I've been wearing my Sarah Palin "Guns and God" tee-shirt in PA, and it's been attracting a lot of attention. You can get one by clicking on the Sarah logo on the sidebar. Tomorrow, as a former business speechwriter, I'll be writing on "A Speech for Sarah Palin."
Today on Clintons4McCain Blog Talk Radio (Saturday, 5-6 p.m. ET) our primary guest was Jean Avery, founder of http://moms4mccain.blogspot.com. You can find the archieved broadcast by clicking on the following link: http//:blogtalkradio.com/clintons4mccain
Jean Avery has turned her "little" group of American moms into a countrywide organization. She's one of the most innovative activists in the nation and has developed many fascinating concepts, including what she calls "nap-time politics."
Next week on the radio show we'll feature two African-Americans who are spearheading the campaign against Obama and for McCain-Palin. They'll be Lloyd Marcus and Tanya Crews.The co-hosts of the program will be Anne Franklin of Texas and Steve Maloney of Pennsylvania.
Our emphasis from now until the election will be on "ground-game" activities (calling, canvassing, e-mailing, etc.) that are essential to winning the election.
A second point: I'm asking everyone in our huge coalition to join the action-oriented group known as "Wake-Up America." You can join today by going to: http://wam08.com It will explain exactly what you can do to get out the vote for McCain-Palin. WAM will make common cause with ALL groups dedicated to the election of John McCain and Sarah Palin.
A final point: one of the country's best organizations at attracting Democrats and Independents to McCain-Palin has been: http://dncreform.org. They're influencing votes around the country, but they need your financial support -- even a few dollars will help -- to continue their efforts. Please assist them.
Again, I'd like to thank all of you for your efforts on behalf of Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin. The practical actions we take will ensure victory on Nov. 4.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Polls Show McCain-Obama Close
Okay, Zogby has Obama ahead by two points (as did Diageo, which has been in the tank for Obama), and Hotline has it at one point. I've written recently about what we should do (fight like h--l) "when we take the lead again." I said I thought that would happen sometime around the beginning of the third week of October but perhaps as late as early November. Obama all through the primaries "over-polled" and "under-performed in the voting booth."
In the PA Primary (April 22), Wolf Blitzer and others said the race was "tightening" and we even heard their favorite cliche ("too close to call"). I said that Hillary Clinton would win by 10 percentage points. On April 23, it was at 10 points, although it fell to 9.2% by the end of the day. I do know PA voters (ornery!).
I also predicted Clinton could win OH, TX and IN, in all of which Obama "over-polled." Sen. Clinton won all three.
In 2004, Gallup came under heavy criticism from the far-Left for having "too many Republicans" in its survey template. Like terrified rabbits, Gallup changed its legendary template ("the gold standard"). As a result, it got both the national and the state races wrong.
It said in early November, 2004 that Bush would win PA by two points and Kerry would win Ohio by two points. I told the editor of the Pittsburgh daily that maybe Gallup had gotten the states confused. Kerry won PA by three points, and Bush won Ohio by two points. Gallup also predicted that Kerry could win FL, which he lost by hundreds of thousands of votes.
There has been a lot of talk about "the Bradley Effect," referring to the fact that voters tell pollsters that they will vote for a Black man -- and then don't. It does exist in this campaign, and there are a (very) few people trying to figure out its effect on this year's election. Why do people tell pollsters "fibs?" Because they think (correctly) that's what the pollsters want to hear.
One great caller in Beaver County, PA (Audrey) is so sweet and friendly that when she asks voters if they support John and Sarah, EVERYBODY SAYS YES!
Gallup's "internal numbers" have had McCain ahead as recently as last week (45-39), but it's buying the heavy "new" (Black mostly) vote theory, so it put McCain behind. Say what?? In the PA primary, Obama lost approximately 60 counties out of 67. He won some suburban Philly counties by relatively narrow margins. He won Philly (big), Pittsburgh (city), Harrisburg, and downtown Lancaster. Otherwise, he didn't win squat. His support in PA is very soft.
Beware the polls (especially CNN), my friends. I love those polls of course, but I don't really believe them on a day-to-day basis.
In the PA Primary (April 22), Wolf Blitzer and others said the race was "tightening" and we even heard their favorite cliche ("too close to call"). I said that Hillary Clinton would win by 10 percentage points. On April 23, it was at 10 points, although it fell to 9.2% by the end of the day. I do know PA voters (ornery!).
I also predicted Clinton could win OH, TX and IN, in all of which Obama "over-polled." Sen. Clinton won all three.
In 2004, Gallup came under heavy criticism from the far-Left for having "too many Republicans" in its survey template. Like terrified rabbits, Gallup changed its legendary template ("the gold standard"). As a result, it got both the national and the state races wrong.
It said in early November, 2004 that Bush would win PA by two points and Kerry would win Ohio by two points. I told the editor of the Pittsburgh daily that maybe Gallup had gotten the states confused. Kerry won PA by three points, and Bush won Ohio by two points. Gallup also predicted that Kerry could win FL, which he lost by hundreds of thousands of votes.
There has been a lot of talk about "the Bradley Effect," referring to the fact that voters tell pollsters that they will vote for a Black man -- and then don't. It does exist in this campaign, and there are a (very) few people trying to figure out its effect on this year's election. Why do people tell pollsters "fibs?" Because they think (correctly) that's what the pollsters want to hear.
One great caller in Beaver County, PA (Audrey) is so sweet and friendly that when she asks voters if they support John and Sarah, EVERYBODY SAYS YES!
Gallup's "internal numbers" have had McCain ahead as recently as last week (45-39), but it's buying the heavy "new" (Black mostly) vote theory, so it put McCain behind. Say what?? In the PA primary, Obama lost approximately 60 counties out of 67. He won some suburban Philly counties by relatively narrow margins. He won Philly (big), Pittsburgh (city), Harrisburg, and downtown Lancaster. Otherwise, he didn't win squat. His support in PA is very soft.
Beware the polls (especially CNN), my friends. I love those polls of course, but I don't really believe them on a day-to-day basis.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Debate & Shocking Obama Images
Tonight (Tuesday), participate in a debate-watch-chat with fellow McCain-Palin Supporters at http://votebitter.com. If you'd like to purchase a "God and Guns" tee-shirt, go and click on the link at the top of the sidebar. When you purchase it, please use the promo code "steve." Every nickel generated above costs will go the McCain-Palin Campaign. If you want to engage in actions to elect John and Sarah, please go to: http://wam08.org and sign up. Thanks.
Monday, October 6, 2008
McCain Campaign Attacks Barack Obama
Note: The followoing material is from Doug Holtz-Eakin, McCain-Palin 2008 Senior Policy Adviser. The piece is entitled "Obama's Lies on Health Care." This will be part of a several part series comparing Sen. McCain's rational health care plan with Obama's government-dominated variety.
Across the country, Barack Obama is attacking the McCain health plan with ads that are cynical and deceitful. Unfortunately, these attacks will not stop by a mere presentation of the facts. Barack Obama has now made a deliberate decision to lie about John McCain's health care plans with the realization that no one in the media will actually call him on it. Barack Obama's attacks are not grounded in the facts.
There are significant and legitimate policy differences between John McCain and Barack Obama that voters should clearly understand. We do suspect this will be difficult to accomplish, as we've seen that pinning down Barack Obama's policy positions is like debating the protégé of John Kerry. He has changed his tax plans nearly weekly to disguise his most basic intention to raise taxes during a recession. He has played games with NAFTA and international trade to disguise his belief that opening foreign markets to American workers is not good. He has been on both sides of the Second Amendment in an effort to disguise his fundamental anti-Second Amendment positions. He has displayed a willingness to say anything in order to be elected president including deriding basic American values at a San Francisco fundraiser in order to raise campaign cash while traveling to diners in Pennsylvania telling us how much he cherishes small-town values.
Now, Barack Obama's attention has turned to health care where he demonstrated yesterday that he will say anything to distract the American people away from his basic intention to force millions of Americans to accept government-run health care. He will say anything in order to sell the American people on the fact the very same government he supposedly wants to change is the government he wants to determine their health care benefits. Please find below the facts about Barack Obama's health care plan:
· Barack Obama's Plan Continues The Push Towards Government-Run Health Care: The Obama plan will create a brand new government-run health plan at the cost of $243 billion a year – a financial burden of more than $3,000 a year on American families.[1] The apparent goal is a complete government takeover of the health care system:
"If I were designing a system from scratch, I would probably go with a single-payer system." – Barack Obama, Speech in Albuquerque, NM, 8/18/08
"The goal, like HillaryCare in the 1990s, is to displace current private coverage and switch people to the default government option. What's new is Mr. Obama's smoother political packaging." – "Obama's Health-Care Tipoff," Wall Street Journal Editorial, 8/21/08
"Obama's plan, with its heavy reliance on government, leads to the same problems that bedevil universal health care systems all over the world: limited patient choices and rationed care." – Michael Tanner, "A Fork in the Road – Obama, McCain and Health Care," 7/29/08
· Barack Obama's Plan Will Harm Employer Coverage: The Obama plan includes a $179 billion a year employer mandate.[2] The mandate requires employers to either provide "meaningful" coverage or pay a tax towards the government plan.[3] Faced with tough economic conditions and rising health costs this creates a clear incentive for employers to drop coverage and move families into the new government plan. A Lewin Group study which examined a similar employer mandate combined with a national plan, like the Obama plan, concluded that almost 52 million individuals would lose their private employer coverage.[4] To maintain their competitive edge, others employers will follow - spelling the demise of the employer coverage system.
[1] Roger Feldman et al. "Impact of Barack Obama 2008 Health Reform Proposal," HSI Network, LLC., 8/21/08
[2] Roger Feldman et al. "Impact of Barack Obama 2008 Health Reform Proposal," HSI Network, LLC., 8/21/08
[3] http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/issues/HealthCareFullPlan.pdf, Accessed 10/3/08
[4] http://www.sharedprosperity.org/hcfa/lewin.pdf, Accessed 10/3/08
Across the country, Barack Obama is attacking the McCain health plan with ads that are cynical and deceitful. Unfortunately, these attacks will not stop by a mere presentation of the facts. Barack Obama has now made a deliberate decision to lie about John McCain's health care plans with the realization that no one in the media will actually call him on it. Barack Obama's attacks are not grounded in the facts.
There are significant and legitimate policy differences between John McCain and Barack Obama that voters should clearly understand. We do suspect this will be difficult to accomplish, as we've seen that pinning down Barack Obama's policy positions is like debating the protégé of John Kerry. He has changed his tax plans nearly weekly to disguise his most basic intention to raise taxes during a recession. He has played games with NAFTA and international trade to disguise his belief that opening foreign markets to American workers is not good. He has been on both sides of the Second Amendment in an effort to disguise his fundamental anti-Second Amendment positions. He has displayed a willingness to say anything in order to be elected president including deriding basic American values at a San Francisco fundraiser in order to raise campaign cash while traveling to diners in Pennsylvania telling us how much he cherishes small-town values.
Now, Barack Obama's attention has turned to health care where he demonstrated yesterday that he will say anything to distract the American people away from his basic intention to force millions of Americans to accept government-run health care. He will say anything in order to sell the American people on the fact the very same government he supposedly wants to change is the government he wants to determine their health care benefits. Please find below the facts about Barack Obama's health care plan:
· Barack Obama's Plan Continues The Push Towards Government-Run Health Care: The Obama plan will create a brand new government-run health plan at the cost of $243 billion a year – a financial burden of more than $3,000 a year on American families.[1] The apparent goal is a complete government takeover of the health care system:
"If I were designing a system from scratch, I would probably go with a single-payer system." – Barack Obama, Speech in Albuquerque, NM, 8/18/08
"The goal, like HillaryCare in the 1990s, is to displace current private coverage and switch people to the default government option. What's new is Mr. Obama's smoother political packaging." – "Obama's Health-Care Tipoff," Wall Street Journal Editorial, 8/21/08
"Obama's plan, with its heavy reliance on government, leads to the same problems that bedevil universal health care systems all over the world: limited patient choices and rationed care." – Michael Tanner, "A Fork in the Road – Obama, McCain and Health Care," 7/29/08
· Barack Obama's Plan Will Harm Employer Coverage: The Obama plan includes a $179 billion a year employer mandate.[2] The mandate requires employers to either provide "meaningful" coverage or pay a tax towards the government plan.[3] Faced with tough economic conditions and rising health costs this creates a clear incentive for employers to drop coverage and move families into the new government plan. A Lewin Group study which examined a similar employer mandate combined with a national plan, like the Obama plan, concluded that almost 52 million individuals would lose their private employer coverage.[4] To maintain their competitive edge, others employers will follow - spelling the demise of the employer coverage system.
[1] Roger Feldman et al. "Impact of Barack Obama 2008 Health Reform Proposal," HSI Network, LLC., 8/21/08
[2] Roger Feldman et al. "Impact of Barack Obama 2008 Health Reform Proposal," HSI Network, LLC., 8/21/08
[3] http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/issues/HealthCareFullPlan.pdf, Accessed 10/3/08
[4] http://www.sharedprosperity.org/hcfa/lewin.pdf, Accessed 10/3/08
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Obama: Chicago Corruption, Terrorists
Obama and His Unsavory Political PalsThe steps bloggers and other onliners must take for McCain-Palin to win in November . . . Note, if you'd like to read my pieces on Hillary Clinton as a classic "Abused Woman," please go to http://hillarysupportersformccain.blogspot.com.
For the most part, I couldn't agree more with Paul Z. -- bloggers need to be coordinated rather than consolidated. I would add that we also need to be more focused, not trying for revelations on 100 different issues. Obama's murky position on Jerusalem is one of those that will take 10,000 hours and get us 100 votes.
In a sense, we need to be brtual with OURSELVES, determining if our "pet" issue is really one that matters outside ur household. We have to know exactly what we're doing and be able to determine if it's going to win us votes. With me, it has been the Rev. Wright issue. Wright is an America-hater, a hater of White People, and a malicious liar. Obama spent 20 years in his Church, pressumably hooting and hollering along with the rest of the congregation.
Frankly, we can't assume that something that may be important to some pro-Isreael voters (Israel-hater Rashid Khalidi, for example) is significant to anyone else. I fear the same is true with Raila Odinga -- almost no one knows who he is. If he lived in Chicago, we'd be fine. When we have to tell people that they "should be interested in this or that," we've lost the battle.
The fact that Obama had the most liberal voting record in the Senate (and Biden was the third-most liberal) is clear and easy for people to understand. They are both socialists whose political philosophies are basically to buy votes with other people's money.
i suggest we also, focus on Obama's connections with unsavory characters, primarily Ayers and Wright. I do believe it's also an issue that Obama and his main allies in Congress have been recipients of huge donations from most of the housing and financial services companies connected with the financial crisis.
But again, Obama's "birth certificate" is not going to decide votes, even if it should. Obama's huge donations from Tony Rezko are important as part of his connection with unsavory characters throughout his political lifetime.
Obama's long connections with voter fraud -- ACORN -- could become a major issue. Sean Hannity has a program on it tonight (Sunday) on FOX News. It's already viral on the Internet.
Voter fraud is important because it's a way of stealing the value of honest people's votes.
As bloggers, we have to stop trying for exotic "home runs." We need to focus on a few issues that can determine the election. Obama/Axelrod would dearly love to send us on wild goose chases. We must resist the temptation.
Willie Horton, ONE issue, destroyed the Dukakis candidacy. The Swift Boat allegations, really one issue, destroyed Kerry. I'm sure there were hundreds of other "issues" in those campaigns. None of them amounted to a hill of beans. On the image above: I'd leave out Khalidi and Mansour, except in passing. Ayers and Wright should be the focus.
Friday, October 3, 2008
Sarah Palin: Ready for Presidency?
If you want to participate in the "Vote Bitter" project, buy a Sarah tee-shirt to wear on Nov. 4 (and every possible day before) by clicking on the image to your right. Every penny I get will go to the McCain-Palin campaign. When you purchase, write in the promo code: Steve.
Gov. Sarah Heath Palin, America's Political Superstar, Vanquisher of Joe Biden
Gov. Sarah Heath Palin, America's Political Superstar, Vanquisher of Joe BidenDear Friends, last night before the Palin-Biden debate I got an urgent e-mail from Tatiana Sabadini Goncalves asking me if I would write for El Diario, a huge Brazilian newspaper, on whether Sarah Palin was ready to be President. I replied to Tatiana (scroll down), a reporter with the World Edition, and she was nice enough to send me a reply today. As you'll see, I said (writing in a hurry) that Sarah would someday be a great President. Below: First Tatiana and then me. -- steve (This is one of those experiences I thought I'd never have in this lifetime; I've had many this year.)
Tatiana says:
You help me a lot! Thank you Stephen. I hope I can count on you for others Sarah Palin stories.
You help me a lot! Thank you Stephen. I hope I can count on you for others Sarah Palin stories.
Tatiana Sabadini Gonçalves
Editoria Mundo
RedaçãoDiários Associados
Editoria Mundo
RedaçãoDiários Associados
Hi Tatiana: Sarah Palin is very ready to be Presdient of the U.S. She has more executive experience, as a Governor, than ALL the other candidates combined (McCain, Obama, and Biden). She has a well-earned reputation for being willing to go against her own Party (Republican) when it is in the wrong. McCain has done the same, but neither Obama nor Biden has ever gone against the wishes of their Party. Coming from a state that's very rich in natural resources, Sarah Palin is an expert on energy (particularly oil and natural gas) and the environment, subjects that seem to mystify Biden and Obama. Rather than just chattering about the middle class, as her opponents do, she IS a member of the middle class. As a mother -- and the mother of a soldier -- she has experience managing a household and raising children that is foreign to most male politicians. She is a leader and a pillar of integrity, both of which are essential in a President.
She will make a great one.
Steve Maloney
Ambridge, PA
Ambridge, PA
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Sarah Palin"s Smackdown of Biden
http://votebitter.com/debate/vp/ Join us at the debate "watch party" by clicking on the link above. My prediction? "Sarah will mop the floor with him."
"We've tried the military surge option before and it failed. If we try it again, it will fail again." (Joe Biden, December, 2006) As the banking industry's "main man in Washington," Biden has a heap of 'splaining to do.
"I knew there was something very fishy about Joe Biden . . . "
"We've tried the military surge option before and it failed. If we try it again, it will fail again." (Joe Biden, December, 2006) As the banking industry's "main man in Washington," Biden has a heap of 'splaining to do.
"I knew there was something very fishy about Joe Biden . . . "JOE BIDEN: OBAMA’S MR. WRONG, GIVES A WINDY SPEECH AT DEM CONVENTION
In noted windbag Joe Biden’s speech at the Democratic National Convention, the only crystal-clear truth he uttered came in the first sentence: “I've never been called a man of few words.” [1]
Joe’s speech has as a leitmotif the words “John McCain was wrong. And Barack Obama was right.” In many cases, he forgot to add that, if McCain was wrong, Biden was also wrong. In most cases, he was just wrong on his own.
For example, wasn’t it Obama that labeled Hillary Clinton a warmonger for voting in October, 2002, for the authorization of the use of force in Iraq? Joe Biden forgot to mention – as Obama has – that Biden also voted for the authorization.
Earlier, he had said that the U.S. “has no choice but to eliminate” Saddam Hussein. We didn’t hear that point made in the speech – of course. [2]
In the remarks, Biden praised Obama for being willing to “talk” to various despots and rogue leaders. However, he sang a very different tune in the primaries.
Then, Biden said about Obama’s “talkathon politics,” the following: “Would I make a blanket commitment to meet with the leaders [noted by BHO] in the first year after I was elected President? “Absolutely, positively no!” [3]
Of course, since Obama has no experience, Biden talked about the Obama’s supposed “judgment.” In fact, judgment doesn’t appear the strong suit of man who befriended not only crackpot preachers, but also various terrorists, Communists, and gangsters.
Biden put it this way: “Now, let me ask you: whose judgment should we trust? Should we trust John McCain's judgment when he said only three years ago, ‘Afghanistan we don't read about it anymore because it's succeeded?’”
Those whose memory extends three years or more might remember that, yes, we didn’t read – or see – much about Afghanistan. The reason: because at that point, as McCain noted, we had succeeded. Most of the Taliban had been killed, captured, or sent on the dead run to the tribal areas of Pakistan.
Biden apparently confused 2008 with 2005, in which year McCain was dead right about the Afghan situation.
Biden’s speech also “forgot to mention” The Iraq Surge,” which John McCain has long supported. Of course, Barack Obama doesn’t talk about the Surge except in ways that suggest he doesn’t have eyes to see – and ears to hear.
Who was right on the surge? John McCain. And who was wrong? Barack Obama was. And, lest we forget, so was Joe Biden – terribly wrong.
Biden said in 2006, “We’ve tried the military surge option before, and it failed. If we try it again, it will fail again.” Gee, Joe, who was wrong – and who was right? [4]
Biden also opposed the multilateral negotiations the Bush Administration pursued with North Korea. He called for bilateral negotiations. Of course, as much as any negotiations can work with the North Koreans, the multilateral approach worked. [5]
Perhaps that’s why North Korea was absent from the speech.
The Obama Campaign presented Joe Biden as an “expert” on foreign policy and national security. As I’ve demonstrated, he’s neither. He’s a longwinded gentleman who’s been wrong on nearly every major issue in his lifetime – he even voted against the first Gulf War resolution back in the previous century.
Joe Biden talks a great deal and says very little. John McCain apparently has decided to treat Biden as a pompous irrelevancy.
For reasons unknown, Barack Obama apparently saw Biden as Mr.-Right. Actually, Joe is turning out to “Mr. Wrong,” someone wildly off-base on all the things that matter.
[1] http://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/ap/politics/2008/Aug/27/joe_biden_s_speech_at_the_democratic_convention.html
[2] Michael Barone, The Almanac of American Politics, National Journal, 2008, p. 365
[3] http://townhall.com/columnists/CalThomas/2008/08/26/bidens_toughest_opponent_himself
[4] Almanac of American Politics, p. 365
[5] Almanac of American Politics, p. 366.
In noted windbag Joe Biden’s speech at the Democratic National Convention, the only crystal-clear truth he uttered came in the first sentence: “I've never been called a man of few words.” [1]
Joe’s speech has as a leitmotif the words “John McCain was wrong. And Barack Obama was right.” In many cases, he forgot to add that, if McCain was wrong, Biden was also wrong. In most cases, he was just wrong on his own.
For example, wasn’t it Obama that labeled Hillary Clinton a warmonger for voting in October, 2002, for the authorization of the use of force in Iraq? Joe Biden forgot to mention – as Obama has – that Biden also voted for the authorization.
Earlier, he had said that the U.S. “has no choice but to eliminate” Saddam Hussein. We didn’t hear that point made in the speech – of course. [2]
In the remarks, Biden praised Obama for being willing to “talk” to various despots and rogue leaders. However, he sang a very different tune in the primaries.
Then, Biden said about Obama’s “talkathon politics,” the following: “Would I make a blanket commitment to meet with the leaders [noted by BHO] in the first year after I was elected President? “Absolutely, positively no!” [3]
Of course, since Obama has no experience, Biden talked about the Obama’s supposed “judgment.” In fact, judgment doesn’t appear the strong suit of man who befriended not only crackpot preachers, but also various terrorists, Communists, and gangsters.
Biden put it this way: “Now, let me ask you: whose judgment should we trust? Should we trust John McCain's judgment when he said only three years ago, ‘Afghanistan we don't read about it anymore because it's succeeded?’”
Those whose memory extends three years or more might remember that, yes, we didn’t read – or see – much about Afghanistan. The reason: because at that point, as McCain noted, we had succeeded. Most of the Taliban had been killed, captured, or sent on the dead run to the tribal areas of Pakistan.
Biden apparently confused 2008 with 2005, in which year McCain was dead right about the Afghan situation.
Biden’s speech also “forgot to mention” The Iraq Surge,” which John McCain has long supported. Of course, Barack Obama doesn’t talk about the Surge except in ways that suggest he doesn’t have eyes to see – and ears to hear.
Who was right on the surge? John McCain. And who was wrong? Barack Obama was. And, lest we forget, so was Joe Biden – terribly wrong.
Biden said in 2006, “We’ve tried the military surge option before, and it failed. If we try it again, it will fail again.” Gee, Joe, who was wrong – and who was right? [4]
Biden also opposed the multilateral negotiations the Bush Administration pursued with North Korea. He called for bilateral negotiations. Of course, as much as any negotiations can work with the North Koreans, the multilateral approach worked. [5]
Perhaps that’s why North Korea was absent from the speech.
The Obama Campaign presented Joe Biden as an “expert” on foreign policy and national security. As I’ve demonstrated, he’s neither. He’s a longwinded gentleman who’s been wrong on nearly every major issue in his lifetime – he even voted against the first Gulf War resolution back in the previous century.
Joe Biden talks a great deal and says very little. John McCain apparently has decided to treat Biden as a pompous irrelevancy.
For reasons unknown, Barack Obama apparently saw Biden as Mr.-Right. Actually, Joe is turning out to “Mr. Wrong,” someone wildly off-base on all the things that matter.
[1] http://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/ap/politics/2008/Aug/27/joe_biden_s_speech_at_the_democratic_convention.html
[2] Michael Barone, The Almanac of American Politics, National Journal, 2008, p. 365
[3] http://townhall.com/columnists/CalThomas/2008/08/26/bidens_toughest_opponent_himself
[4] Almanac of American Politics, p. 365
[5] Almanac of American Politics, p. 366.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg)
