and now they've found out all 3 candidates'
Posted By: files were breached on 2008-03-21
In Reply to: State Fires 2 for Looking at Obama File - sm
Reminds me a lot of LA hospital employees getting fired for snooping in Britney Spears' medical records. I don't know what exactly there is to snoop in passport records, but it's still a privacy breach.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
It sounds like you've found an
employer like they ALL were in the "old days." In the 70s and 80s you would never ever have seen anyone complaining as they do on the company board and there is little doubt in my mind that all the complaints are well justified. My wish for you is that your company will be able to stay in business and compete with the greedy hoes in big business.
We've Found Bin Laden
Osama bin Laden may be hiding out in one of three walled compounds near the Pakistani border, according to scientists who've used satellites and geographic analysis in an attempt to pinpoint the fugitive terrorist's location.
University of California-Los Angeles researchers used nighttime satellite images and population-detection methods to target what they believe to be the 9/11 mastermind's hiding place - Parachinar, a town mere miles from the southern Pakistani border, according to USA Today.
The researchers took into consideration where bin Laden has been spotted and where he would likely frequent since he went underground in 2001, mapping out potential nearby lairs where the AL Qaeda leader could set up house.
The amount of available electricity and the population density of the areas bin Laden was likely to travel through were also a factor in the study's conclusions.
Geographer Thomas Gillespie, who led the UCLA research team, previously used similar techniques to locate endangered species and criminals. The bin Laden study was born out of a seminar Gillespie was teaching to undergraduates on how to use mapping techniques to solve real-life problems, USA Today reported.
Government officials told USA Today that Gillespie's conclusions could potentially hold weight once they are fleshed out and published in journal form.
"The combination of physical terrain, socio-cultural gravitational factors and the physical characteristic of structures are all important factors in developing an area limitation for terror suspects," John Goolgasian of the federal National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency told USA Today.
President Barack Obama has said on the campaign trail and in office that one of his main priorities in the White House will be to locate the terrorist leader.
"My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him," Obama told Katie Couric in a January interview.
Last week, Obama said that he would begin actions to disable al Qaeda activities in Afghanistan, though he did not have a precise timetable mapped out for action in the region.
"What I know is that I'm not going to allow al Qaeda and bin Laden to operate with impunity attacking the U.S.," Obama said on Feb. 9.
Here's what I've found about Obamas' gift giving.
By Alex Spillius in Washington
Last Updated: 6:57PM BST 25 Jul 2008
In a magazine interview Obama and his wife Michelle revealed that one of their steadfast house rules is not giving Christmas or birthday presents to Malia, 10, and Sasha, 7.
The couple explained that they spend "hundreds" on birthday slumber parties and want to "teach some limits". Santa Claus is still permitted to deliver seasonal gifts however.
candidates
I think they will both be true in the future to who they are now (as well as they can be with having to work with Congress to get things done), but "what you see" depends on where you're looking and who's doing the talking.
Candidates
Why not let felons vote? No different than providing amnesty to millions of illegals to get their vote, which is going to happen whether we like it or not.
Obama certainly talks the talk. I have a couple of problems with him. One his pastor. He might also consider running as an AMERICAN, not an African-American. It matters not that he happens to be a black AMERICAN. Let's be done with racism on BOTH sides. Sometimes I think the only way we, who happen to be Caucasian, can ever satisfy the African-American community is to become slaves for a few hundred years. Let it go already. There is not one person alive today who ever was a slave or ever owned a slave. Let's move on.
McCain.........while I honor his service to this country, if I hear about his POW years one more time I think I'll vomit. I saw him on a talk show where he was asked about how many houses he owns and he immediately launched into his "years as a POW where he didn't even have a table much less a house".
God save this country, neither candidate is going to help Him.
Yes...too bad the candidates don't
talk to real Americans, not the CEOs, the Hollywood elite (why anyone take any political advice from a so-called movie star is beyond me) when cameras aren't around. Most candidates perceive us as being sheeple, say some pretty things and we will follow, no matter how high the cliff is you're brining us over. I don't care how many houses you own, what faith your father was, if you had an affair or if you wear a flag pin. Get to some frickin' issues when you debate each other, don't give us the run around and jab each other. Neither one of you are stellar candidates. You both have faults, you both have good points, but for cripe's sake, talk about something that matters to us!
candidates
instead of obama or mccain, any other candidates you may vote for?
http://www.votesmart.org/election_president.php
I hope each one of these candidates
wins! They've been there, done that, and in my opinion, should have the strongest voices. I just hope it isn't too late for this country by next election day!
then again, they ALL scare me - all the candidates
   
Presidential candidates
I think MTs should run the country!!! 
Candidates cars
This was fun to read
http://www.newsweek.com/id/160091
Do either of the candidates have a plan
for this financial crisis that does not involve the taxpayers bailing out the US?
Independent candidates have to
have at least 15% in opinion polls in order to participate in the presidential debates. Right now....the only candidates eligible to participate in the debate are, of course, McCain and Obama. To me....that says that no independent has enough backing to do any good except for take votes from the other two. There is nothing wrong with voting for an independent though. If you feel Ron Paul is a better candidate, you have the right to vote for him. However, some say it would be throwing your vote away since the likelihood of him actually win is slim. You never know though. Do what you feel is best and go with your gut. If you truly believe in Ron Paul, vote for him. No one can knock you for that.
If one of the candidates was not Obama I would be...
tempted. However, in my view, it is way too important for the future of this country to doa protest vote. same reason I am voting a straight republican ticket. The thought of Obama as president and a majority in congress...makes it way too important for a protest vote this cycle...at least for me.
Here are some other parties and their candidates.
The Libertarian Party has nominated former Congressman Bob Barr, the Constitution Party has nominated pastor and radio talk show host Chuck Baldwin, and the Green Party has nominated former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney. Ralph Nader declined to seek the Green Party nomination and is running as an independent candidate. That is in addition to the Ron Paul fans as well as McCain and Obama.
What did we get out of the debate last night? That same ole crap Obama and McCain have been throwing around since the get go. Imagine what that would be like with all these other people thrown in the debate as well.
They only cover 2 candidates because
we don't demand that they do otherwise. Power to the people!!!!
I wish there was a rule that the candidates HAVE TO
avoid them and go off in a direction of their own choosing. Especially when it's something they already said before. This second debate had me yawning.
here are a few if my candidates lose -
1. Get up Wed. AM, after election, turn on TV. See my faves didn't win. My reaction: 'Oh, cr@p!'
2. my actions: Eat cereal and drink coffee.
3. Where to go from thERE?
BACK TO BED!
4. What will I flee? My low-paying MT job, which most likely will never get any better.
Now I know how the candidates feel!
Say one thing and everyone wants to dissect your every move! LOL
sbMT for President! who wants to be my running mate???
HAHA J/K
Anyone interested in the candidates houses? SM
On the www.apartmentherapy website, they feature the candidates homes. I love that site. Anway...spoiler alert, if anyone cares.
________________________________
What I found interesting is Mitt Romney lives in a comptemporary home on the water, which is pictured next to Barack Obama's conservative georgian style home.
OK, not of vital interest, I just love looking at homes. 
Scary that you would support either of those candidates.
p
Differences in Wives of the candidates...
So I have only seen Michelle and Cindy speak few times.
However I have noticed something that sticks out to me tremendously, and this was the attitude of the two.
Last night Cindy was calm, sweet, and caring.
Michele seems hard, negative, and loud.
Obviously I am a Republican, but I pride myself on trying to be objective. Do we see these things differently or is this agreed upon? Cindy definitely seems like a weak little doe, and Michele a tough ox.
I'm not saying either is worse, just something I observed.
Polls promising for both candidates
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26627956#26627956
I have a great idea! I think the candidates should be...sm
hooked up to lie detectors during the debates. Wouldn't that be interesting?
Of course she does.....all the candidates use planes for some things...
my point was, that they SOMETIMES use buses instead of flying everywhere, Obama does not use buses, and I would venture a guess that one flight uses more energy than her tanning bed does in a year.
Go Lou Dobbs - he's really ripping both candidates
A new one. Boy oh boy was he going off. He is so disgusted with the whole crisis going on and that the mainstream americans are going to end up paying for it. First he went off on John McCain and boy did he go off. Then he went off on Obama and boy did he let him have it too. He never once said one has a better solution that the other or one was more to blame than the other. He ended it by saying something to the effect (I forget exact words) but something about these two candidates are running to be president and they both won't answer questions with a straight answer. And if they can't even answer then they both shouldn't be running (or don't want it bad enough). Like I say I forget the exact words but I do have to say I'm going to start listening to Lou Dobbs from now on because he's not taking sides.
If you get to see his show on CNN tonight you should catch it. Very good points he brings up (and you could see the spokespersons for both sides cringing at what he was saying). He didn't let them get away with anything.
I wish both candidates were black! Then no one would be able to say it is about race. It is not abo
x
I have truly wished for a while that both candidates were black (sm)
because I thought that would take racism out of this election. One of my black friends, however, says that it would still be a racial election, because some people would think one candidate was catering more to "white" people and others would think they were catering to "black" people. I just hope we can get through all of this and have a country that can all get along, regardless of race or religion.
Americans for Tax Reform: The Candidates
Dear Friends,
1. ATR Presidential Primer: Everything You Should Know about the Candidates’ Tax Proposals (read more >>)
ATR Presidential Primer: Everything You Should Know about the Candidates’ Tax Proposals
The 2008 election is only days away. Soon you’ll be called on to vote for your next President, U.S. Senator, and U.S. Representative. Are you familiar with all their tax policies? Do you know where the candidates stand on the issues closely related to your family budget?
Americans for Tax Reform has compiled a list of all the recent materials we’ve put out on the Presidential candidates. We think you’ll find these resources and links to be very useful in your decision-making process.
Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform, discusses his thoughts on the two presidential candidates in the Politico. You may want to take a quick read to see what he thinks hinges on this election.
Educational Resources:
- Which candidates have signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge? See if your candidate has promised never to raise taxes. (Incumbents and Challengers)
- Americans for Tax Reform and Rutledge Capital Release Version 2.0 of Obama-McCain 401(k) Tax Calculator
- McCain v. Obama on Taxes
- McCain vs. Obama on Energy Taxes
- He$$ in a Hand basket: Life Under a Democrat Congress
- Five Things You Might Not Know About Obama’s Small Biz Tax Hike
- Obama’s “Spread the Wealth” Plan Raises Taxes on two-thirds of Small Business Profits
- If Obama Wants to “Spread the Wealth,” He Ought to Start With His Personal Tax Gap: Barack Obama Has a Tax Gap of Over $250,000
- Obama to U.S. Companies: “Don’t Let the Door Hit You on the Way Out” Obama Supports Keeping U.S. Business Rate Second-Highest in World
- Worried About Your 401(k)? Start Asking Obama About the Corporate Income Tax Rate
- Obama Advisor Changes the Definition of “Welfare”: Free Money Handouts Are No Longer Enough
- Joe the Plumber cares about more than just his higher tax rates: Expensing his Equipment in year one
Please consider making a $10, $15, or $20 donation to help Americans for Tax Reform continue our work. Thank you for your generous support.
(<< back to top)
Onward,
Grover Norquist
Candidates on both sides of the aisle have talked about...
affordable health care as long as I can remember. What they NEVER talk about is how they are going to realistically fund it. Hillary's plan ends up by being funded by the people who never get sick, who end up paying for all those who do get sick (that is the reader's digest version). And that is unfair in my book. That is what I am interested in seeing. When people say "America should provide health insurance for all Americans" what that means is, we will be paying for it through taxes. There is no other way to pay for it. The government has no money in and of itself...it is our tax money they fund things with. So, while your premiums may go down, your taxes will inevitably go UP, because that is how they are going to fund it. There is no magic answer here, at least from where I am sitting. One candidate talked about funding it through raising taxes on cigarettes. That is all well and good, but is it really the responsibility of people who smoke to pay for health care for America? And fewer and fewer people are even starting to smoke...so when smokers die off or quit because cigarettes get too expensive...then what? What will they tax next to pay for it? I am always interested in the specifics of how to pay for it. I don't like to hear "we will figure that out later." And, again, any plan is wholly dependent upon whether you can get both sides of the aisle on board for it...President can't pass it on his own. I just hope they will be honest and forthcoming about how they intend to pay for it.
None of the top tier of Democratic candidates will commit...
to having the troops out of Iraq during their 4 years. I know some of you have posted that you would not vote for Hillary for that reason. What if she is the candidate? Second question...if none of them are going to end the war immediately and that seems to be a major issue for most of you...I assume you are going to vote for one of them anyway...whichever one gets the nomination?
Voters do this when candidates spout fvalues.
nm
I agree totally, but unfortunately I feel all candidates do and say
whatever they want to get the votes and once they are in office, they do as they please or do what they said they would not do. It is very scary. AND everyone is so blown away by Palin. She is not running for President is she??? That scares me even more. I am still undecided.
I understand your confusion. I would suggest that you look at both candidates....
and their stand on all the issues that are important to you, and please, exercise your right to vote, no matter which candidate you choose. And try not to get bound down in the gotcha politics, concentrate on the issues, and vote for the one that most closely follows what you want for your country.
This is true - least qualified of all candidates to be the President
Sorry but sitting in on the senate and voting "present" more times than not, and being a community organizer does not make one qualified to be President. I think its like I heard the other day. When it comes time to vote and we have a war going on, an economy that's crumbling, jobs going overseas, no matter what people say now they are not going to go with someone who is new and inexperienced. They will go with someone who has been in politics, is a war hero, stands up for his fellow americans, and is obviously not for either side. Plus having Gov. Palin is the biggest plus for the ticket. A new face to Washington, hard on the big boys, won't back down, has the intelligence and know how to get our economy back on track, fights for the rights of citizens, and has the experience of balancing a budget, the smarts to know we need to drill here (and not just smooth talk like the dems are giving us). She and Sen. McCain will help bring this country to be energy independent and not let big CEOs walk away with millions while people like us have to pay. I for one among many are very excited to see what good things President McCain and Vice President Palin will be doing for our country.
If your still upset when McCain & Palin win, don't worry though, if you submit your names that you voted for the democrats I'm sure they will let you all pay more in taxes than the rest of us. After all you seem to think Biden was okay in trying to convince you that its your patriotic duty to pay more in taxes when the CEOs and other execs will walk away with money in their pockets (to include Obama, Clinton & Dodd).
Why don't we discuss the Republican candidates for a change?
This is just like a dog chasing his tail!
webmd.com has healthcare plans of both candidates
in a very informative fashion, front and center. take a look. i am also very concerned about o's idea for changing medical records technology....
Executive power survey by presidential candidates.
In case you haven't seen this article, I am posting the link:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/12/22/candidates_on_executive_power_a_full_spectrum/?page=2
This is very enlightening for those who want to know their candidates thoughts about executive power.
Lets put this nonsense to bed. Pres candidates born outside US
Here's the link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born_citizen
Here's the text. See. Isn't this EASY?
US presidential candidates born outside the US
"The constitutional wording has left doubts about whether those born on foreign soil are on an equal footing with those whose birth occurred inside the country's borders, and whether they have the same rights."[2] Though every president and vice president to date (as of 2008) has either been a citizen at the adoption of the Constitution, or else born in a U.S. state or Washington D.C.,[3] a number of presidential candidates have been born elsewhere.[4]
Barry Goldwater, who ran as the Republican party nominee in 1964, was born in Arizona while it was still a U.S. territory. Although Arizona was not a state, it was a fully organized and incorporated territory of the United States.[5]
George Romney, who ran for the Republican party nomination in 1968, was born in Mexico to U.S. parents. Romney’s grandfather emigrated to Mexico in 1886 with his three wives and children after Utah outlawed polygamy. Romney's parents retained their U.S. citizenship and returned to the United States in 1912. Romney was 32 years old when he arrived in Michigan.
Lowell Weicker, the former Connecticut Senator, Representative, and Governor, entered the race for the Republican party nomination of 1980 but dropped out before voting in the primaries began. He was born in Paris, France and acquired his citizenship at birth through his parents. His father was an executive for E. R. Squibb & Sons and his mother was the Indian-born daughter of a British general.[6]
John McCain, who ran for the Republican party nomination in 2000 and is the Republican nominee in 2008, was born at the Coco Solo U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone to U.S. parents. Although the Panama Canal Zone was not considered to be part of the United States,[7] federal law states: "Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States."[8] The law that conferred this status took effect on August 4, 1937, one year after John McCain was born — albeit with retroactive effect, resulting in McCain being declared a U.S. citizen.[9]
The mere fact of Constitutional ineligibility has not deterred some minor parties from nominating candidates for President who could not possibly serve in the office. For example, although some states have blocked ballot access for such candidates, the Socialist Workers Party nonetheless successfully placed its candidate, Róger Calero, on the ballot in Mississippi in 2004. [10]
Gotcha. Reject candidates who promise what we know they can't deliver.
...although that does raise the little problem of who, then, we could possibly vote for?
I read an interesting statement over the weekend and can't find it now, but basically it was this: When we scream at our politicians we're really screaming at the electorate that put them in office. And at bottom, that really is the problem. The politicians are exactly what our electorate has chosen. And frankly, I don't see the electorate changing for the better - especially younger voters - for which I think we can thank at least one generation of parents who didn't parent, and teachers who didn't teach.
Marital Fidelity and Family Values in Republican Candidates?
Should cut both ways, shouldn't it?
I'm providing the link to the article because I run the risk of posting profanity if I copy what some of these Republicans did, and as we all know, the words describing the deed is unacceptable, although the deed itself will be defended in Neoconville, as long as it's done by a Republican.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0607.benen.html
There have been lots of states who have elected candidates and wished they hadn't. sm
I, too, find the Viggo mortensen tie-in a little strange. I had to reread the entire thread and I only saw Hollywood, no one specific named, was there? Other than Willie and he isn't Hollywood. Anyhow, I don't like Dennis either. I can remember when he was all over the news going to do something about the gasoline prices and never heard another word out of him after he was elected. He's no different than most of them and no better than any of othem.
Can't chew gum. Would've if I could've.
Even got hypnotized. Supposedly guaranteed to quit. Lasted 5 hours. Thank heavens I never smoked anything stronger. 
What I found so far
I see where Perle and Rice take exception to some of his statements, but that's all I could find. And I guess that would expected as they do have to protect themselves. Also, it's very hard to find opinions that do not have a noticeable right or left slant. If anyone out there has suggestions on middle-of-the-road, non-politically-sided information sites please let me know.
My point was how many people have to step forward and report that the White House manipulated the truth before it gets addressed? How many can you dismiss as saying they had a book to sell, or they were protecting their careers, etc.? At what point does some of what they are saying (Clark, Tenet, Powell to name a few) become believable?
I found it for myself sm
An eagle-eyed reporter for the ABC affiliate in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, noticed something missing from Democratic presidential contender Sen. Barack Obama's, D-Ill., lapels.
"You don't have the American flag pin on. Is that a fashion statement?" the reporter asked, at the end of a brief interview with Obama on Wednesday. "Those have been on politicians since Sept. 12, 2001."
Catch David Wright's report tonight on "World News with Charles Gibson."
The standard political reply to that question might well have been, "My patriotism speaks for itself."
But Obama didn't say that.
Instead the Illinois senator answered the question at length, explaining that he no longer wears such a pin, at least in part, because of the Iraq War.
"You know, the truth is that right after 9/11, I had a pin," Obama said. "Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we're talking about the Iraq War, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security, I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest.
"Instead," he said, "I'm going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testimony to my patriotism."
In Iowa, some Obama supporters applauded the candidate's fashion statement. Said Carrie Haurum of Waterloo: "He doesn't need to wear that flag on his lapel. He wears it in his heart."
But talk radio and cable news quickly pounced on the issue.
"It just shows you he's not ready for the big time," conservative Laura Ingrams opined on Fox News.
Said Sean Hannity: "Why do we wear pins? Because our country is under attack!"
The Obama campaign declined to expand on the senator's statement. Spokesman Bill Burton said, "His comments speak for themselves."
But, Obama responded to the mini controversy.
"I'm less concerned with what you're wearing on your lapel than what's in your heart," Obama said Thursday while campaigning in Independence, Iowa.
"You show your patriotism by how you treat your fellow Americans, especially those who serve. And you show your patriotism by being true to your values and ideals. And that's what we have to lead with, our values and ideals," Obama said.
Of course, if he had said that in the first place, he might have avoided any controversy.
I found this almost sad...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/24/eveningnews/main4476173.shtml
found what I found..
This was actually on the wall street journal on line this morning. It was edited in. Here is what I found: Unfortunately, I can't provide the link; sorry. This is a quote from it, though.
"Take a closer look. It's a jpg screenshot of a webpage, easily edited. Seeing as they're running pidgin instant messenger in the background, I'd guess that the GIMP is probably the likely photo editing software of choice."
Bth of which can be found there.
nm
I found this....sm
I could only find these two. The first video won't play, and had this line on it. And when I put the whole line in google, I got the aol video.
"Senator Obama proposes a tax credit in the form of a check in the mail for mortgage interests, college tuition savings, childcare, clean cars, earned income tax credit to be expanded, a make-work-pay credit. All of these credits will be refundable to those people who don't pay taxes anyway in the form of a check in the mail. 63 million Americans would pay no federal income tax whatsoever, and most of them would get a check in the mail every January."
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=196103
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/obamas-tax-plan-annual-tax-credit-check-for-tens-of-millions-of-filers-who-dont-pay-tax/3755547671/?icid=VIDURVGOV06
Okay....it took some looking but I found it....
o A $1,000 “Making Work Pay” Tax Credit. For 95 percent of workers and their families—150 million
workers overall—the “Making Work Pay” credit will provide a refundable tax cut of $500 for workers or
$1,000 for working couples. This credit will benefit over 15 million self employed workers and for 10
million low-income Americans, will completely eliminate their federal income taxes.
o A Refundable $4,000 American Opportunity Tax Credit. Barack Obama will provide a $4,000 fully refundable
tax credit to ensure that college is affordable for all American families. This credit will cover
100% of the first $4,000 of qualified tuition expenses, making community college essentially free and
covering about 2/3 of the cost of public 4-year college.iv
o A Universal 10% Mortgage Interest Tax Credit. Barack Obama will provide a 10% refundable credit to
offset mortgage interest payments and make homeownership more affordable for lower- and middle-income
families. This universal credit will provide an average tax cut of $500 to 10 million homeowners who do not itemize.
I see refundable in there a few times. And there you have the low income folks who will, with the help of this "credit," ELIMINATE their federal taxes. Who is going to take up that slack?
THERE is the bottom we were hunting.
Happy now?
Here's what I found
1. The 57 states. I think that was an honest mistake. I had not actually heard him say that, but that is not one of the main issues we were talking about. Him saying 57 states was not talked about very much and not one of the main concerns we had. Anyway...I think O just made an honest mistake, but here is the video clip.
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws
2. His muslim quote. The way you phrase it by wanting to see at least one minute prior and after the quote I already know you're going to come back and say that is going to be a slip of the tongue. I'll grant you that - it could have been, and then again it could have not been. If Stephanopolis had not said anything it would have been let go. Again, it could have been a slip of the tongue and people will believe one way or the other. The only people who know if he is really a muslim or christian is him and his family. But then again how many muslims sit and say "my christian faith" by accident. Do you think in Iran or Libya or any of the middle eastern countries they would ever say "my christian faith" by accident. I don't think so, just like you don't hear christians accidently slip and say my muslim faith or my jewish faith. Particularly I don't care if he's christian, muslim, jewish, hindu or athiest. When people talk about their faith, they usually say what their true faith is. Also you will see in this video that Stephanopolis was defending McCain and said that McCain was not going after Obama because of his faith. He kept repeating it over and over that McCain is not going after him because of his faith, but Obama kept ignoring and making it to look like the "poor me they're going after me", and like your original post said if its not true you can't make it up. But then again that would not have given him much sympathy from voters by admitting McCain left the religion out of the campaign.
Anyway...because you wanted to videotape here is it.
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=iQqIpdBOg6I
Just let me know what other lies you imply we were saying so I can provide credible sources for you.
|
![](http://a.abcnews.com/images/Politics/playsoftheDay_071128_mc.jpg")
![](http://a.abcnews.com/images/Site/abc_default_image_mc.jpg")
