The Gary Sutton Show will be on location this morning from 9-12 noon at Jackson School (polling place) at 177 East Jackson Street.
Tonight from 8-11p.m., the Gary will have a special "Election Night Show" from "Celebrations" at Sam and Tony's Restaurant. This will be a call-in show and will include guests and "Man-on-the-Street" interviews throughout the evening.
Reflect on the day and share your comments with us here on the WOW Blog.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Today (and tonight!): What are your thoughts on this Primary Election Day 2008?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Any election day is a wonderful opportunity for the "people" to send a message to its leaders. The upcoming general election, more so than many others in the past, will allow us to keep a full fledged socialist out-of-office (either Clinton or Obama) but unfortunately, means we must also put a not so attractive republican in office. This is one of those elections where I will vote for the least offensive candidate. This is a shame since Obama can truly evoke hope when he speaks and I believe could lead very well but, his socialist bent just will not work with me.
Obama is not a socialist. Don't understand this pre-occupation people seem to have with socialism. This country is no where close to being socialist.
Anon,
"Socialism refers to the goal of a socio-economic system in which property and the distribution of wealth are subject to control by the community."
In Obama criticizes ‘ownership society’ , the author quotes Obama.
"Obama, a Democrat from Illinois, said Bush’s political philosophy consists of giving tax breaks and encouraging “everyone to go buy your own health care, your own retirement and security, your own child care, your own schools..."
“It’s called the ownership society. In our past there has been another name for it; it’s called social Darwinism."
If Obama is critical of individuals ownership society, and he believes that the "community" is the owner and is responsible of an individuals health care, retirement, security, childcare, etc and Fidel Castro believes the same thing, then calling Obama a socialist is an understatement. Communist/Marxist would be a better description, but since socialism is an incremental step towards communism I would give partial credit.
Feel free to try and GUESS WHICH COLLECTIVIST SAID IT...
Hint: ""Our individual salvation depends on our collective salvation." is credited to Obama.
I think Hillary is going to win.
1. Obama's wife isn't percived as patriotic.
2. Obama's preacher (former preacher) isn't percived as patriotic.
3. Obama himself hasn't shaken off the negative perception.
Hillary may have the edge on this one. I think, I could be wrong. Frankly, non of them would be good for the country. Not even McCain. I guess, I am waiting for the right man (or woman) who ever they maybe to restore America to greatness and make people proud of being American's once more. THAT instead of blaming America first, and throwing some hate on this country. IF YOU DON't LIKE AMERICA - GET OUT!
We love you Gary! I'll be listening tonight!
Eric,
You're quoting Obama the Harvard educated social activist, not the politician running for President. I don't know what is wrong with a society focusing on solidarity and community interests as suppose to focusing on individual material gain.
Anon: "You're quoting Obama the Harvard educated social activist, not the politician running for President."
Obama seems to have many faces. These statements, his association with Jeremiah Wright's church, and his "clinging to guns and religion" statement seems to unmask his attempt to define himself based on the audience.
Anon: "I don't know what is wrong with a society focusing on solidarity and community interests as suppose to focusing on individual material gain."
As Dr. Walter E. Williams has said, you can be a socialist all you want but do it with your own money and don't try to make me into one. Jeremiah Wright preached against seeking material gain, but purchased a multi-million dollar home. Likewise, Obama, Algore, and John "2-Americas" Edwards promote community solidarity, collectivism, and socialism, but never at their own expense. Their ideas are always at the expense of other peoples money.
Eric,
No doubt that hypocrits are a dime a dozen. The public shouldn't be bailing out Bear Sterns. But isn't the public's responsibility to ensure that the widow across town can afford her meds or the kid next door has a good school to go to?
Even Joe Lieberman agrees that Obama is a Marxist.
NAPOLITANO: Hey Sen. Lieberman, you know Barack Obama, is he a Marxist as Bill Kristol says might be the case in today’s New York Times? Is he an elitist like your colleague Hillary Clinton says he is?
LIEBERMAN: Well, you know, I must say that’s a good question. I know him now for a little more than three years since he came into the Senate and he’s obviously very smart and he’s a good guy. I will tell ya that during this campaign, I’ve learned some things about him, about the kind of environment from which he came ideologically. And I wouldn’t…I’d hesitate to say he’s a Marxist, but he’s got some positions that are far to the left of me and I think mainstream America.
Anon: "No doubt that hypocrits are a dime a dozen. The public shouldn't be bailing out Bear Sterns. But isn't the public's responsibility to ensure that the widow across town can afford her meds or the kid next door has a good school to go to?"
I agree, the public shouldn't be bailing out Bear Sterns. However, if you believe that meds and school are Constitutionally delegated responsibilities of the federal government, then please site the Article and Section.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Eric,
Devolution is a great idea and in theory would be good for democracy. The problem is that there is tremendous private power in this country. Medium to large businesses can bully states. They demand subsidies and tax credits, essentially state welfare or threaten to move to another state. That effectively takes away public power. It's much harder to bully the federal government.
"The problem is that there is tremendous private power in this country. Medium to large businesses can bully states. They demand subsidies and tax credits, essentially state welfare or threaten to move to another state. That effectively takes away public power. It's much harder to bully the federal government."
Business take away public power only if permitted to by elected officials who have forgotten who they work for. When the federal government gets involved, instead than leave a state, a business leaves the country.
Eric,
Okay then, if we're prepared to agree that a system of private tyranny operates unchecked and controls the country, what impact would a socialist president have? None. That's why I don't understand this concern people have with electing a so-called socialist. People are afraid of paying more taxes, I guess. But one sees no benefit from the considerable taxes one pays now. So what't the difference?
First it was "Obama is not a socialist." Now it is "I don't understand this concern people have with electing a so-called socialist."
Since Obama is now a "so-called socialist" it seems like we are making some progress.
I don't quite follow your logic, but I do believe that I am a better manager of money than government bureaucrats. In the free market, the individual can purchase health care, child care, insurance, retirement savings and education that is a lot more cost efficient and accountable to those who use the service than any government program can ever hope be.
Eric,
Obama's not a socialist. For arguments sake, it would have little impact on how our country works if he tried to push a socialist agenda.
In the real world corporations are bound by law to maximize profit. Human interest and public good doesn't factor in. One shouldn't expect a corporation to do anything good unless it's trying to mollify people or increase market share. It's in a corporation's best interest to undermine notions of mutual support, solidarity, sympathy and concern for others. Expecting a corporation to be either benevolent or accountable, is like expcting a dictator to be benevolent or accountable.
Post a Comment