The Argus Observer | Online

Comment Blog - Note: All Comments Subject To Approval

Proud Granny wrote on Nov 7, 2008 11:23 AM:

" All I know is that my 3 year old grandson likes Obama because his smiles are real. He said McCain has squinty eyes and said a "bathroom word". Enough for me to be swayed - as if our votes really count these days. We are having a "Victory Party" for Obama tomorrow and I am to bring Vanilla Frosting with Sprinkles. If only we could see the world through a 3 year old's eyes.. wouldn't life be grand!!! "

Nuetral Party wrote on Nov 6, 2008 1:47 PM:

" I listen to people on T.V., the newspapers, at work and a few other venues and simply put, this election is nothing about the issues, taxes, etc. It is simply about race. Surely Obama has his work cut our for him as did McCain if he had won. But how many can honestly say that he will be given a fair chance? He is already scrutinized like no other before the 1st day he announced he will run for President.

Does a flag pin on your lapel make you less American? Does his name constantly have to be linked to Osama Bin Laden?

He as well as McCain started on equal ground, and AMERICA and AMERICANS voted for him just as we did with the other 43 Presidents before him. And our current President, all I have heard about him over the pass few years is how terrible of a job he is doing, so can Obama be any worst? Give the man a chance and judge him, not his name, not his race, not his political party. Judge him on his actions while he is in office.

A True American, and I have fought in WARS for this country and I do not have a pin on my shirt. "

Comrade wrote on Nov 5, 2008 5:33 PM:

" Comrade Kari,
Should the government mandate wealth sharing, or should that be up to individuals? If you are of the belief that the government should mandate sharing the wealth, that makes you a socialist.

Case in point: Government didn't tell John Huntsman to take his wealth and invest it in the war on cancer. He does it on his own. When people, by their own free will, give happily and cheerfully of their wealth, it is called charity, in religious communities, it is called tithes and offerings, or alms.

Kari: "I have no problem sharing my wealth. I think that is the way it should be. If I make more, I should be taxed more." Ahh Kari, you would be in favor of a flat tax, where everyone pays the same percentage of their income. That is a pretty conservative idea, that is WORKING in several former Soviet-bloc countries. It will work here if we give it the chance.
Explain how taking a person's (or business') hard earned money and giving to people who don't pay taxes as a "tax cut" helps the economy. Explain how it encourages others to become entrepreneurs. Sounds like socialism to me.

Kari: "Anyhow...Obama has won! Millions of people sigh and are relieved! "
Yes Kari, some 62 million people are breathing a collective sigh. Another 240 million are holding their breath, waiting to see what kind of person Barack Hussein Obama really is.

Peace! "

Teacher wrote on Nov 5, 2008 2:25 PM:

" Sorrry...i can't help I am a prudoct of Fruitland High School. Or that public screwls don't not do a good enuf job at screanning thier techer's.

At least I am doing my best to follow "OUR LEADER". "A Children's Story" By James Clavell "

Duh wrote on Nov 5, 2008 1:32 PM:

" Regarding "Teacher's" blog... maybe you should share the grades as you propose... after all... a person who teaches these young people should know how to spell "FAULT"...I quote:

"Is it really those kids faulth for having low grades?"

You've got egg on your face.... "

Teacher wrote on Nov 5, 2008 12:38 PM:

" I have decided to take 5% of my students grades that have A's and B's and give them to the students that have D's and F's. Is it really those kids faulth for having low grades? I am sure they are oppressed and have bad home lives that make them unable to study and work like they should. Thats fair, is it not? "

Kari wrote on Nov 5, 2008 12:11 AM:

" I have no problem sharing my wealth. I think that is the way it should be. If I make more, I should be taxed more. There is always going to be people who have less than me. If the situation were reversed, I would hope that others cared enough about me as I do for them. Anyhow...Obama has won! Millions of people sigh and are relieved! "

Not that it matters wrote on Nov 4, 2008 12:05 PM:

" But, Obama also wrote a forward for Ayers' book. Usually you don't do that for people that you don't know well and admire. Obama has run a general election campaign that is very centered politically. In the primaries and in his record, he has been solidly on the far left. He's slick and has been given a free pass by the media. No one really called him on his 180 degree turnarounds on issues that he talked about during the primary campaign. When McCain tried to bring it up the media accused him of being negative and mean. Imagine that! It's mean to attack a person using his own words. When Obama does that to McCain why is there no backlash? Anyway, we are going to get what we deserve. 1980 is right around the corner. Hang on tight. "

Kari Kari how contrary wrote on Nov 4, 2008 8:58 AM:

" Kari, the best retort you can muster is a probable additional and overlooked keystroke? A self proclaimed educated critic who did not answer the fundamental flaw that strikes at the root of this difference in a political science position. Socialism. Prepare to share your wealth, at the pumps, every time you plug into an electricity outlet, at the grocery stores, and everywhere else supplemental revenue can be drawn. It will be needed and squandered away. Without food and industry all the handouts will not fix the world economy no confidence no change. (Nash's equilibrium) "

Sam wrote on Nov 4, 2008 8:30 AM:

" There is no problem with paying their fair share. Its those you are getting more than their efforts. Once again Change is what people want. Change is what you will get. This country will not be what the founder fathers set it out to be. They meant for people to work and get what they earn. Not for a socialist utopia that punishes hard work and ingenuity. Why not work for the government and not get punished rather than work your butt off to get what you want when Robin Obama Hood will take it from you and give it away. "

Oblasphema wrote on Nov 4, 2008 8:21 AM:

" So sour grapes how do you explain away Obliviousma's association with "reverend" Wright? here's another idea transparency in the campaign finance, and total disclosure of the funding sources. This will be the media's golden parachute story line, if/when our nations' new leader stumbles. I welcome change, frankly I don't like McCain either, Sara Palin's constant Soccer Mom/Alaska references also show the only 2 dimensional sides she has to offer. BUT it is out there no recanting of who is a friend and who is a foe. We now see that our land, our freedoms our jobs and our leadership can be purchased. "

Kari wrote on Nov 3, 2008 6:56 PM:

" I am voting for Obama and I am not a welfare case, unemployed, a special interest group, and I don't want a free handout from the government. I pay my taxes and work a typical M-F, 8-5 job. I am middle aged, have a child entering college, I am a college graduate and believe everyone should pay their fair share. The person who made that kind of statement is close minded and out of touch with reality. The person who wrote that may want to learn how to spell or at least use spell check. "

Sour Grapes wrote on Nov 3, 2008 12:52 PM:

" To Oblasphema: Obama was asked by the Annenberg Foundation to be the chair of a committee to disburse grant funds for Chicago public school projects. Ayers wasn't on the committee, but he's the one that convinced Annenberg to give the grant. In fact, Chicago named Ayers "Citizen of the Year" for getting the grant. Annenberg wanted Ayers to help the committee to select projects for the grant. Annenberg was a very conservative Republican. Ayers assisted the committee ro find projects for the grant funds, and Obama and Ayers attended meetings for the grant disbursements. This is all public record. Conservatives keep ranting about the association between Ayers and Obama, but this has been repeatedly investigated by tons of news organizations, and there's nothing there. "

Sam wrote on Nov 3, 2008 7:15 AM:

" They worked on Education Bills together while he was in the state senate. Take off your Oblinders and see whats going on. LA times even has a video of them together at a lunch with Arrafat's spokesman. LA times even confirms it and wont release it. Don't give me that crap.

I am not voting for either canidate. Don't tell me I am bias like I am telling saying that you are. "

Oblasphema wrote on Nov 3, 2008 7:07 AM:

" The response to Sam is typical and weak. There is an enormous difference between unfortunate association and deliberately surrounding yourself with like minded supporters. Obama has simply been afforded the opportunity to reinvent himself, he still has distain over allegiance for what our country originally stood for. This surge of liberalism will surely help put the world on wellfare. Watch as we hand out our nations gross national products and industry to less than fortunate countries. The only change we will get will be the kind thrown into tin cans. "

Wayde wrote on Nov 3, 2008 1:25 AM:

" I can't believe people would vote for Obama. I will NEVER vote for a candidate that won't wear an American flag pin on his jacket!! "

To Sam wrote on Nov 1, 2008 8:20 AM:

" From what I have seen, Obama and Ayers weren't really friends. They served together on a board. McCain said something about Ayers' living room, but I'm not sure what that meant. I doubt that there were many people on that board, or in the alleged living room that knew what the Weather Underground was. I didn't until I did some reading.

How about this... I happen to be related to a person who molested a child. I find that action totally unacceptable and he knows it. What does that make me? Am I guilty by association?

Now, what if I had supported that person in his actions? What if I had known about this earlier and didn't tell anyone. What if I had said, "Oh, that's no big deal, keep on molesting."

There are obviously huge differences between these two stances. The same goes for Obama. He has stated that Ayers' actions in the past were wrong and there is nothing Obama can do about it. "

Sam wrote on Oct 31, 2008 3:37 PM:

" How would you feel about Bush, McCain, or any Repub if they happened to be friends with Timothy McVae (Sp)? Ayres is just as bad as he was and Obama was friends with him.

It doens't sound to good to me. But on the other hand I am glad Obama will win. This is a repeat of the Carter administration and circumstances. After Crappy Republicans mess things up we elect a horrible president then we get a great conservative leader like Reagan to set us in the right track for the next 20 years until and idiot like Bush (Nixon and Ford) mess us up again to set us up with something worse Obama (Carter). Our near future looks bad but if history repeats our distant future is savable. "

Wow... wrote on Oct 31, 2008 11:15 AM:

" I am saddened by all of the negativity that people from our community can muster.

As for Ayers, when did Obama join him is his basement making bombs? When did he get up in his pulpit and say Go* Dam* America?

By the way, have you listened to the rest of that line, GOP-breath? He said God Damn America for treating so many people so poorly. I do not agree with saying things like that, but I agree that the government of the United States had a major hand in treating millions and millions of people like property. Black slave, Native American, the Japanese in Camps. These are not easy things to overlook.

Does Obama stand in front of his microphone and spew hatred for anyone. No! So do not link him with people that do.

As for McCain, the Congressional Record shows that he indeed did vote repeatedly for Bush's policies. That my friends is really proof that McCain supports the Bush concepts of the economy and those ideas are as bad as any we have ever had.

What is worse, some one who knows a guy who has done terrible things, or someone who voted repeatedly for the policies that may keep you, your kids, or your grandkids from going to college? "

Sam wrote on Oct 30, 2008 12:53 PM:

" Even though I agree with your thought on some welfare voters we do have to remember the bigot rednecks that only vote for the GOP. Just a note that I think Obama is bad for the country. "

... wrote on Oct 30, 2008 11:54 AM:

" These are the people who will vote for Obama-Welfare cases, umemployed, special intrest, or anyone else that wants a free handout from the goverment. And who going to pay for the hand outs. The working people who
are willing to work and earn what they recieve. "

Kari wrote on Oct 30, 2008 2:46 AM:

" Newsflash....Obama is going to win Oregon. Have anyone looked at the polls? Thank god for all the liberals in Portland and the rest of the state! "

Realist wrote on Oct 29, 2008 12:56 PM:

" Under President Obama there will be no cuts in spending. There will be likely increases especially in social programs as he attempts to "re-distribute wealth." His answer to the deficit will be huge tax increases which will further cripple the economy. Does anyone else but me remember Jimmy Carter? He came in to office on the heels of an unpopular republican administration during an economic downturn. He had a willing Democrat majority in both houses. He wanted wide sweeping social change and to distance our country from an unpopular war. Sound familiar? Anyone else besides me finish college and try to find a job in 1981? And you wonder why Obama scares the bejeebers out of me? Too many people are comparing our current state to 1932. It's way more like 1976 if you want my opinion. Obama is much more like Carter that he is like FDR. FDR went after the bad guys, remember? Anyway, I'm glad that at least for now, I have a secure job. I worry about my kids. Vote McCain. "

Sam wrote on Oct 29, 2008 10:52 AM:

" You think he is going to give up power. He wants government to have more power. Over personal finance and health care for example. I can see us doing morning excersice so the government can keep us healthy for lower costs to them. Then have the camera in our house to make sure we are being good followers. No matter the party power given to government wont be given back to the people. It hasn't ever and wont. I don't trust the government with my social security retirement fund and would like to have my tax go to my own IRA but they wont give up that power to me. Because they already control it. Never will we get those rights back and personal privledges back. "

Sour Grapes wrote on Oct 29, 2008 8:51 AM:

" With the current state of our economy, it is naive to think that either party is going to be able to enact expensive new social programs. If Obama is elected and a supermajority of the Senate is Democratic, the most likely immediate changes will be in getting rid of Bush's "1984" programs and restoring civil liberties. Bush's monstrous deficit spending cannot continue, and (even)the Democrats know it. "

Sam wrote on Oct 29, 2008 7:50 AM:

" We the people will get what we ask for. We will have "fundamental" change in our country when Obama is elected. The fundamentals of our values and economy will be changed. We will get what we ask for when Obama is Pres. Then when we want our country back it will to late to get the power back from a new overly powerful government. Bush started us down the path of "1984" with his survalence progam and Obama will complete the USA into Oceania when his Social Programs take over our economy. We will get what we ask for and more. We want "change" we will get it. "

Larry wrote on Oct 28, 2008 6:33 PM:

" Now that's a surprise! "

Sour Grapes wrote on Oct 27, 2008 7:27 PM:

" To "Let's Get Critical": Nothing has been hidden from the voters about either candidate's flaws. Obama's been the target of the well-oiled Republican attack machine for many months, and all the attacks have been well-publicized. The problem from the Republican standpoint is that there just isn't much to uncover. The voters know both candidates. This is going to be the best-informed electorate that ever went to the polls. The losing candidate has no one but himself to blame, whether its McCain or Obama. "

Lets get critical wrote on Oct 27, 2008 1:37 PM:

" Believe it or not people are judged by their associates. McCain is being crucified by the media and the Obama campaign for being too closely associated with President Bush. But, they cry foul when Obama is criticized for his association with a domestic terrorist who bombed police stations and promoted, and still promotes anarchy or when he is associated with a crazy minister who screams "G** D*** America" from the pulpit in his "church." There is such a double standard in this campaign by the media and it is refreshing to see a main-stream publication, even if it is the Argus, look past the lies and distortions of the far left and see that McCain is a true proven leader and an American hero. Sarah Palin is the victim of the greatest institutionalized character attack in the history of American Politics. The Obama campaign doesn't need to employ negative campaigning because the news media does it for them free of charge and in the name of journalism. Please, vote for John McCain. If people with wealth want it redistributed, let them do it themselves. As for myself, I'd rather earn my own. "

Critical Reader wrote on Oct 26, 2008 8:31 AM:

" Although the Argus's endorsement of John McCain was a foregone conclusion, it would have been a pleasant surprise to see some discussion of how the two candidates conducted themselves during this campaign season. Rarely have outside events played such a huge role in shaping the outcome of an election. The Argus endorsement ignores the economic news of the last several months, as well as the McCain campaign's collapse after the Republican convention. Many Americans, including many well-known conservatives,are dismayed at McCain's selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate, as well as his failure to put forth a coherent response to the looming recession. An experienced leader who was truly putting "Country First" had a golden opportunity in the last two months to show that leadership to the world. Instead, he picked a running mate who divided the country instead of uniting it; he touted economic policies straight from the old-school conservative playbook; and he tried to reignite the culture wars by focusing on Obama's background instead of sending America a calm and reassuring message.

Clearly Obama is more liberal than McCain, and he would never have earned your endorsement for that reason alone. However, your endorsement might have carried more weight if you had actually tied current events to your endorsement instead of ignoring them. You could just as easily be endorsing Herbert Hoover in the election of 1932. "

TERMS OF USE

Those who post comments are accountable for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they furnish. While we encourage writers to utilize this service on our Web site, we also strongly suggest they treat it as public forum where good taste counts. We reserve the right to decline for approval objectionable material from these blogs.

Writers that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments - such as racists language, threats or comments unrelated to the story - will not be approved for the blogs. Also, entries that are unsigned or "signatures" by someone other than the actual writer will not be approved.

While writers can still post anonymously, we strongly suggest that they do not do so.

Opinions, guidance and other information expressed in Argus Observer story blog comments and on the Argus Observer blogs represent the individuals' own views and not necessarily those of the Argus Observer. The Argus Observer furnishes this type of forum and does not endorse and is not accountable for statements or advice from anyone other than an designated Argus Observer spokesperson.