Presidential Candidate Debate #2 Was A Yawn

"You know, bless your heart, sir. My son's in Iraq fighting for your right to protest." Sarah Palin to defeatist heckler in Florida 10/7/08.

The town hall style meeting, that wasn't a town hall meeting debate last night was two hours of my life I'll not get back. It was boring and Tom Brokaw was lame. A town hall meeting doesn't screen questions, pick questions to be asked or limit answering time to one minute. The questioners usually say a bit about themselves, or why they pose the question to the candidate. These robotic questioners simply rose from their seats and read off their questions from index cards.

Obama led off, with his first answer, blaming the 'failed policies of the past 8 years' for the state of the economy now. Just like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. It's a lie but that doesn't seem to matter to the Chosen One. Obama has to count on his lies to usher him right on into the White House. The economic policies of the administration led the way to recovery after the monumental hit to our economy on 9/11/01. And, taxes were lowered not raised.

When was the last time a Democrat President, since JFK, cut taxes?

One question last night brought to mind something burned in memory from post 9/11 speeches in the Senate. A C-SPAN junkie, I tune in to congressional proceedings regularly. The question last night was about the unity in spirit in the country after the attacks of 9/11. The mood soon shifted and the questioner wanted to know why Americans weren't asked to make more sacrifices for the war on terror efforts.

The President, not clearly articulated, had a message after the attacks for Americans to try to get back to as normal a routine as possible. Don't let the attacks paralyze the country. He used the term, 'go shopping' as an example. Naturally that was an easy phrase for the Bush deranged to seize upon as criticism. The point was, economic stability was essential to recovery.

That brought back memories of the catalyst of my decision to never again even consider voting for a Democrat for President. Why? I watched with utter disgust as Hillary Clinton stood at the speaking podium on the floor of the Senate and hold up a newspaper and ask, 'what did he (Bush) know and when did he know it'? kind of questions. Never mind the failures of her husband's administration to squash the ever growing threats and terror attacks to our country and our overseas bases and embassies. Then, Ted Kennedy started with a daily rant about unnecessary war and the money it takes to defend ourselves. It points to a very basic difference in policy between the two parties.

Democrats want government to pay for every social program under the sun. Republicans want to provide for a strong national defense in a dangerous world. How did President Clinton pay for his new entitlements and expansion of existing programs? He butchered defense spending. He said it was a peace dividend after the end of the Cold War. He was very wrong. It was a vacation from history. And, for his sainted wonderful economy? It was Republican leadership in the House and Senate that demanded a balanced budget from him. The effort was led by Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the House.

With Obama in the White House and a Democrat Congress - at new all time lows in polling - he will be completely unchecked. Partisan divides will remain just as strong, if not even stronger. Obama has never gone against his party's leadership. Despite his lies of being a bi-partisan candidate, he has no such record.

John McCain can keep the defense department planning healthy and strong without excessive cuts. He has proven a vigilant watchdog in the rewarding of bids. He has a record of stopping excess spending, even in defense spending. He has a bi-partisan record, a very long record.

I will not support a party that plays such slimy games with national defense. The defeatist left has reached new lows in the name calling, and the unwarranted claims against this administration and its policies. Have we been attacked since 9/11? Who would have thought that possible on 9/12/01?

When a defeatist candidate like Obama, who is happy to talk about defeat and surrender but not victory, says we need the money from the war effort to pay for new jobs in our flailing economy, what does he mean? When did government create jobs? Does he plan on public works programming, like FDR? Any monies coming his way will be used for social engineering for the interest groups to which he is beholden. Even Chuck Schumer felt the need yesterday to hold a press conference and whine that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is helping campaign coffers of Republicans, not many Democrats, in this election cycle. What does that tell you? An Obama administration would devastate small businesses, the very backbone of our economy. Does he not realize at least 60% of small business is taxed at individual taxpayer rates?

Obama likes to make much of his talks with Colin Powell. Did you know Powell has only contributed to McCain, not Obama, according to public campaign records?

Economics and national security go hand in hand.