[GCFL-discuss] Free Lance

[Discussion of the Good, Clean Funnies List]

Lance, I looked up Romans 8:32 before looking up anything else you asked
about. It would be redundant to observe, that is true. My personal
inclination in Romans is toward Romans 12:1, but that is why there is so
much in the entire book: there are so many things to be said, and so many
different people to say them to, none of whom can grasp them all.

You've asked me three different questions.

As to the voting records on veterans, the "score sheet" the disabled
veteran mentioned to me is not a measure of how many times a senator
shows up to vote. It is a record of how many times the senator voted
favorably on legislation Disabled American Veterans advocated for, or
voted against legislation DAV wanted defeated. John McCain's votes went
the way DAV advocated 10% of the time. Now DAV may or may not accurately
represent the real interests and needs of most or all disabled veterans,
but I don't know of any organization of similar scope which offers a
counter-claim.

I went to the DAV web site, entered my parents' zip code, which is in
Illinois, and got a listing of Key Votes for Senator Obama. There was one
red x, meaning he voted against an amendment they supported, all the rest
were either green checks (14), meaning he voted the way they advocated (Y
or N), one not scored, and three he was ineligible to vote, which I
presume means it was a vote in a committee that he is not part of. For
whatever weight it carries, that's the score. DAV emphasizes that they
are not endorsing any candidate, they keep these records on all public
officials, and a lot of veterans' legislation is passed by voice vote, so
they can only tabulate roll call votes on major legislation.

As to Cafferty, I wouldn't think of providing a rebuttal. He is right on
the money. His main criticisms sound like those of my mother, a life-long
Republican, who incidentally voted for Obama both in 2004 for the senate,
and in the primary this year for president. The party doesn't stand for
small government, it stands for bigger and bigger government. It has no
disciplined fiscal policy at all -- Clinton is the last president who
showed any fiscal discipline. And, as to integrity, I do know many
decent, patriotic Republicans who have a great deal of integrity, but
unfortunately none of them are being slated for office. Some, by no means
all, are voting for Obama. Incidentally, the Democratic Party is not
exactly to my liking either. It's national leadership is kind of
petrified in its sense of policy and principles. I don't especially like
Nancy Pelosi, or my state's governor, or its senior senator, or... but I
think Obama can pull them in a more sensible direction, because he has
been on record for several years with a much more sensible analysis. My
state's junior senator will be a big help.

Finally, will Obama do what a president can (can't do anything about
taxes unless Congress votes the way the president asks it to), to put the
tax burden back on corporations and close loopholes? He says he will do
that, every time he is asked. Either he is George W. Bush in disguise and
lying through his teeth, or he means it. I want something more than he is
offering, I want the first $20,000 tax exempt for individuals, $50,000
for families, and then have a 50% bracket starting somewhere around
$500,000 or $1,000,000. But Obama will take a step in the right
direction.

Is he as savvy as Clinton? That is a question I haven't heard asked in a
while. He does have Robert Rubin among his advisors, and Rubin oversaw
the budget and spending policies that got us to the point of actually
paying off some of the national debt. Yes, I think he is savvy enough to
get essential programs moving, while exercising fiscal discipline and
balancing the budget. He said he will go through the budget line by line
to examine, is this something we really need to spend money on? That's
all I would ask of a candidate. The budget is too big and complex to
promise in advance, which lines he will or won't propose to cut out or
continue. I want a president who will take a good hard look when its
budget time, not a candidate who makes wild promises. Every time I hear a
candidate say, vaguely, "I will cut wasteful spending," I want to ask
"Exactly which parts of the budget do you call wasteful? Maybe your waste
is my essential government function." I generally approve of what Obama
has said we do need to spend money on, and I appreciate he will be
looking line by line at what else is in the budget, and where the money
will come from to pay for what he wants to spend.

Siarlys
____________________________________________________________
Click here for great computer networking solutions!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/Ioyw6i3oHgMkXRbUtiOtURO09axbrKOaZHsNXa5Z414aZKH2VhincI/