Posted by citizen at 5/30/08 12:28 p.m.

McCain has dug his grave by aligning himself with bush.

Posted by Checkyourrealty at 5/30/08 12:41 p.m.

O'Bama or Sir Hillary get elected watch out, massive unemployment, higher taxes, more Government control over our lives. Sounds like what the Dems want, thank god I'm not a Dem. I'm not a huge fan of McCain and only hope that the GOP drafts someone else or he picks an awesome VP. "Aligning himself with Bush" put down that whacky weed, McCain has done everything to stay away from Bush even attacking him, while telling others not to attack O'Bama. Can't wait, if one of those loser Dems or Socialist/Commies gets elected I'm gonna sit back and demand my share of what you people who elected them have.

Posted by The Unrepentant Lib at 5/30/08 12:44 p.m.

Well yea. After all the unmitigated disasters brought to us courtesy of the republican freaking party, I am amazed that anybody would ever even admit having voted for one just like nobody admitted voting for Nixon following Watergate.

It's just a bad ideology like Communism. Both sound good, but conservatism does not work in actual practice. Time to move forward.

Posted by x-hiker at 5/30/08 12:55 p.m.

All three candidates offer a lot of negatives but McCain is the overall best pick of the lot. Obama would be second.

I wouldn't vote for Clinton even if she were the only candidate in the race. I couldn't stand her when she was President before, oops! - I mean first lady. Always pushing her way into politics and trying to set policy like someone had elected her rather than her philandering husband. The way she has conducted herself in this race has simply solidified my view that Clinton is an elitist liar whose only real goal here is to get elected rather than to serve the people. She would be a horrible President, dangerous even with her inability to handle stress or conflict.

Posted by DAVIDRF at 5/30/08 12:55 p.m.

Check,

If McCain gets elected, we get Bush Light. Whoopie. Won't that be fun? 4 more years in Iraq, and a likely confrontation with Iran militarily that we can't afford. Business as usual in regards to most of the current administration's poilices; hey, why change something if in your warped view of reality it's working, right?

I'm not a big fan of Obama, but IMO, he's leaps and bounds better than McCain. These little whiners who are stating they won't vote for Obama if Hillary doesn't get it or vice versa need to shut the heck up and start thinking with their brains instad of their emotions. If McCain wins because of attitudes like that, I will smack anyone I meet who had that attitude in the back of the head come election day.

Posted by easternwashington at 5/30/08 1:09 p.m.

Before you cast your vote for Barack H. Obama, you might want to check out S2433, in the U.S. Senate, sponsored by Obama. I would never vote for him. McCain is the least of the evils presented to us this time around.

Posted by unregistered user at 5/30/08 1:09 p.m.

The republicans never gave us any reason to vote for them. After they started blowing the budgets on uncontrolled spending, why vote for them when Democrats have shown they are better at it?

But it is also that people tend to forget the past. They are too much in the, "What have you done for me lately" mode. And it doesn't help when our press is the Joseph Goebbels-like propaganda wing of the Democrat party. When the republicans were in charge, every time their poll numbers went down, we heard the mantra of 'Do nothing party'. Everything was jacked up and blamed on them.

Now? Not a peep, though this Democrat controlled congress is the lowest ranked congress since they began polling. Add to things like Queen Pelosi saying back in April 24, 2006, that if the Democrats got elected and took over congress, they had a 'common sense' plan to reduce the price of gas. Why haven't the press pounded on this? Because the Democrats are their buds..

Politics are cyclical. If the Democrats get in, they will overreach. They have no answer to lowering gas prices and all their proposed policies will only RAISE the price. Oh, but congress will still drive their fat cars with public funded gas cards, but oh, us little people will feel the wrath.

As for Iraq? What? We cut and run, it falls into quagmire, Iran takes over and price of gas does what?

The left uses the mantra of tax cuts reward the rich but they omit that the top 50% of tax payers pay 97% of all taxes. (IRS data, not making it up).

And once again our press fails to report that the Democrats want to let the Bush tax cuts expire in 2010. That the marginal rate for ALL people that they consider rich will increase from 25% to 28%. But they once again omit that anybody making $31,000 and up fits in that category.

Mark my words, things will get as bad as when Jimmy Carter was in there. People will whine about that, but THIS time, unlike last time, we have the power of the internet to record these people, ESPECIALLY the press.

And to REMIND people that put these people in office, WHO put them in office to ruin their lives. And to NEVER, EVER, trust the left-winged controlled press AGAIN.

Posted by unregistered user at 5/30/08 1:18 p.m.

It seems that all three candidates are really Bush-lite this time around. Hillary is the least Bush like though and the easiest to stomach.

Posted by Tenochtitlan at 5/30/08 1:27 p.m.

#134251 wrote:
And it doesn't help when our press is the Joseph Goebbels-like propaganda wing of the Democrat party. When the republicans were in charge, every time their poll numbers went down, we heard the mantra of 'Do nothing party'. Everything was jacked up and blamed on them.

Now? Not a peep, though this Democrat controlled congress is the lowest ranked congress since they began polling.

That's because the dynamics are different. When the Republicans were in charge, they had significant majorities in Congress, and a Republican in the White House. This time, Democrats hold the Senate only by a sliver, and a Republican is still in the White House. Gridlock is to be expected.

And why are you saying that, just because there's gridlock in Congress, nothing is getting done? The Democrats have slowed down President Bush's agenda. They've begun changing the terms of debate in the public discourse. They're preparing to take real hold of Congress with the next election, and the White House too.

They've accomplished a lot more than you give them credit for.

But, come on: Do you really think of the media as liberal? That's one of those instant discrediting statements...

Posted by 711homer at 5/30/08 1:28 p.m.

Prime example of why most voters are not intelligent to vote!1

Posted by 711homer at 5/30/08 1:28 p.m.

intelligent enough to vote.

Posted by hackerb9 at 5/30/08 1:39 p.m.

The Republicans have had enough of a chance running the country their
way. They've widened the divide between the rich and the middle-class.
They've spent uncontrollably and put our country in hock to China.
They've made government bigger and more intrusive.

I don't care if it's Obama, Clinton, or the freaking Pillsbury
Doughboy. I'm voting for anyone but McCain.

--b9

P.S. What's with the people here stooping to misspelling Obama's name
or trying to make his middle name an issue? Jeez. Grow up.

Posted by Not Superstitious at 5/30/08 1:40 p.m.

Posted by Checkyourrealty at 5/30/08 12:41 p.m.

O'Bama or Sir Hillary get elected watch out, massive unemployment, higher taxes, more Government control over our lives.

What you're describing is the U.S. under Bush/Cheney. Typical neocon republicon doesn't even pay attention to what's going on.

How many decades will it take us to dig ourselves out of the trillions in debt Bush/Cheney have created?

BTW, the size of government increaesed under Reagan and Bush II. When are you going to start paying attention?

Posted by RationalThought at 5/30/08 1:59 p.m.

easternwashington,

S. 2433 is co-sponsored by Republican Senators Richard Lugar, Charles Hagel, Gordon Smith and Olympia Snowe.

Guess all these Republican Senators have had the wool pulled over their eyes by that sneaky Sen. Obama?

S. 2433 is a bill that requires the United States to contribute to efforts to reduce poverty in the world. What a horrible goal!

Only a Republican would support poverty.

Posted by ilyena at 5/30/08 2:03 p.m.

I think the polling misses a segment of women voters beyond 60 who will not vote for Obama under any circumstances. We are not quaint things too nervous to vote for a black man. Many of us have voted for them where it counts - close to home. We marched with blacks in the 60's and 70's (I've probably been in more marches than Obama), donated to black Panther breakfasts when the FBI was taking down names, dated black men, taught the first wave of Affirmative Action students, and worked with and for blacks in many settings. We have seen the Obamas light up the sky and have nothing to offer beyond wonderful rhetoric and charm. In addition he is quite sexist, and now after Rev. Jeffers, we have another close friend the Catholic priest, riducle Sen. Clinton from the pulpit of Obama's church. This man is full of hypocrisy. The Republicans must be full of joy at the prospect of being able to take him out after their multimillion dollar failure to eliminate Clinton.

Posted by RationalThought at 5/30/08 2:10 p.m.

ilyena,

Let me get this straight - you're willing to sit by and watch McCain get elected rather than vote for Obama, when you are obviously a Democrat - or at least sympathetic to Democratic philosophies?

Really? Truly?

Then good bye. I don't want misguided supporters of Sen. Clinton in my party. We don't have room for those who hold out for principle even if it means another four years of the Bush Administration.

Posted by USAGYM08 at 5/30/08 2:12 p.m.

"O'Bama or Sir Hillary get elected watch out, massive unemployment, higher taxes, more Government control over our lives."

Sounds a lot like a warning issued by Pres. George H.W. Bush in 1992: "Watch your wallet!"

Of course, Clinton trounced him, and we went on to a surplus-economy.

Posted by unregistered user at 5/30/08 2:40 p.m.

Get up everybody, democrats and republicans alike; vote to secure a future for your children, and children's children by voting for the one person who can return this country to its former glory. That person will have to be capable of making the necessary changes that will bring about unity instead of division, and peace instead of war.

I'll not tell you who to vote for, or who not to vote for, but make sure that when you vote you vote for CHANGE.

Thank You

Posted by thezorg at 5/30/08 3:23 p.m.

easterwashington writes, "Before you cast your vote for Barack H. Obama, you might want to check out S2433, in the U.S. Senate, sponsored by Obama. I would never vote for him. McCain is the least of the evils presented to us this time around."

Hmmm ... apparently you didn't expect anyone to actually be familiar with that bill or to look it up. It's the Global Poverty Act of 2007, sponsored by 16 Senators, including Republican Senators Hagel, Lugar, Smith and Snowe.

The description of the bill is, "A bill to require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day."

Bill information is public and easily available from multiple sources. I didn't even have to go to the Thomas or OpenCongress sites to get that one. I just typed "S2433" into Google and several informative sites showed up with the full text, sponsorship and analysis of the bill.

Personally, I use the Library of Congress site at thomas.loc.gov/home/bills_res.html, then follow up with other sources if needed.

Posted by myopinion_matters at 5/30/08 3:40 p.m.

and this is news? Washington State is the bastion for the liberal left, eco-nazi. They have rarely, if ever, voted for a conservative or even a centrist for that matter.

Posted by jim0121 at 5/30/08 3:43 p.m.

And this should be McCain's peak, with the R nomination sewn up and the D nomination still somewhat in flux. Once the D nomination is secure and most of the offended Clintonistas wake up and realize that McCain is their worst nightmare, McCain should pretty much disappear. As he, and all R's should. The world will be so much better off without them.

Posted by unregistered user at 5/30/08 3:58 p.m.

I dont care who you vote for, but if you make your decision based soley on a persons party and not policy, you are a moron and should be banned from future voting.

Posted by big rr at 5/30/08 4:19 p.m.

The democraps are in charge of the spending. Stop blaming the Honorable President Bush for what the democratic congress does. All money bills must originate in the House of Representatives. This is stated in the constitution. Put blame where it belongs,on the democrats.

Posted by Old Goat at 5/30/08 4:22 p.m.

MYOPINION_MATTERS: I believe you speak the truth. That last GOP governor I can remember was Arthur "Windy" Langlie back when I plied the hallowed halls of Huskyville in the very early fifties.

Posted by Will in Seattle at 5/30/08 4:44 p.m.

McSame dug his own grave by showing he's clueless about Iraq and Iran (hint, Shiites aren't where you think) and pledging to TRIPLE the federal budget deficit even BEFORE you count the cost of his Hundred Year Triple War strategery.

As to why folks around here aren't so negative twixt Clinton or Obama - either one would at least stop our nation's long drift to third world status. We're smart enough to know that.

Posted by hackerb9 at 5/30/08 5:48 p.m.

That last GOP governor I can remember was Arthur "Windy" Langlie
back when I plied the hallowed halls of Huskyville in the very early
fifties.

Hi, Old Goat, I have a counter memory for you. I was a young
kid when Republican Dan Evans, for whom I have an inexplicable
fondness, was our Governor. That would have been the 70's, and I'm
sure he wasn't the last. Myopinionmatters is mistaken.
Washington state, as a whole, is no liberal bastion. Don't forget that
our state is so evenly sliced that Gov. Gregoire only beat out that
other guy by a handful of votes.

--b9

Posted by TravisB at 5/30/08 5:53 p.m.

"MYOPINION_MATTERS: I believe you speak the truth. That last GOP governor I can remember was Arthur "Windy" Langlie back when I plied the hallowed halls of Huskyville in the very early fifties."

Yet more stunning evidence of the political retardation of Republicans in Washington State.

Try these two names on for size:
John Spellman (1 term plus 1 term as King County Exec)
Dan Evans (3 terms, plus helped build the DFH Evergreen State Univ.)

While you're at it you might want to toss in Dixie Lee Ray. Although she had a (D) after her name on the ballot she mostly took her marching orders from the Republican caucus in Olympia.

If you really are an Old Fart, how is it that you managed to forget four Republican terms in the Governor's mansion?
Face it. You guys just don't pay attention. You're too busy being manipulated by AM radio demagogues and televangelists. You deserve the oblivion you find yourselves in.

Posted by USAGYM08 at 5/30/08 7:16 p.m.

Hell, I knew about Evans, and I didn't even live here then.

Posted by smdmd at 5/30/08 7:37 p.m.

If you remove King County from WA, WA would be a red state. So it would be interesting to see the areas where Elway polled people. Also the way the questions are worded is important too

Posted by USAGYM08 at 5/30/08 7:51 p.m.

Elway is a professional polling organization and knows very well how to elicit a statistically significant response, thanks.

Your geocentricity is alarming. King is NOT the only "blue county" in the state, and McCain is NOT the only palatable choice for those who've voted GOP in the past.

Posted by Old Goat at 5/30/08 8:20 p.m.

TravisB and USAGYMO8, I stand corrected. You are right. I simply didn't recall those names. I should have known better. Dixy Lee Ray is the only one I knew personally, but so what? Nice lady.

Posted by TravisB at 5/30/08 8:54 p.m.

smdmd,
if you removed King County from Washington State,
Washington State would be South Dakota.

There are about as many registered voters in King County as in all of Eastern Washington.
What's wrong. You don't like the principle of representative democracy?

Posted by USAGYM08 at 5/30/08 9:20 p.m.

Oh, poor Dixie. I hear she had a rather unfortunate post-mortem experience!

heh.

Posted by myopinion_matters at 5/30/08 9:45 p.m.

Evans and Spellman were nearly 30 years ago people, ancient history and were a state election. you better go back and check who the presidential choice was before you go throwing stones.

Posted by myopinion_matters at 5/30/08 9:49 p.m.

smdmd, you obviously did not watch the voting results from the last two elections. Every populace county in Western Washington voted Democrat. There is no "red" constituency in Western Washington that can attain a majority. Go back to the Secretary of States website and pull up the results by county of the election in 2006. It is these numbers which will give Queen Christine the governorship again and the citizens of Washington a state income tax in 2009.

Posted by Old Goat at 5/30/08 10:10 p.m.

USAGYMO8: The Post Mortem experience you mention is old news. Frankly, I'm surprised a "professional" like yourself would bring it up jokingly in this column.

Posted by prsteve11 at 5/31/08 9:22 a.m.

He only leads Senator McCain by 6 points in Washington State? That's not a healthy margin for a blue state like this. It's clear John McCain is winning this election.

Posted by Mickel at 5/31/08 10:02 a.m.

What is a Democrat? Read this Comparison.

www.lewrockwell.com/orig/keller5.html

Posted by Mickel at 5/31/08 10:33 a.m.

In reality, A Democrat is a person who lives off of the forced taxes that are put on the private citizens of this country or State. Let's face it, those in the government always get enough wage raise increase to pay for thier share of tax increases and then some. But what has the Dems done for those Private workers who yet still belong to Unions and still have wage deductions in order to compete?
We have become just as bad as Myanmar. The Dems(Junta)collect high taxes from the Private Industry and reward it's government workers who keep them in office. Sweet Deal right?
Obama & Hillary promised huge tariffs on goods coming in this country. The Canadian Gov wrote them a note promising them that we would suffer the same thing on our goods entering thier country. Both Ob & Hil called the Canadians up and told them that was only election talk.
Nancy Pelosi came to power and the first thing she did was to slice off some money to the Fed watchdogs that checked on the Union Pension funds. It seems that the Union Bosses would borrow and not pay it back. Without the extra money to hire more people it's easier to sneak a little bit out for themselves. Obama has promised the teamsters that that part of the feds would go away under his Term. He has denied that but we shall see. I'm pretty sure he will get in. If he does, you can bet that in a short time the big bosses will rape the fund.

Posted by Brittanicus at 5/31/08 3:39 p.m.

MARK MY WORDS...!
Our economy is really going to to be on the dung pile, if Obama wins? He directly told the general public that he becomes president, he will sign into law a new AMNESTY. Although none of the Presidential contenders can be really trusted, Obama will be true to his word. That means if Democrats don't get to gut the border fence, as they are right now? The raw truth is it will not matter? As taxpayers will be forced by federal law to support the 15 to 38 million illegal immigrants already here. That means big business has won and they just collect the profits.

While the man or women in the street will have a giant financial yoke around their neck, to pay billions in even more welfare programs. Senator Obama will have condemned America to a bleak future, for not only subsidizing millions of poor, non-English speaking, uneducated foreign nationals. Our government skims quietly of your wage packet 356 billion dollars, to support illegal low income workers annually and appease big business and that cost will become a pittance.

The compounding effect is millions of more itinerant labor and families, will breach the border and no patrol, or army will be able to stop the momentum. Thats why we must stop OBAMA with the Federal SAVE ACT (H.R.4088) Tell your Democratic representative to sponsor it now. January 2009 will be far too late!

Posted by unregistered user at 5/31/08 6:59 p.m.

The capital of Obamaland favors any Dem over McCain? Gee, why doesn't that surprise me at all?

Posted by Sanity1 at 5/31/08 7:04 p.m.

Hark to all the chicken little's...
Brittanicus, you are about 30 years too late. The southern border is a JOKE. A blind grandma could wetback across to TX or AZ. You think anything short of a Berlin Wall 1500 miles long is gonna help? Forget it. What needs to be done is to give the Criminal penalties to the Employers who hire undocumented workers. Instead of fines, give them some jail time. You will see the Hiring STOP. Then there will be less reason to cross the border illegally. Problem solved. Of course, any career politician that raised such a solution would have to go back to selling cars.
Big rr. Learn more than one fact before you spout off, since the Democrats only took back control of the House and Senate in 2006, it would not be until the 2007 sessions that this would have any effect on spending, we are just now halfway through 2008. Most all of the MASSIVE debt build up over the past 7.5 years can be lain at the feet of your dear, dear, republican'ts, and their inability to control their spending habits.

As for UR's comment about 50% of the taxpayers paying 97% of the taxes. I don't doubt the statistic, just it's significance. Tell me, what % does the top 10% of taxpayers pay? Or, the richest 2% of Americans? What % of taxes are borne by corporations? A single statistic is like a comb with one tooth, worthless.
This isn't a fact, just an opinion, but we need a change from the Wahington D.C. "business as usual" way of running the country, because we are running the country into the ground. We need, as an electorate, to see if there isn't a way to change the status quo, to fix our broken record of political failure, to maybe find a little hope...
-later-

Posted by docjenn at 5/31/08 7:07 p.m.

thanks for giving me another reason to support Obama. Senate bill 2433. Someone who wants to do something about Global poverty? According to this site: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/90xx/doc9082/s2433.pdf
The proposal would cost less than 1 million per year.

Apparently an extra million is a problem for some of you when we are currently spending millions per day on a war that shouldnt have lasted this long and shouldnt have been started for the reasons given in the first place.

Maybe you would rather not have taxes and spend billions of dollars we dont have on our war and sell our soul and land to other countries, than find a way to support ourselves and maybe help some others along the way.

Posted by Hug-a-Liberal at 5/31/08 8:14 p.m.

The truth is that WA voters, me included, prefer 50 pounds of zoodoo in our living room to McCain.

In fact, I would sooner have 50,000 pounds of zoodoo rather than McCain, even if I had to taste-test every pound of it for authenticity.

Posted by unregistered user at 5/31/08 10:29 p.m.

Obama only appears to be about 170 pounds.

Posted by SmokeyJoe'sBar at 6/1/08 11:29 a.m.

And now, that Obama has resigned from his embarrassment of a church, I can vote for him with enthusiasm. I would prefer Hillary but if it's Obama who is the candidate, I would have voted for him anyway, but now that he's got shed of that bunch of church clowns, I am not forced into voting for a church puppet. McCain as president? That would just prove that no one (that means the idiots in love with W) learns from the past.

Posted by unregistered user at 6/5/08 3:10 a.m.

Just like delusional Mariner's fan's going down to the ballpark without knowing why they are really going, maybe get some garlic frys, a fishdog, buy some $8 beers.

Like them - Obama voters want change just like we wanted change back in the 70's...Not knowing what it means, just because it's change. Who cares about substance when there's great speeches! Right?!? The last guy that ran on that note drove this country right to the brink of disaster with the highest mortgage rates, fastest growing inflation rate evah in history. Oh and not to mention let a terrorist country walk all over him by holding our brothers hostage for 444 days and trying to negotiate with them. YEAH, that really worked! Sound familiar? The same terrorist country we are about to let do the same if we decide to leave the region prematurely. Hahaha, you want change...you're about to get it in the form of $10/gallon after Nov. LOL.

/enjoy! ^^woot woot Obama...Obama...raise duh roof! CHange! Oprah for VP! After all she paid for the whole dayum thing!