Simple Lula. a mentality that is not obsessed with someone's middle name as if it means something. Try that Lula. Change is refreshing and good for the soul.

PS: If i had any connection to Obama's inner circle i will tell him start using your middle name intentionally in order to show it has no negative connotations whatsoever and to prove that the country, reds and blues, moved beyond that narrow view of things.

I am so proud of America today. An old man, looks 80+ and white as cotton, says i was going for McCain but i switched to Obama now. I never thought i would see that in my lifetime.

WE, Americans, are not that stupid after all ( I agreed with the Europeans when they said that about us). It is a great credit to Obama that he can bring that kind of change in what others think about us and in what we think about ourselves.

The wealthy (top 10 of the richest people) are the ones currently paying the highest tax rates--- 70%. The bottom 50% pay 3% of all the taxes. I think statistics will show that the average person is the one who run the businesses in this country. If they are getting no where, it's most likely because of state regulations and high taxes.


All the Democrats would only hike those up.



We have plenty of oil in our own land and need not be held captive to those who wear sheets in Saudi Arabia, etc. It's the Democrats who forbid drilling in ANWAR and off shore and opening up new refineries.

As far as the housing industry and banking industry goes, you will see that it's always the problem of Democrats who favor more regulation rather than left in private hands. Think of the 1980s S& L scandal where something like 500 billion was wasted by Democrats.
Bamkers were given vastly extended lending authority which would be their undoing. Not too much different today. How long can lending institutions give out loans with 0 down payment to unqualified borrowers and stay in business?



Blame in part organized labor for that...and with unfair trade regulation and high taxes, what incentive is there for to invest in enrepreneurial activities? Isn't it the Democrats who prefer no pollution in the air (of factories) over food in our mouths?

Anyone who is running for the presidency of the US needs to be examined up one side and down the other...from now on, with me, it will always be Barack Hussein Obama...after all, it's his name, isn't it? Is his Muslim heritage a dark secret or something?




Do you remember that Hillary chose to use her maiden name going by Hillary Rodham Clinton for the longest time...must be politically advantageous to drop that now I guess. Funny how that goes!



It depends on the change..as change can be for the good as well as for the bad...our democracy going socialist would not be a good change..and that is all the current Democrat candidate's outlook, including Barack Hussein Obama.

Right now Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama are debating which one of them is the strongest abortion supporter. (Both have 100% pro-abortion records).
In 2001, he voted "present" on a measure to keep pronographic books and video stores 1,000 feet away from schools and churches, and he voted against a requirement to make schools filter internet pornography from school computers. Can anyone who's ga-ga over this guy please explain why he won't protect children from evil?

sorry the top three democrats have decided that they won't get out for at least a year after they take office.

Oh wow, what an insightful article!

Absolutely not and that is why i said he should use it intentionally...... but he is not a Muslim, so why are you obsessed with his middle name?

And if you like to know how his "heritage" affect his policies ..... why not just address the topic straight up? is this your way of presenting things "under the radar"?

That is the kind of change we need Lula. we dont need that kind of wink wink attitudes ..... nothing wrong at all in open frank and honest discussion ..... we have enough of putting things under the radar way of doing things or discussing issues.



the explanation is very obvious Lula. Filtering things doesnt guarantee anything. all it does is open the door to filtering other things .... which is censorship at large. there are supposed to be teachers at school to supervise what kids do on the internet. not only porno, how about drugs, violence, and all kinds of bad manners and behaviors.... you filter that too? kids with internet unsupervised is a bad thing no matter how much you filter things.

I give a great example: last week i noticed that my 8 yr old grandson is copying something from his laptop. I said, what are you writing? he said: Gampy, you wont believe this but i know how to cheat in the SO AND SO videao game.... I said what? he said there are codes you can buy if you want to use higher levels in that game but i found a site that has those codes and i can copy them and use them without buying them. He was very excited and happy that he found a way to get waht he want without paying for it ..... there was a long discussion about honesty and nothing for free and stealing and that kind of thing.

Can you please tell me how can you filter that? I didnt even know that kind of thing existed on the net. That is why he voted against it. it was not the solution .... supervision and guidance is.

The same thing with book stores. You really believe 1000ft away is the solution? If the community allows the existence of this kind of stores .... the kids are at risk no matter how far away the stores are. again that was not the solution.....

you may differ with him on this ..... but his logic is not without merits. I agree with him.there are better ways to protect the kids .... and we must do it.

But you present what he did as "he won't protect children from evil"..... that is misleading Lula. acutually more than misleading ... it is plain false accusation. that is not an honest discussion.

i could see such a restriction from schools but not churchs. if that were to pass. then the religious people could illegally kick a porn store out of a city. of course this would be legal if that law were passed. all they would have to do is open a so called church ever 1000 feet.

I am not ga-ga over this man. I do not want him as president. but it is not the federal governments job to protect children from evil.


it is the governments job to protect children/society from evil people. such as child predators.


it is the job of parents to point out what is evil.

Right gene, and taxing these people will definitely help that.....LOL!

Once again, you know nothing about the "average" person.

We have plenty of oil in our own land and need not be held captive to those who wear sheets in Saudi Arabia, etc. It's the Democrats who forbid drilling in ANWAR and off shore and opening up new refineries.

The most optimistic estimate of the oil in ANWARE is 3% of our consumption. If you believe we have all the oil WE NEED, you are out of it. Gas and home heating oil is the highest cost EVER. GREAT JOB Bush and Cheney. Don't you think our two former oil men have help us become FOREIGN OIL DEPENDENT! It is their legacy to BIG OIL!!!!!

wrong the estimate is the same amount as iraq.

not since they have been in office.

Lula posts:

Yesterday in New Hampshire Hillary said exactly this in response to a question from a woman in her audience. She would order the troop withdrawal 60 days from taking office....how long it would actually take is another story.

sorry I didn't know that she had flopped on this again.

Reply By: danielostPosted: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 The most optimistic estimate of the oil in ANWARE is 3% of our consumption wrong the estimate is the same amount as iraq.

Document that!

Reply By: danielostPosted: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 Don't you think our two former oil men have help us become FOREIGN OIL DEPENDENT! It is their legacy to BIG OIL!!!!! not since they have been in office.

WHY? That was the first big push of Bush and Cheney.