"Change" is also telling the Federal Government to take their money and stuff it when they tried to send her money to build a bridge to nowhere. " If we want a bridge in Alaska, we will build it ourselves", she said.

There is absolutely NO change in Obama's message. Just more progressive programs meant to become bloated and ineffective, more identity politics, more class warfare and demonizing the wealthy, more tax increases that have proven to be hurtful and used to empower Washington and Big Business - not in a good way, more advances toward fascist progressive-ism ( the world has been there and rejected it), more diminishing of the heart and compassion of the American people by sending ...

"Change" is also telling the Federal Government to take their money and stuff it when they tried to send her money to build a bridge to nowhere. " If we want a bridge in Alaska, we will build it ourselves", she said.

There is absolutely NO change in Obama's message. Just more progressive programs meant to become bloated and ineffective, more identity politics, more class warfare and demonizing the wealthy, more tax increases that have proven to be hurtful and used to empower Washington and Big Business - not in a good way, more advances toward fascist progressive-ism ( the world has been there and rejected it), more diminishing of the heart and compassion of the American people by sending the message that it is governments responsibility to be the giver of charity and compassion, more anti-individual anti-libertarianism. More bloated and hideous hate-rhetoric and more inane imagery and platitudes. I think we have had enough.

I'm not saying McCain will deliver, but Palin could be the future and she has proven a willingness to say John McCain is wrong on drilling in ANWR.

There are two incredible things that point to real change in this selection, 1) I don't think there has ever been a candidate for president that has selected a running mate more different on issues, principles, and background. And 2) Palin points to a future where we believe in ourselves, not in the need to look to government for answers, and McCain is not afraid of being overshadowed by someone that his base admires more than the person leading the ticket.

The selection of Palin not only makes me feel better about voting for McCain, but it makes me feel better about McCain and gives me just a little faith that he is still principled.

This will come out in debates. Your reference to both being relatively inexperienced candidates isn't exactly correct. What qualifies as experience and what kind of experience? None of the people running for President qualify on the experience issue, they've never been in that position (unless it's the incumbant running again). So you look at other experience. Many have indicated that running a state government isn't much different than running the Federal government. You have slightly different set of laws, but the concept is similar in terms of state legislature, judicial, municipalities etc. She has this experience being a governor of a state - he doesn't. She has one of the highe...

This will come out in debates. Your reference to both being relatively inexperienced candidates isn't exactly correct. What qualifies as experience and what kind of experience? None of the people running for President qualify on the experience issue, they've never been in that position (unless it's the incumbant running again). So you look at other experience. Many have indicated that running a state government isn't much different than running the Federal government. You have slightly different set of laws, but the concept is similar in terms of state legislature, judicial, municipalities etc. She has this experience being a governor of a state - he doesn't. She has one of the highest approval ratings in the country being the person in charge, Obama is part of the do-nothing Congress that has pathetic public approval rating. He spent more time on the road running for the job than being a senator. Obama has seriously flawed associations, all they have on her are things that people around her have done (her daughter, which is really none of their business and has nothing to do with her being a VP...then DUI her husband got... 22 years ago, another important and irrelevant issue, now they're trying to see if there's anything to this trooper-gate story, which actually does involve her, although likely end just like John McCain's NYT-alleged 'affair' took place, which didn't). These are major difference in just the people.

And the most interesting thing is that the left latched on to her as if she was running for the President, even though at this point she isn't.

There are many promises Obama camp makes (on their web site) and they outline steps of how they're going to spend an unbelievable amounts of money on various things (most of which will do nothing but more wasteful government spending), but they don't specify how they'll manage to do this. The only logical answer is to raise taxes and in a huge way, grow the government, which is already too big.

Although I'm not a registered Democrat, I am a "liberal" and I will be voting for Obama. Since you guys have been presuposing what liberals think of palin without actually asking one, I would like to put forth my humble opinion on this issue:

Things I don't care about:
1. Her Inexperience
2. Her Daughter's Pregnancy
3. Her Husband's DUI
4. The fact that she didn't abort her Down-Syndrome baby
5. The fact that she is a woman
6. The fact that she joined a secessionist party.

The Democrats have latched on to these issues not because they think they are valid criticisms, but because they lay bare the hypocrisy and exceptionalism underlying the Republican attacks on Obama.

For instance, it is...

Although I'm not a registered Democrat, I am a "liberal" and I will be voting for Obama. Since you guys have been presuposing what liberals think of palin without actually asking one, I would like to put forth my humble opinion on this issue:

Things I don't care about:
1. Her Inexperience
2. Her Daughter's Pregnancy
3. Her Husband's DUI
4. The fact that she didn't abort her Down-Syndrome baby
5. The fact that she is a woman
6. The fact that she joined a secessionist party.

The Democrats have latched on to these issues not because they think they are valid criticisms, but because they lay bare the hypocrisy and exceptionalism underlying the Republican attacks on Obama.

For instance, it is okay to have shifty American-hating friends if you are a Republican, but not if you are Democrat.

It's okay for you to have only 2 years of major office experience if you are a Republican, just not if you are a democrat.

It's okay for you to express extremist religious views out of step with mainstream America if you are a Republican, but not if you are a Democrat.

It's okay for you to have a youthful phase of hating America if you are a Republican, but not if you are a Democrat.

Let's face it: if you guys were bating for the other team, you would be making the exact same arguments in reverse. You pick your candidate, then try to rationalize the personal issues into pros and cons depending on who you support. This means you guys are all acting like partisan hacks.

That is why, apart from criticizing the hypocrisy of it all, I have no interest in attacking Sarah Palin on these issues. If you guys really want to win, then you should put the personal issues down and start talking about policy differences. Those will be much more persuasive.

And to get the ball rolling, here are some policy issues where I, a self professed liberal, disagree with Sarah Palin:

1. Church and State
As an Evangelical Christian and as a governor who opposes gay marriage, Sarah Palin has supported creating laws based not on our common values as a society, but instead based on her personal religious beliefs. This is a totally unacceptable violation of the separation of Church and State, in my opinion.

2. Extraction as Development
Sarah Palin views the extraction of our natural resources as the way to develop our country. This has been borne out with force during her governorship. However, in case you hadn't noticed, extraction is a Third World develo...

And to get the ball rolling, here are some policy issues where I, a self professed liberal, disagree with Sarah Palin:

1. Church and State
As an Evangelical Christian and as a governor who opposes gay marriage, Sarah Palin has supported creating laws based not on our common values as a society, but instead based on her personal religious beliefs. This is a totally unacceptable violation of the separation of Church and State, in my opinion.

2. Extraction as Development
Sarah Palin views the extraction of our natural resources as the way to develop our country. This has been borne out with force during her governorship. However, in case you hadn't noticed, extraction is a Third World development model, where poor countries simply pillage their natural resources for quick cash. It means we cheapen ourselves rather than move up. International trade and high technology is the development model of first world countries like America.

3. Government Hand-outs to Foreign Businesses
In order to bring in a pipeline that Palin thought would solve all Alaska's problems, she handed out major subsidies of state government money to a Canadian Oil company. If our government should be subsidizing businesses with our tax dollars (and I don't think it should be) then shouldn't it be spending those dollars on small American companies that are struggling rather than profitable foreign oil companies?

4. Responsibility, Objectivity and Corruption
Although Sarah Palin made her name fighting corruption, there are a number of actions on her part that concern me, and lead me to think that she doesn't appreciate the gravity of her position.

First, she is under investigation for abusing her power in dismissing a state commissioner who refused, despite pressure from Palin, to fire a state trooper who was involved in custody battle with Palin's sister. Using the executive power of the governor to settle family scores, even allegedly, shows very little appreciation of the responsibility that accompanies the power of an executive position.

Second, in determining whether or not the Canadian Oil c...

4. Responsibility, Objectivity and Corruption
Although Sarah Palin made her name fighting corruption, there are a number of actions on her part that concern me, and lead me to think that she doesn't appreciate the gravity of her position.

First, she is under investigation for abusing her power in dismissing a state commissioner who refused, despite pressure from Palin, to fire a state trooper who was involved in custody battle with Palin's sister. Using the executive power of the governor to settle family scores, even allegedly, shows very little appreciation of the responsibility that accompanies the power of an executive position.

Second, in determining whether or not the Canadian Oil company deserved the subsidy she gave it, she appointed as head of the advisory committee a lobbyist who had in the past worked for the same company. Surprisingly, in the end, he recommended that the state give the company a hand out. Even if this decision was made in good faith, there is no way to prove it. That is why most politicians AVOID the appearance of impropriety.

Third, although her husband promised to quit his job at a BP subsidiary when she was elected governor, he only took a leave of absence, and then returned to work full time after one year. She said this was not a conflict of interest with the excuse that he wasn't in management, ignoring the probability that management's treatment of her husband will reflect her dealings with the company.

Once again, although this is only the appearance of impropriety, the office of the Vice President, or even State Governor, carries such a grave responsibility to millions of people that even that appearance is unacceptable. Also, if McCain wants to make the case that he is going to change the cronyism that dominates Washington in the Bush era, then these three lapses in ethical judgment on the part of his Vice Presidential candidate undermine his arguments.

I fully realize that we need to pay taxes (and I have been for the last 30 years). In terms of your comment for me to put my money where my mouth is - I have no problem with that. I am opposed to constant tax ratcheting, but I disagree with your sentiment that raising taxes solves problems. What should be done is wasteful spending cut in a big way. Once the spending is 'fixed' and money is being spent wisely, with audits, checks & public accountability for spending - then I will agree with your sentiment to pay more taxes if we need it.

For some things, like education - it's ludicrous to beat the 'more money' drum as if that would solve our education system. Our education system needs ...

I fully realize that we need to pay taxes (and I have been for the last 30 years). In terms of your comment for me to put my money where my mouth is - I have no problem with that. I am opposed to constant tax ratcheting, but I disagree with your sentiment that raising taxes solves problems. What should be done is wasteful spending cut in a big way. Once the spending is 'fixed' and money is being spent wisely, with audits, checks & public accountability for spending - then I will agree with your sentiment to pay more taxes if we need it.

For some things, like education - it's ludicrous to beat the 'more money' drum as if that would solve our education system. Our education system needs to be overhauled, private school vouchers instituted as well as accountability in place. Let the school staffs be accountable for the work they do, just as any other business staff. Get the discipline back in school. Kids don't need to go to school to learn about Heather with 2 mommies, they need to learn how to multiply 5x8, how to write well in English, why apples fall from trees, physics, chemistry, history - that's what school's for at young age, not to push some political ideas (left or right). The people orchestrating current education clearly know nothing about it - dump them! Get new people involved, get curriculum to match the best education available elsewhere in the world. It's NOT about the money.

I'd say it's not taxes that are needed in many places - it's much better spending, accountability and full public record. NO more earmarks in bills, make each bill be simple handling one issue. It makes no sense to drop a bridge money in the bill that is suppose to appropriate money for our troops.

And speaking of the troops - reexamine the Pentagon spending, cut the waste where it exists, but definitely... most definitely don't ever forget that we have to have our Armed Forces in place and it needs to continue to be the best in the world.

Because if you don't have one - there are too many people/countries that want to do us in and the ONLY thing that prevents them from doing so is these men and women.

Attacks on Palin - I totally disagree with you on that one. Dems latched on to these because they have nothing else to attack with. You can't attack the woman for being a bad governor when she has 90% approval rating. You can't attack her lack of accomplishments as mayor or governor - because she has the accomplishments, they're on public record. People like her. They can't accuse her of being partisan because she has the record of attacking her own party people to eliminate corruption... so it has to be the pregnant daugh...

Because if you don't have one - there are too many people/countries that want to do us in and the ONLY thing that prevents them from doing so is these men and women.

Attacks on Palin - I totally disagree with you on that one. Dems latched on to these because they have nothing else to attack with. You can't attack the woman for being a bad governor when she has 90% approval rating. You can't attack her lack of accomplishments as mayor or governor - because she has the accomplishments, they're on public record. People like her. They can't accuse her of being partisan because she has the record of attacking her own party people to eliminate corruption... so it has to be the pregnant daughter, DUI of 22 years ago and other irrelevant stuff, as you astutely realized yourself.

As for Obama attacks - many of them are totally legit. You have no problems with his associations? That's fine... I most definitely do! You have no problems with his unbelievable number of times he skipped voting, you think that's no big deal, considering his was elected to make decisions and vote one way or another? Your choice. I have big problems with that. I don't elect people to collect salary, regardless of how well they speak, I want them to vote on my behalf. I realize that they may not always vote as I would, and that's ok. But I much prefer them voting differently from me than not voting at all. The latest example of his undecision was when they had the church interview and he was asked about abortion. Now I can see how there might be a very tricky question asked, something that he had no idea was coming and was caught him so offguard that he just couldn't decide fast enough. I can understand something like that. However, here we're talking ABORTION. How many times has he heard about this issue? He had the list of all questions. The man needs to have an opinion on that subject. What was his response? It was 'beyond' his 'paygrade'.

Is that an answer of someone who is ready to lead a country of 300 million? He can't even respond to a simple question like that? And you want to vote for such? Give it some thought... put aside the liberal Democrat in you and put on your common sense hat and see if that makes sense.

What attacks are you referring exactly? Attack on the Mrs.? She made a stupid comment - she gets called on it. Nothing wrong there. Perhaps you can indicate as to specific attack you object to.

Ok, now let's cover you differences with Ms. Palin.

1) I agree with you about separation of Church and State. However, the last time I checked - the laws are passed by the Legislative Branch, not the Executive....

Is that an answer of someone who is ready to lead a country of 300 million? He can't even respond to a simple question like that? And you want to vote for such? Give it some thought... put aside the liberal Democrat in you and put on your common sense hat and see if that makes sense.

What attacks are you referring exactly? Attack on the Mrs.? She made a stupid comment - she gets called on it. Nothing wrong there. Perhaps you can indicate as to specific attack you object to.

Ok, now let's cover you differences with Ms. Palin.

1) I agree with you about separation of Church and State. However, the last time I checked - the laws are passed by the Legislative Branch, not the Executive. She may be pro-church, but she has no power to make any law, just veto some (although in her case as VP - she wouldn't even be able to do that). If people of Alaska wanted to pass some laws and her personal beliefs supported it - why not. I'm sure you had no problems with passage of the gay marriage act in California? I don't recall anywhere in the Constitution referring to something like that. But the law was passed, if it passes all the legal muster - that's the deal, period. That's how this works. I can understand you not wanting Palin elected to Congress or become a judge, but this point you made here doesn't apply to her.

2) We need to do something about our current & future energy needs, hopefully you'd agree with that. Also, it's ridiculous that we pour so much money, essentially into the hands of our enemies, which is also ridiculous. What we need are some incentives to get new technologies developed (and I have no doubt the brilliant minds of MIT, Harvard etc. and American businesses will step up and delivery there), but that's not going to happen overnight. In the meantime our economy is hurting because of energy prices. What can we do immediately to get some relief in terms of prices - get away from dependence on foreigners. We have the resources.

There have been plenty of people that indicated that there are all kinds of new technological developments available to make the extraction process environment-friendly. Get natural gas, get coal and yes, drill for gas. One of the immediate effects this act alone will have is reduction in demand for foreign oil, which will force prices that we pay for that oil down. And continue in the direction of energy independence as well as changing the energy to use new technologies, because eventually the oil will be gone... everywhere if we keep using it & more and more so. So, I don't see any problems with drilling, provided it gets done with appropriate care. Nothing wrong with using the resou...

There have been plenty of people that indicated that there are all kinds of new technological developments available to make the extraction process environment-friendly. Get natural gas, get coal and yes, drill for gas. One of the immediate effects this act alone will have is reduction in demand for foreign oil, which will force prices that we pay for that oil down. And continue in the direction of energy independence as well as changing the energy to use new technologies, because eventually the oil will be gone... everywhere if we keep using it & more and more so. So, I don't see any problems with drilling, provided it gets done with appropriate care. Nothing wrong with using the resources of the planet, oil isn't the only resource we use, we just need to do it with care, that's all. And if you want to harp on someone about environmental concerns - I think you better go for the country you live in, not the one you're a citizen of.

3) I'm not sure about that particular situation. I'd have to get more details to see what she did and why. I do agree with you that US companies should most definitely be given a shot first. Perhaps there was nobody else capable of delivering what needed to be done other than them for the money... I don't know, can't really comment. She does have a surplus in the budget there, which deserves a big kudos and I don't see her as anti-American/pro-Canadian person, but if it turns out that there were credible US companies involved and she chose Canadian - then I'd agree with you that it was the wrong call.

4) Well, let's not go there yet. If you want to do the partisan BS... let's just not go there. You say 'even if it's just alleged'... come on, what kind of a statement is that? Some idiot brings a charge forward and you immediately assume it's true because of allegation? That's totally unfair. Let's see how this investigation turns out. Keep in mind that McCain was accused of infidelity on the front page of NYT...

We all know how well that allegation played out and ended up. Let's just see what actually happened there before jumping to conclusions. I gave the low-life Edwards the same benefit of a doubt, before his confession came out... same with Bill. Let's just be fair and crucify people for something they actually did, not for some allegations. I hope you're decent enough to agree with me on this. And if it turns out she overreached - I'll be more than happy to crucify her along with you and change my positive opinion of her. To me - a stunt like that is a deal-breaker.

And finally, Palin is #2, let's not forget that. McCain is the man running for the main job and he'll be the one making t...

We all know how well that allegation played out and ended up. Let's just see what actually happened there before jumping to conclusions. I gave the low-life Edwards the same benefit of a doubt, before his confession came out... same with Bill. Let's just be fair and crucify people for something they actually did, not for some allegations. I hope you're decent enough to agree with me on this. And if it turns out she overreached - I'll be more than happy to crucify her along with you and change my positive opinion of her. To me - a stunt like that is a deal-breaker.

And finally, Palin is #2, let's not forget that. McCain is the man running for the main job and he'll be the one making these decisions... let's not bury the guy before his time, which is something Democrats are actively trying to imply.

I don't agree with McCain on everything, in fact he totally lost me when he tried to get the amnesty passed, but I certainly have a lot of admiration for his past and his service and I think he did amazingly well with his VP pick, nothing conventional there, although clever on many levels. Democrats are used to promising the world, but with all the hope of last election and their pathetic performance even though they are the majority - I have absolutely no confidence that they will do anything positive for the country if they take the White House. Obama is too naive on many levels (mostly due to inexperience) and we just don't have the luxury of major political mistakes with other countries, not when there are people like al qaeda, iran, and Russia now raising their head again. This can turn extremely unpleasant for this country if not played right.

In any case, this is the most interesting election cycle I have ever seen, historic on many levels, regardless who wins. I guess we'll see in couple of months.

You've got a lot there for me to digest Record Sage, and good points all around. I'm going to take some time to chew on this one.

However, in the mean time, I hope you check out the arguments I made in two other clips because I would appreciate your scrutiny.

In Rustee's interesting clip on the leftist notion of "fairness" in taxation, I try to make the case that raising taxes on the rich and lowering it on the poor is fair not in the moral sense of the word, but in the necessary for a balanced and free market sense of fair. Essentially it's why I think supply side economics is wrong, and why cutting taxes for the rich has hurt our...

You've got a lot there for me to digest Record Sage, and good points all around. I'm going to take some time to chew on this one.

However, in the mean time, I hope you check out the arguments I made in two other clips because I would appreciate your scrutiny.

In Rustee's interesting clip on the leftist notion of "fairness" in taxation, I try to make the case that raising taxes on the rich and lowering it on the poor is fair not in the moral sense of the word, but in the necessary for a balanced and free market sense of fair. Essentially it's why I think supply side economics is wrong, and why cutting taxes for the rich has hurt our economy.

In Willhelm's other clip "Why Everyone Should Be In Favor of Reducing Taxes on the Rich" I lay out why, in order to keep your marginal taxes low, you will have to reduce military spending.

And so you know, since 1951, marginal taxes have steadily decreased, not increased, so I don't understand what you mean by "tax racheting" unless you mean ratcheting America into debt.

1. Education Spending
Federal Education spending is not much. Learning about Heather's two mommies is funded by your local taxes, not by the Federal Government. And Washington State has one of the lowest tax rates in the nation.

On a side note, Record Sage, I would like to thank you, because your taxes paid for my education in a Washington State Public Schools, where in edition to learning about the importance of tolerance, kindness and Heather's two mommies, I also got a first rate education in multiplying 5x8 (40!), writing in English (though not word economy!), apples falling from trees, physics, history, and most importantly, in debate and argumentation (Taught by one of the most brilli...

1. Education Spending
Federal Education spending is not much. Learning about Heather's two mommies is funded by your local taxes, not by the Federal Government. And Washington State has one of the lowest tax rates in the nation.

On a side note, Record Sage, I would like to thank you, because your taxes paid for my education in a Washington State Public Schools, where in edition to learning about the importance of tolerance, kindness and Heather's two mommies, I also got a first rate education in multiplying 5x8 (40!), writing in English (though not word economy!), apples falling from trees, physics, history, and most importantly, in debate and argumentation (Taught by one of the most brilliant right-wing libertarians you will ever meet!)

My 9th Grade social studies teacher, also brilliant but an anarchistic lefty, also taught me enough about the structure of the government to understand that Federal Marginal Income Taxes have very little to do with education spending.

So thanks for the education, and remember this: if you want to reduce *Fedral* taxes, you'll need to look somewhere else to cut out waste.

3. Attacks on Palin
You are right. Some Democrats do make dirty attacks because they don't know what else to say. (And I stress, I'm a "liberal" not a democrat, and I will not register with a party on principle, even if I have to vote with one in the end.)

But I don't attack her on those grounds, and Obama didn't either. Obama attacked McCain for holding a double standard. Both Obama and Palin have accomplishments in government. Obama has held a national office, while Palin has not. Palin has executive experience while Obama does not.

In the end, its a tie. Anyone who says otherwise, left or right, is bullshit. Democrats try to twist it to say Obama's inexperience is okay but Palin's isn'...

3. Attacks on Palin
You are right. Some Democrats do make dirty attacks because they don't know what else to say. (And I stress, I'm a "liberal" not a democrat, and I will not register with a party on principle, even if I have to vote with one in the end.)

But I don't attack her on those grounds, and Obama didn't either. Obama attacked McCain for holding a double standard. Both Obama and Palin have accomplishments in government. Obama has held a national office, while Palin has not. Palin has executive experience while Obama does not.

In the end, its a tie. Anyone who says otherwise, left or right, is bullshit. Democrats try to twist it to say Obama's inexperience is okay but Palin's isn't. That's bullshit. Republicans try to twist it to say Palin's inexperience is okay but Obama's isn't. That's bullshit too. So please stop doing it, and join me in calling it all bullshit.

5. Church & State
I know the executive branch doesn't write laws, but it is her political beliefs that I question. I don't believe that she supports the separation of church and state, and I don't want someone like that in power.

Also, as vice president, she casts tie breaking votes in the Senate, so there she is tangled up in the legislative branch!

I am also against the California law, because that implies it requires legislation to resolve the question of gay marriage. I prefer the Massachusetts way, where the court rules that it is discrimination, because it is. Ending discrimination should not require additional laws, because equality is already enshrined in the US Constitution.

On t...

5. Church & State
I know the executive branch doesn't write laws, but it is her political beliefs that I question. I don't believe that she supports the separation of church and state, and I don't want someone like that in power.

Also, as vice president, she casts tie breaking votes in the Senate, so there she is tangled up in the legislative branch!

I am also against the California law, because that implies it requires legislation to resolve the question of gay marriage. I prefer the Massachusetts way, where the court rules that it is discrimination, because it is. Ending discrimination should not require additional laws, because equality is already enshrined in the US Constitution.

On the other hand, discriminatory laws that arbitrarily deny some Americans the rights granted to others are fundamentally unconstitutional. Period. This is a Judicial issue, not a legislative one. And as it so happens, the GOP wants to pack the court with activist judges, so there's one more reason to worry about an executive who doesn't value the First Amendment.

3. Energy
I agree that we need new energy solutions. I disagree that oil shortages are what cause the current price hikes. Demand for oil has not gone up, and supply has not gone down. The reason that prices have gone up is because speculators and profiteers have been allowed free hand in manipulating the market, and the fact that there are only three or four major oil companies means there isn't healthy free market competition to drive prices down.

Also, drilling in Alaska for oil is a dead end. Ask anyone in the oil industry. The hypothetical oil in ANWAR is mixed in with shale and gravel, making it only good for paving roads and greasing that squeaky hinge you've got. The reason companie...

3. Energy
I agree that we need new energy solutions. I disagree that oil shortages are what cause the current price hikes. Demand for oil has not gone up, and supply has not gone down. The reason that prices have gone up is because speculators and profiteers have been allowed free hand in manipulating the market, and the fact that there are only three or four major oil companies means there isn't healthy free market competition to drive prices down.

Also, drilling in Alaska for oil is a dead end. Ask anyone in the oil industry. The hypothetical oil in ANWAR is mixed in with shale and gravel, making it only good for paving roads and greasing that squeaky hinge you've got. The reason companies want drilling is not to get at some vast oil reserve we've been overlooking, but because they want to establish a precedent for overturning the environmental protections laws that brought our country back from the brink of an ecological meltdown in the 70s.

Politicians want to drill in ANWAR, but geologists don't. Interesting, isn't it?

Let the school staffs be accountable for the work they do, just as any other business staff. Get the discipline back in school. Kids don't need to go to school to learn about Heather with 2 mommies, they need to learn how to multiply 5x8, how to write well in English, why apples fall from trees, physics, chemistry, history - that's what school's for at young age, not to push some political ideas (left or right). The people orchestrating current education clearly know nothing about it - dump them! Get new people involved, get curriculum to match the best education available elsewhere in the world. It's NOT about the money.

"Education is the civil rights issue of this centu...

Let the school staffs be accountable for the work they do, just as any other business staff. Get the discipline back in school. Kids don't need to go to school to learn about Heather with 2 mommies, they need to learn how to multiply 5x8, how to write well in English, why apples fall from trees, physics, chemistry, history - that's what school's for at young age, not to push some political ideas (left or right). The people orchestrating current education clearly know nothing about it - dump them! Get new people involved, get curriculum to match the best education available elsewhere in the world. It's NOT about the money.

"Education is the civil rights issue of this century. Equal access to public education has been gained. But what is the value of access to a failing school? We need to shake up failed school bureaucracies with competition, empower parents with choice, remove barriers to qualified instructors, attract and reward good teachers, and help bad teachers find another line of work.

When a public school fails to meet its obligations to students, parents deserve a choice in the education of their children. And I intend to give it to them. Some may choose a better public school. Some may choose a private one. Many will choose a charter school. But they will have that choice and their children will have that opportunity."

-John S. McCain, Sept 4th, 2008

4. Subsidies for Canada
I agree American companies should come first, but I don't like corporate welfare period. If a company, like for instance, an oil company, is enjoying record profits during a time when the price of their product is hurting our economy, should we really give them a hand out? Should we be rewarding someone for profiteering? I don't think she's anti-American pro-Canada. I think she, like most Alaskan politicians, is pro-big oil corporation, and I'm not.

5. Impropriety
First of all, these aren't rumors from the newspaper. These are facts. In independent commission is investigating her for dismissing a comissioner. That comissioner was the one who was involved with the em...

4. Subsidies for Canada
I agree American companies should come first, but I don't like corporate welfare period. If a company, like for instance, an oil company, is enjoying record profits during a time when the price of their product is hurting our economy, should we really give them a hand out? Should we be rewarding someone for profiteering? I don't think she's anti-American pro-Canada. I think she, like most Alaskan politicians, is pro-big oil corporation, and I'm not.

5. Impropriety
First of all, these aren't rumors from the newspaper. These are facts. In independent commission is investigating her for dismissing a comissioner. That comissioner was the one who was involved with the employment of a state trooper involved in a legally documented custody battle with her sister. Dismissing him without grounds when the situation is delicate like that is asking for trouble. Same goes for the latter two problems. They are in my opinion poor judgments from a person who is trying to give the impression of fighting cronyism.

More importantly, picking someone under investigation for corruption undermines McCain's message of ethics reform.

In the end, you are right. She is number two. She isn't the candidate, McCain is. I'm also glad McCain is showing that he isn't a Bush stooge, because I like the guy, and he certainly has the tumerity to make the election all out for change. With the current line up, the status quo doesn't stand a chance, and that certainly makes me happy.

What I am doing here is trying to introduce issues into the discussion of a VP candidate who has been almost exclusively debated on irrelevant personal grounds. I don't like that. In a few days I'll go back to arguing Obama v. McCain, but I'd like to give Sarah Palin the respect she deserves - by criticizing her on specific and valid issues rather than di...

In the end, you are right. She is number two. She isn't the candidate, McCain is. I'm also glad McCain is showing that he isn't a Bush stooge, because I like the guy, and he certainly has the tumerity to make the election all out for change. With the current line up, the status quo doesn't stand a chance, and that certainly makes me happy.

What I am doing here is trying to introduce issues into the discussion of a VP candidate who has been almost exclusively debated on irrelevant personal grounds. I don't like that. In a few days I'll go back to arguing Obama v. McCain, but I'd like to give Sarah Palin the respect she deserves - by criticizing her on specific and valid issues rather than dismissing her with glib personal slander the way so many do to most people they disagree with.

Honestly, dl211, I think someone who's wife and kid were killed is entitled to a little bitterness, and although its not his finest moment, I can see him making an off-hand comment. I don't know that you can prove it was done as a deliberate political ploy. I will just grant you that it was unfair to the driver.

But here is the thing: Obama knew Biden had said a number of regrettable things, but his extemporaneousness largely accounts for why many people do trust Joe Biden. I would say it is a risk, but a deliberate one - trading the liability of a loose tongue for the integrity of honesty and directness.

Now McCain is playing the same game. Palin has pros and cons as well. The big con is ...

Honestly, dl211, I think someone who's wife and kid were killed is entitled to a little bitterness, and although its not his finest moment, I can see him making an off-hand comment. I don't know that you can prove it was done as a deliberate political ploy. I will just grant you that it was unfair to the driver.

But here is the thing: Obama knew Biden had said a number of regrettable things, but his extemporaneousness largely accounts for why many people do trust Joe Biden. I would say it is a risk, but a deliberate one - trading the liability of a loose tongue for the integrity of honesty and directness.

Now McCain is playing the same game. Palin has pros and cons as well. The big con is that she undermines most of the strategies that the GOP insiders were planning, but the pro is it reminds the country that McCain is his own man, and does a lot to deflect criticism that he is a Bush pawn - something he needed to do in a very audacious manner. So I'll say that's a plus in the McCain column.

But its more complicated than that.

Obama needed to balance his idealism with Biden's practicality. McCain needed to balance his progressive reputation with a firm evangelical conservative. Obama needed to balance his youth with experience, McCain need to balance his experience with youth.

After a divisive primary, Obama needed to show he would listen to and respect criticism by picking someone who will openly disagree with him. So Biden seems to be a good choice there.

After an apathetic primary, McCain needed to get the Republican party excited about him. So Palin seems like a good choice.

But Obama's central theme needs to be "Idealistic Change, but don't worry, we'll also show restraint." Biden brings that to the ticket with age and expereince.

On the other hand, McCain's central theme needs to be "I'm gonna clean up Washington, but I won't throw the baby out with the bath water." I don't know if Palin was a good choice to make that point.

If you, dl211, are a bereaved family member of the truck driver, then I will also give your bitterness the same benefit of a doubt that I give Biden. But I think you are just a partisan trying to make hay.

If you pay attention to my now extensive comments on Palin, I have made clear, and discussed four specific political issues where I don't agree with Palin, and those are the only reasons I oppose her. I have gone out of my way to specifically avoid basing my arguments on innuendo or gossip. You have me confused with your sterotype of a liberal.

But once again, to recap, I oppose Palin for four reasons:

1. The Separation of Church & State
2. Extraction & the Environment
3. Corporate Welf...

If you, dl211, are a bereaved family member of the truck driver, then I will also give your bitterness the same benefit of a doubt that I give Biden. But I think you are just a partisan trying to make hay.

If you pay attention to my now extensive comments on Palin, I have made clear, and discussed four specific political issues where I don't agree with Palin, and those are the only reasons I oppose her. I have gone out of my way to specifically avoid basing my arguments on innuendo or gossip. You have me confused with your sterotype of a liberal.

But once again, to recap, I oppose Palin for four reasons:

1. The Separation of Church & State
2. Extraction & the Environment
3. Corporate Welfare Handouts
4. Indifference to the Appearance of Impropriety

All these are documented, based on facts, and therefore debatable at length, as Record Sage has done.

I agree with you that its off limits to attack Palin's personal life, or impugn her character or personal dignity. I will gladly take on any liberal who tries to do that.

[dl211, I suppose you don't know anyone who's had to cope with tragedy?]

Did you ever have to wake parents up in the middle of the night to inform them their only son had just been killed in a car wreck on his way home from college for the holidays, after the initial shock and crying, they have questions you do not have the answers to?

Did you ever choke up with tears trying to tell a hysterical mother her two year old son had been killed by being run over by a piece of heavy equipment operated by the father?

Have you ever had a victim die from a gunshot wound while interviewing him with his family not twenty feet away in the trauma unit?

Have you ever conducted a suicide investigation ...

[dl211, I suppose you don't know anyone who's had to cope with tragedy?]

Did you ever have to wake parents up in the middle of the night to inform them their only son had just been killed in a car wreck on his way home from college for the holidays, after the initial shock and crying, they have questions you do not have the answers to?

Did you ever choke up with tears trying to tell a hysterical mother her two year old son had been killed by being run over by a piece of heavy equipment operated by the father?

Have you ever had a victim die from a gunshot wound while interviewing him with his family not twenty feet away in the trauma unit?

Have you ever conducted a suicide investigation of a sixteen year old girl who shot herself with her parents in hysterics?

Have you ever been on multiple fatality accidents, with bodies torn apart and scattered around on and off the roadway? Then have relatives of the victims show up at the scene. Have you ever walked around accident scenes and noticed the crunching noise you hear underfoot is actually bits of skull you were walking on?

Have you ever responded to an accident where a drunk driver had a head-on with another car with a female and two small girls in the back seat? You find a blank death stare on the young woman behind the wheel, one dead child in the back and the other trapped in the wreckage crying "mommy" over and over again. Then you find out the drunk being placed on a stretcher was not only alive but was actually laughing. I wanted to kill him.

Did you ever get called out in the middle of the night to an apparent accident but turned out to be a murder suicide? A man intentionally rear ended a stopped 18 wheeler with a flatbed trailer at high speed only to find his wife that he had killed earlier had been thrown on impact from the trunk into the back seat.

You can get similar stories from just about any cop who has worked for a number of years, the list could go on and on. These are real low poin

If you are so familiar with tragedy dl211, then why are you surprised that Biden might have at one time accepted in his mind a version of events that was easier to understand, even if it wasn't true?

I'm sorry that will helm thinks I'm not being fair. I think I am because I would accept the same argument in defense of a conservative candidate. Bereaved people don't always get their facts straight, and I don't expect them to. I won't blame Biden for that, and I wouldn't blame a Republican for doing the same thing.

These four points are not rationalizations. They are genuinely the reasons I don't agree with Palin. I like her - she's a nice person, she hunts and fishes, she wants the governme...

If you are so familiar with tragedy dl211, then why are you surprised that Biden might have at one time accepted in his mind a version of events that was easier to understand, even if it wasn't true?

I'm sorry that will helm thinks I'm not being fair. I think I am because I would accept the same argument in defense of a conservative candidate. Bereaved people don't always get their facts straight, and I don't expect them to. I won't blame Biden for that, and I wouldn't blame a Republican for doing the same thing.

These four points are not rationalizations. They are genuinely the reasons I don't agree with Palin. I like her - she's a nice person, she hunts and fishes, she wants the government to be honest, and she works her best to achieve what she thinks is the right thing. Just like me. And I respect that.

So why would I not vote for someone who I like? Because I disagree on four specific issues. I've laid them out, they are what they are. Record sage had constructive responses to them, and I respect that, but dl211 and willhelm, neither of you have done anything constructive other than insulting and accusing people.

I would really like to have a serrious talk about the issues that I believe in. I am fair, and I won't hold you to a different standard than the one I have for liberals.

Honestly, I don't even understand why you think I'm being unfair.

You say you want to be fair and that's admirable.

You have some issue with Mrs. Palin and you stated them, and that's why you stated you'd be casting your vote for Obama.

My question is why aren't you, in the interest of being fair, showing the issues on Obama's side of the ticket. More specifically - the bankruptcy legislation that Biden was involved in back in 1998? What about Biden's voting on extremely important issue like immigration? What about the fact that he was rejected by his party's constituents to have him be the Presi...

You say you want to be fair and that's admirable.

You have some issue with Mrs. Palin and you stated them, and that's why you stated you'd be casting your vote for Obama.

My question is why aren't you, in the interest of being fair, showing the issues on Obama's side of the ticket. More specifically - the bankruptcy legislation that Biden was involved in back in 1998? What about Biden's voting on extremely important issue like immigration? What about the fact that he was rejected by his party's constituents to have him be the President in all of his attempts? Does it concern you that people might get him even if they don't want him?

And this is just Biden. You start looking at the messiah himself, with rev. Wright, Rezko, Ayres etc. and the fact that Biden himself dissed Obama as lacking when it comes to such a job (I'm trying to be nice here) and that doesn't concern you?

If you want to truly be fair - then I think looking at all of these facts merits consideration and serious one at that.

I certainly disagree with Mr. McCain on a number of issues, but he's still an American hero in my view, the man who sacrificed a lot for his country and spent many years in service to it and that's very admirable. Mrs. Palin I don't know much about, but what I have heard so far from her personally and seeing how the attack dogs media are trying to crucify her (in a way similar to Hillary, although with more venom), considering that the media is terribly left-biased, it appears that perhaps using the word 'messiah' is no longer appropriate and there's a good reason why this the venom is out there. Also worth carefully considering.

When you hear things like 'she said she sold the plane on ebay and she actually didn't, but she just put the ad there, but sold it to a private party to get a better deal' vs listening

I do actually disagree with Biden on bankruptcy legislation, but since the GOP supports making it even tougher for private individuals to declare bankruptcy, I don't feel I have a choice on this issue. I'll just write letters to my congresswomen.

I am very libertarian on immigration. I don't believe governments should restrict the movement of law abiding citizens between their boarders. I think illegal alliens should pay US taxes, and obey US laws, and should be given reasonable punishments for breaking laws. (Including the law they broke when the crossed the boarder illegally, although what is fair punishment for that is a different debate.) That said, I think our immigration policy is aut...

I do actually disagree with Biden on bankruptcy legislation, but since the GOP supports making it even tougher for private individuals to declare bankruptcy, I don't feel I have a choice on this issue. I'll just write letters to my congresswomen.

I am very libertarian on immigration. I don't believe governments should restrict the movement of law abiding citizens between their boarders. I think illegal alliens should pay US taxes, and obey US laws, and should be given reasonable punishments for breaking laws. (Including the law they broke when the crossed the boarder illegally, although what is fair punishment for that is a different debate.) That said, I think our immigration policy is authoritarian and discriminatory. I support an open border. Drug dealers can be arrested independent of border patrol, the same way we arrest domestic drug dealers.

There are problems with the Obama camp, for sure. I don't agree with them on everything, but on the issues that are important to me, I agree with Obama more than I agree with Palin or McCain. Nobody has made the argument otherwise. We all vote based on different values, and that is certainly okay. My point is our standards on those values should be consistent across party lines. That, for example, is why I would vote McCain over Hilary, but Obama over McCain.

Another main reason I bring up these points is to allow conservatives such as yourself to see some of the real reasons Democrats disagree with Palin. I welcome you doing the same with Obama (Rustee and I have had some very interesting discussions on the economic side of that argument)

I think this is very important to overcoming the political divides and making progress towards the values we do share. Also, Record Sage, I hope to be back in Seattle in November or December, so I hope I can take you up on your offer of coffee!

Absolutely you can take me on your offer - I'll even throw a meal to go with the coffee Just contact me and we'll get together.

As for the differences - I'm with you on how things should be looked at, but when you look at fringe taking over the Democrat party and what they're looking to achieve and their tactics - it's difficult to overcome the political divide... in fact listening to some people on this very site - it's clear that it's pretty much impossible. Whenever ideology trumps everything else - that's the end of any kind of normal debate, because fairness is out of the house at that point. Look at war as an example. There are intelligent people, like invictus, who totally opp...

Absolutely you can take me on your offer - I'll even throw a meal to go with the coffee Just contact me and we'll get together.

As for the differences - I'm with you on how things should be looked at, but when you look at fringe taking over the Democrat party and what they're looking to achieve and their tactics - it's difficult to overcome the political divide... in fact listening to some people on this very site - it's clear that it's pretty much impossible. Whenever ideology trumps everything else - that's the end of any kind of normal debate, because fairness is out of the house at that point. Look at war as an example. There are intelligent people, like invictus, who totally opposes war regardless of circumstances. To me - that's both a noble and admirable trait. That's his strong belief and he isn't ashamed to admit it. What he doesn't do though is disrupt a funeral of someone killed in a war to make his point. That's disgraceful & totally wrong in my view. Anyway, I'm sure you know what I mean.

Getting back to the topic at hand, one of the main reasons I support McCain is his understanding of wars, much more so than all of the others running combined many times (including Palin of course) and strong commitment to protecting the country. It seems to me if that one issue gets ignored or screwed up - the others simply fall apart like dominoes since they won't really matter under those circumstances.

People keep talking about McCain being similar to Bush, blah blah blah... to me a better question is what policies of Bush that worked well does he support and (I hope) will continue to support and what policies that didn't work will he change the course on. Today's a very somber anniversary, one we, as Americans, should never forget. It's been 7 years since we were attacked and they haven't been able to attack us since (although I have absolutely no doubt that they'd like to). I hope McCain continues on this Bush policy.

Immigration is an issue that I disagreed with Bush on, same with McCain for the same reasons and I hope he does take a different road.

I would probably agree with your immigration sentiments if we had perfect immigrants, who come to this country to work and pay taxes, many of whom do, but certainly not everyone. I've seen this many times being an immigrant myself and when you hear about ERs in Ca, Tx and other border states being shut down due to incredible influx of people who aren't paying - you have to pause. This current immigration wave is ruining what has been so well and painfully built by other immigrants for the past 200+ years. It makes no sense to destroy it in a few short yea...

Immigration is an issue that I disagreed with Bush on, same with McCain for the same reasons and I hope he does take a different road.

I would probably agree with your immigration sentiments if we had perfect immigrants, who come to this country to work and pay taxes, many of whom do, but certainly not everyone. I've seen this many times being an immigrant myself and when you hear about ERs in Ca, Tx and other border states being shut down due to incredible influx of people who aren't paying - you have to pause. This current immigration wave is ruining what has been so well and painfully built by other immigrants for the past 200+ years. It makes no sense to destroy it in a few short years just because.

I agree that we could use cheap labor in certain industries, I agree that many of those coming provide such labor, but I disagree with blanket amnesty or the current immigration rules. I do agree with you that anyone who might become a permanent resident should pay penalties, back taxes and future taxes, but it isn't that simple - how do you address the legal immigrants crowd. There are plenty of those and they have been waiting for years to get into the USA. It's totally unfair to them to stay in line, while others simply jump the fence and plunder the other side.

If everyone was conscientious and thoughtful & didn't abuse the privilege - sure, that would work, but if that was the case - we both know that even communism would work pretty well. The reason it doesn't is because of many lacks in our society and such is the problem with having open borders for all.

I realize that some may consider this somewhat hypocritical that I, being an immigrant myself, is dumping on immigrants... but it's not the case. We came here without anything... then learned the language, got low end jobs, several at a time at one point, worked legally, paid taxes etc. for the past 30 years. If someone would make a law stating that everyone

Actually, you do have a very good point on McCain's understanding of wars. I believe this is a key difference between McCain and Bush. I do not feel Bush takes seriously his responsibility to the troops, and has not done his due diligence as commander in chief to ensure that the military pursues a feasible strategy that minimizes unnecessary risks and also provides the military with the tools, leadership, and independence that it needs to accomplish its mission.

This is also why I would support McCain of Hillary, because given that both have a jingoistic tone, McCain knows the reality of warfare (ugly) while Hillary and Bush do not. This means he will be far less likely to think of war as a...

Actually, you do have a very good point on McCain's understanding of wars. I believe this is a key difference between McCain and Bush. I do not feel Bush takes seriously his responsibility to the troops, and has not done his due diligence as commander in chief to ensure that the military pursues a feasible strategy that minimizes unnecessary risks and also provides the military with the tools, leadership, and independence that it needs to accomplish its mission.

This is also why I would support McCain of Hillary, because given that both have a jingoistic tone, McCain knows the reality of warfare (ugly) while Hillary and Bush do not. This means he will be far less likely to think of war as a great romantic undertaking, which I believe to be the central fault in the Bush administration.

But on the other hand, I don't think McCain understands this war. Islamic terrorism and insurgency will be fundamentally different from communist revolution (Korea and Vietnam) or classical European imperialist aggression. (WWI & II)

On immigration, I also agree with you except for one perspective. I don't think we should use immigration law to take care of those irresponsible immigrants. Instead we should use existing criminal laws that can be enforced, or have specific laws to address the problems directly. As I see it, this is a criminal problem, not an immigrant problem, and as such should be dealt with through policies on crime, not on immigration.

But you are right to mention the legal immigrant crowd. Many of my Chinese friends would never dream of trying to enter illegally, so they wait and try again even though the system fails them, and I do feel like they are owed greater priority over people who shortcut.

Of course, we have strayed a ways from the topic of this clip, but thanks for serious discussion of issues. It's lots of food for thought.

Well, when you have 'sanctuary cities', the most idiotic thing I've ever heard of, you have the problems we have. It's hard to believe that in the country where laws are suppose to be the rule - you have such a blatant disrespect for them and it's actually being tolerated like it was the norm.

As for Bush on war - I don't think it's as bad as you claim, I think he does care. I also think that any war normally has unintended circumstances and problems that are hard to predict. This war didn't go as planned, 20/20 is always hindsight vision, but things are certainly moving in the right direction at this point. It appears that it may not be a lost cause after all, people like McCain and Bu...

Well, when you have 'sanctuary cities', the most idiotic thing I've ever heard of, you have the problems we have. It's hard to believe that in the country where laws are suppose to be the rule - you have such a blatant disrespect for them and it's actually being tolerated like it was the norm.

As for Bush on war - I don't think it's as bad as you claim, I think he does care. I also think that any war normally has unintended circumstances and problems that are hard to predict. This war didn't go as planned, 20/20 is always hindsight vision, but things are certainly moving in the right direction at this point. It appears that it may not be a lost cause after all, people like McCain and Bush should get credit for the turnaround, if they're getting blamed for the prior problems - it's only fair.

Wars are unpredictable, they suck royally and, unfortunately, they will always be present, unless we all 'get along' and you know what the chances of that happening (probably similar to communism working).

Back to the topic at hand... I guess it hasn't changed so far... Obama still runs his mouth (with comments like 'lipstick on a pig') and Palin still runs the coldest state in the Union...