Letter to the editor:

Conservatives should take another look

Joe Beltran, North Las Vegas

Thursday, Aug. 28, 2008 | 2:01 a.m.

There is this constant chatter by the Republicans, especially from conservatives, about Barack Obama’s relative youth and inexperience and that John McCain, a POW during the Vietnam War, has the experience to run this great country of ours, manage its complex economic system, restore respect for the USA in the rest of the world and solve the problems so mishandled by eight years of the Bush administration.

These conservatives wonder how a Columbia graduate who was near the top of his class at Harvard Law School, without the benefit of privileged family ties, can be qualified to be the next president of the greatest nation in the world, the USA. They also wonder how an articulate and charismatic young man out of a Horatio Alger novel can be qualified to run this country.

Instead, every critically thinking member of the electorate should wonder about McCain’s qualifications to be president. For the sake of brevity, here are some reasons:

1) Unable to decipher the Internet without help

2) Still thinks Czechoslovakia is a country

3) Does not know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite

4) According to his own evaluation is lame about the economy

5) Hired as his economic adviser former Sen. Phil Gramm, who thinks there is nothing wrong with the economy and accuses long-suffering families of being whiners

6) Does not remember how many houses he owns (seven) and calls Obama an elitist

7) Like Bush, was born with a silver spoon in his mouth

8) Like Bush, wants to privatize Social Security

9) Voted 90 percent of the time with Bush.

Do we want another four years of George W. Bush?

Discussion: 23 comments so far…

By mwh710

8/28/08 at 4:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

Hell NO!
By Future2012

8/28/08 at 5:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

This is a typical Democratic debate approach to serious issues.

What is the point of having a discussion.

What is even worst is the LV Sun prints this as a something to promote community discusion.

Help us.

Obama and Biden going back to Clinton for a econoic model is a failure.

Here is what I know

My 401K value dropped by 50% under Clinton and has never recovered.

From March 24, 2000 to October 9, 2002 S&P 500 Index drop of 49.1%

This was Clinton's recession (that nobody will talk about 2 quarters were negative) which was due to Clinton's tax increase. This amount of money taken out of the consuming and investing public resulted in a precipitate decline in sales by and investments in the manufacturing sector. This is evident by:

• The long 17-month contraction in the ISM manufacturing index starting in July of 2000, causing the lost of millions of manufacturing jobs, which helped drive the country into recession.

• The March 24, 2000 to October 9, 2002 S&P 500 Index drop of 49.1% was caused in part by a need by people to sell stock to pay increased taxes.

• Median Household income crest at $42,000 in 1999, and dropped in 2000 and 2001.

• Corporate debt increased by 125% between 1995 and 1999 to $2.6 trillion; and corporate tax shelter trickery (Enron, Global Crossing, and Tyco) took off.

• Real GDP was just 0.5% in 2001.
By AgMallard

8/28/08 at 6:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Typical Republican response: Blame Clinton.

Rove Speak: Radical = Scary black man.

Elitist = Uppity.
By mschaffer

8/28/08 at 6:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

Actual economists pegged the recession that Future2012 is referring to as having started under Bush. He then proceeded in typical incompetent Republican fashion to make it worse for the majority of United States citizens while showering largesse on the political donor wealthy elites. In addition, I wonder how much of the ground prior to the first Bush economic disaster was prepared by the Newt Gingrich Congress???
By NVMakz

8/28/08 at 6:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

The 2008 Barry / Joey partnership would be MUCH worse in its socialism, its huge-government / nanny-state prescriptions that we'll be living in the second term of Jimmah Carter.

Clinton "left" many political, economic and polit-corroding land-mines for Bush to mop up for America.

1) The rise of world-wide Islamofascistic animals who Clinton enboldened in many, many ways, but especially at Mogadishu and the tepid, weak responses to the first WTC bombings.

2) The rise of Rotten CEOs and CFOs who raped their companies and hid the carnage via accountants. False wealth creating false tax revenues which helped clinton "balance the budget", lol!

2a) When the rotten, false accounting of corporations was revealed (BY Bush's Justice Dept via ENRON) - it was too late to save the retirement accts of millions of poor and middle-class Americans who lost much and had to keep working because they were broke.

3) The "Oil-For-Fraud" U.N programme, which The Clinton Administration (through Maddie Not-So-Bright) KNEW was a sham, screwing the people and feeding Saddam == but did nothing.

4) For all of the whining and screaming AT Bush by Global en-viral-MENTALISTS, Clinton/Gore never put the bogus, proven-failure Kyoto Protocol to the Senate for ratification - AFTER - a 95-0 "sense of the Senate" vote in '98 (I think?). Kyoto has proven itself a failure since its adoption - to the applause of those nations NOT included (China, India, Russia (I think?) - the largest of the dirtiest, foulest places on the planet. We all saw the massive pollution China lives with during the Olympics.

5) Terrorists could travel much more free and easy in the 90s than after 9/11. Thousands upon thousands of terrorists and their infrastructures are dead due to the steadfast leadership of GW Bush.

6) A year before Bush took office, the stock market peaked and subsequently declined 8% by the end of 2000. The last four fiscal quarters under President Clinton showed steadily declining GDP growth rates of 4.8, 3.5, 2.4, and 1.9 percent, respectively. When Bush took office, the US Government was still operating under the fiscal budget signed by President Clinton, and would remain so for more than another eight months.

7) "Bubble boy" Alan Greenspan , imo, tried to help Clinton's "legacy" and Algore's failed POTUS bid in 2000 by NOT sponsoring an immediate reduction in Fed. Reserve Interest Rates in 1998-1999 - which would have helped blunt the "Clinton Economic Slowdown" of >2000 = until AFTER it was too late; then they went on a legendary cutting campaign == which had a lot to do with the market risks / uncertainties of that slowdown's destructive effects.
By NVMakz

8/28/08 at 6:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

"Actual economists pegged the recession that Future2012 is referring to as having started under Bush."

Actual citizens who saw their retirement accounts shrinking BEFORE Bush assumed office - without knowing the effects of 90s econ-cheating (THAT kills your argument) until after Clinton" "left" office KNOW the slowdown started much earlier.

It was the revealing of all the 90s lies and corrosions under Clinton AFTER Bush won the presidency that timed the economist's "pegging" the "Recession".

The causes are Clinton's; the fixes were Bush's. Still, economically, the economy is more honest and has grown more than under Clinton (including the slowdown his era "left" America.

Remember also: Clinton has 20-30 dollar/barrel oil == while Bush suffered oil prices at upwards of 140. Clinton could have effected millions and millions more barrels of oil production; but libs are held hostage to their base - the wild-eyed en-viral-MENTALists.

Look beyond the DNC lies and talking points and we see the "economy" is not in nearly as bad shape as liberals need it to be for electoral purposes.

Are you better off than you were 8 years ago? I - for sure - AM.
By azsk8fan

8/28/08 at 7:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

And our option option is what - a racist who can't wait to use the White House (soon to be renamed for fear of political incorrectness) for his own self-serving motives - non of which could stand to benefit the 'whitey' he has been so known to despise. What great choices (choke choke) we have huh????????? America, we are in a world of hurt and it's not going to get any better regardless of who 'wins' this election. How bout we all stay home and just let the electoral college what they do best - override majority vote and just candidate in office in spite of what the MAJORITY votes for........
By NVMakz

8/28/08 at 7:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

America rejected "commune-ism" as far back as the Jamestown Settlements. Later in history, Ayn Rand's Objectivist Classic "Atlas Shrugged" is a blueprint to what the Am-lib WANTS for America.

America's history has been a fight throughout to maintain freedoms, abilities and desires against dictators, despots, mass-murderers and Communists to take it away. Barry's family history, his life-courses, his major influences, Barry's life-actions and the things hidden away during this Barry-fest have Communism and Alinsky-like corrosions at its base purpose.

Barry Obama Soetoro Obama represents Alinsky-esque corrosions to freedom, self-determination and another step toward government-mandated enslavement.

The writer's laundry-list of minor gripes PALE mightily in the face of what Barry Obama represents.

McCain can get someone to work the computer for him = compare that to someone handling Barry's communist deeds and impulses for him.

McCain, given the hand we all have been dealt, is a towering mountain of political gravitas in comparison to the communist, racist political puppy named Barry Obama Soetoro Obama.
By jfnance32

8/28/08 at 8:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

Here are some Obamaism's:

Obama said Iran posed no serious threat even though its leaders have repeated said they want to wipe the USA and Israel off the face of the planet and it seems that Iran is hell bent on building nuclear weapons.

Obama said there were 57 states.

Obama said that his parents met because of the Selma tragedy even though he was born before the Selma event.

Obama stated that Hugo Chavez came to power during Bush’s term even though Hugo came to power in Clinton’s term.

Obama said that the death toll of tornados in Kansas were 10,000 when it was 11.

Obama, when giving a speech on deceased soldiers, said, “……of fallen heroes -- and I see many of them in the audience here today”.

Obama referred to the president of Canada when Canada does not have presidents.

Obama cast a large portion of the voters as bitter people who cling to guns and religion.
By thebs

8/28/08 at 8:43 a.m.

Suggest removal

I agree, Republicans should take another look at Barack Obama.

Obama will cut taxes for 95% of all workers drawing a paycheck. He'll cut the average middle-class tax burden by 3x what John McCain is promising.

Obama will have a much lower national debt than McCain. McCain's economic plans, which primarily promote the interests of the rich over the middle class, will increase the national debt to $5 trillion, 150% of the national debt planned under Obama... even after Obama pays for his health care initiative. Conservative Republicans should take another look at Bob Barr... McCain is more liberal than Obama when it comes to taxes and spending. Most Ameicans trust Obama more than McCain when it comes to the economy.

Prominent Republicans like Rick Santorum, Bob Smith, Pete Domenici, James Dobson, Mitt Romney, Thad Cochran, John Hinz, and military leaders like Major General Paul Eaton and Merill McPeak have all spoken out about McCain's dangerous temperment, and how they doubt his ability to lead as Commander in Chief.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles...

Obama and Biden have signaled their intent to attack al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan. When told of the same plan by Huckabee, John McCain said it was "naieve" and he "lacked the military experience to lead." This led Time magazine to question why McCain was being "Soft on Al Qaeda."

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/...

McCain's economic plans are more liberal than Obama, and he's overlooking the greatest threat to our homeland security, Al Qaeda. What conservative in his Right mind would vote for such a man?
By NVMakz

8/28/08 at 8:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

Has Barry visited the "58th State", Alaska - YET??

What does Barry have against Alaska anyway?

The fact that they want to DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW?

He'll need extra TelePrompTers to keep him concentrating over "THE People's" cries of DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW!

DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW.
By NVMakz

8/28/08 at 9:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ted9Hzn8f...

What a hilarious series which nails the "Obamessiah" cult-of-personality which dominates the American Liberal in this era.

Also, it looks like the "YES, WE CAN" Messiah has deeper roots of narcissism, uber-ego and super-callousness than anyone even imagined.

This is just GREAT. Enjoy!
By crfdlv

8/28/08 at 9:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

John McCain served our country but he wants to let all the illegals over the border with no stopping em! We keep callin him a MAVERICK, but thats a code word for LIBERAL! Mitt Romney got my vote in the primary and there's no way in hell I'm votin for some liberal who wants to give amnesty to the illegals! He can choose whoever he wants as a vice president, that's not gonna make him a true conservative.
By jfnance32

8/28/08 at 9:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

Obama is going to give the middle class an extra $1.95 a day over McCain's plan.....woooooeeeeeee cheesebugers for all!!!!!

Obama is going to raise taxes on capital job creation investments.....boy that will help a lot in Las Vegas...we really do not need any jobs.

McCain is going to increase incentives for job creation investments.

Obama is going to heavily rely on solar and wind. The brand new Solar One plant generates energy at 240% times the current market price. I guess this is what he is talking about sacrifice. He wants to sacrifice our wallets.

Obama also wants us to buy the $48,000 plug-in Volt which is a tiny car that needs to be re-charge for 4-6 hours each night.

McCain wants to invest in R & D in solar, wind and electric cars to bring down the cost and improve the technology. He wants to use cheap coal and nuclear. He wants to use the trillions of dollars of oil and gas. Even Obama has been decided (but kicking screaming) that he need to use those resources, too.

Obama thinks Iran is not a serious threat. Even though that the leaders of Iran swear to destory Israel and the US and are hell bent on building nuclear weapons.

Obama is so naive he thinks he can get countries like Iran, China and Russia to give up their nukes and not hide any weapons.
By NVMakz

8/28/08 at 9:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iv6t3vBdK...

Verily, I spake unto you today's political butt-whoopin' ; YEAH, the unwash-ed commoner of the tribe of "Liberal, of the Lower Realm" == HARK - the Blessed Child strides before you in purpose and light....

...as the mighty shiver goes up thy leg in spastic political stutterances and bleatitudinal spasmness in this place day-to-day ; perspective exits and the "Blessed One" delivers "The Word" in the "58th Province". Amen.

The social-believer residents and domestic terrorists of the "58th Province - Liberal, the Lower" accept the Glorious One as their savior before he passes; kneeling as "HE" traveleth onward - hoping for a whiff of his magnificence as a mighty testimony to his message come alive - cradle-to-grave nanny-state sustenance.

Thus, endeth the sermon. Enjoy!

Here is the text version, lol.............

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment...

Written on my birthday as well. It's a SIGN!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By JohnF

8/28/08 at 9:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

NVMakz,
Talking loud and long doesn't make you right.

Nance,
First you bash Obama for wanting more solar power, then you praise McCain for wanting more solar power. Make up your mind.
By jfnance32

8/28/08 at 9:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

Learn to read.....Obama wants to build a lot of solar using current technology which generates power at 240% times the current market price.

McCain wants to invest in R & D to improve the solar technology to make it more cost effective.
By R_Linn

8/28/08 at 11:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

Four more years of G.W.Bush would be better than four years of Obama and his tax-and-spend liberal buddies.
By NVMakz

8/28/08 at 11:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

"NVMakz,
Talking loud and long doesn't make you right."

Might that be the sound of a person, choking on my dust today??

HMMMmmmmmMMMMmmmm.......

Have a nice day!
By Future2012

8/28/08 at 12:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

mscaffer thinks that Bush was in office in 1999 and 2000, when the economy busted.

Dem can never admit that raise taxes has a consequence.

Clinton was in office and his policies cause the long 17-month contraction in the ISM manufacturing index starting in *** July of 2000****, causing the lost of millions of manufacturing jobs, which helped drive the country into recession.

mscaffer say it with me "July 2000, Clinton was in office".
By AgMallard

8/28/08 at 2:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Republican Deflection Game rules:
1)Blame Clinton score 10 points.
2)Blame Clinton and mention 9/11 in same passage score 100 points.
By LV_Tom

8/28/08 at 4:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

Can we meet somewhere and just beat the crap out of each other?.

The conservatives position will win since the liberals will be trying to appease us all the while saying "can't we all just get along".

Jimmy Cawtah and Bill Clinton will be along any minute to create the document of Appeasement.
By jldour

8/28/08 at 5:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

Many of the comments read McCain says this or Obama says that. It should be obvious that politicans on BOTH sides only say what they think people want to hear to gain power. When Gov. Richardson was asked how you reconcile what Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden said about Obama's inexperience, he said that it was just political talk in a fierce primary and they were just kidding. Well, the political talk continues along with the empty promises. Change? Just more of the same.