The last NY Times article I forwarded to someone demonstrated quite well that they are not liberally biased. They counted money from some lobbyists, and said McCain is the only Senator who takes more money than Obama. Not exactly the "Captain Change" story, though I know they both spout changeisms now. "Mr. and Mrs. Maverick" have been taking all kinds of PAC money, and she campaigned on the Bridge to Nowhere initially in her first gubernatorial bid. I think Hillary, the "Woman Wonder," got out-shined in the primaries because of that word "change." It didn't stick to her, but now it's not sticking to either of the official candidates.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/10/us/politics/10fannie.html
On the other hand, I have a friend, a registered Democrat, who is more impressed by McCain more than Obama, simply because Obama talks more about change than his actual plan to do anything once he gets in office. Obama is losing in the specific plans department with people like my friend, and can see why.
I support Mark McCracken for Congress, and president. He says we can't fix anything domestic until we stop spending so much money overseas, cancel the Bush tax cuts, and start balancing the checkbook. I still stand by Obama, but I wish he had the power to excite me like that. The only thing my Democrat McCain-supporting friend and I can agree on unconditionally is this: the next president must balance the budget at all costs.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment