I've been busy

Hey there.

Sorry I didn't post anything the past few nights. I've been very busy with my family and had to take a couple of nights off. Priorities, you know.

Anyway, let's see what I can find on Al Gore's Internet tonight...

- Here's an article from Newsweek that talks about Sarah Palin. It gives a little back ground information on what happened when she was selected for and again gives the argument on why someone who is folksy does not make her a good candidate for VP. It talks about how she has lacked the curiosity about world affairs that is necessary for someone to hold such a high position and how she's not very organized: http://www.newsweek.com/id/162396

- One of my arguments for why McCain would not make a good President is because of his decision making. He's very reactive and not very contemplative. He doesn't think about a problem before taking action. Proof of that thought? How about:

• Suspending his campaign and threatening to miss the first debate to deal with the problem of the bailout.
• Then showing up for meetings with Bush and basically not saying anything.
• Saying he would get support from Republicans, only then most of them decide not to vote for the bill
• Showing up at the debate even though he said he wouldn't until the bailout was approved, and it wasn't yet.
• Has he yet to say that he's officially resumed his campaign?
• How about the fact that he voted FOR an earmark loaded final bailout plan when he's been basing a good chunk of his campaign on being anti-earmark? Way to stand up for your convictions!

That enough for you?

What has Obama done? Kept his cool and stayed consistent. Didn't overreact or make rash judgements. He kept a level head, which is what is needed in a President.

Anyway, Obama has now been pointing out McCain's erratic behaviour. Good for him!: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27034817

This article also talks about Obama's supposed relationship with a former radical, William Ayers. Even though Obama has denounced this actions from about 40 years ago, the desperate Republicans are now trying to make this an issue. What do they think this means? That Obama backs terrorism? That he is a terrorist? That he's somehow going to support terrorism? Give me a break! Ugh.

Then there's this article with Palin trying to raise the same attack against Obama: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27034817

I'm sorry, but I can't take any attack from her seriously. How can I when she can't remember what newspapers she reads?: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBO_YungPjU

Anyway, here's fact checking from CNN saying the claim is false: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/05/fact-check-is-obama-palling-around-with-terrorists/

Personally, I find this line of attack disgusting and it figures that it would be Palin coming up with such an absurd line of attack.

- Just in case you haven't done so yet, here's the facts about the VP debate and what was not true or misleading in their comments: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_biden-palin_debate.html

That's all I have time for tonight.