Free Us Now Radio Featured Guest, Author Katherine Morrison

Featured Radio Presentation

Monday Night May 4th soROARity
Katherine J. Morrison
"Author of An Independent Call"

---

Free Us Now guest, Katherine Morrison wrote a book about the 2008 presidential election. The book entitled An Independent Call, chronicles the journey of an Independent New Hampshirite from wary observer of town hall meetings to eventual McCain supporter and volunteer. It is an amusing look at the events of a campaign. From meeting candidates from both sides of the aisle, to becoming a blogger for McCain, to being chewed out on campaign phone calls, to receiving press credentials for the Republican National Convention, this account relates the experience of being a participant at the lowest level politics from an outsider's perspective. A mix of good humor and political opinion from the middle.

Rockingham NH County Commissioner, Maureen Barrows, recommends An Independent Call stating that it is- "A must read for anyone interested in the day to day life of a volunteer in a political campaign-attention to detail is brilliant."

---

No radio needed The Free Us Now Radio show is online - If your computer is down no problem call on the phone and hear the entire show right on the phone- Please come! Monday 10 PM eastern/ Bring your questions.
Call-in 347 539-5420.

Event: Free Us Now Radio Show
Host: BettyJean Kling
Start Time: Monday, at 10:00pm
End Time: Monday, at 11:30pm
Where: http://www.Blogtalkradio.com/NO-WE-WONT
Call-in:  347 539-5420

NH Independent and Veteran Canvas Hampton

Excerpt from An Independent Call the story a New Hampshire Independent McCain Supporter

---

Finally, on a more upbeat note, one trait that Senator McCain shares with a good number of his fellow veterans is a wicked sense of humor. While I’d like to say that my rationale for voting McCain was all high minded, I have to admit his sense of humor roped me in in the beginning. It’s probably part of the reason I enjoyed so many of the events with veterans; I’m sure there are veterans out there that lack a sense of humor, but overall I found them quite fun to be around.

During the general election I headed out to canvas a neighborhood with a veteran named Wes. He drove; I hopped out and knocked on the doors. We were canvassing Hampton Beach, a sort of unfortunate task in late Fall to early Winter, since not a lot of people stay at their beach house when the temperature drops. The sheets given to guide us to the appropriate address were accompanied by a brief survey asking whether the occupant was home and whom they were supporting for the different elected offices. The numbering of houses and condos on these sheets could be hard to follow, as locations were not necessarily listed in numerical order. Condo complexes could be particularly difficult to figure out. For instance, 5 Ocean Boulevard unit 16 could be a different page from 5 Ocean Boulevard unit 14, and unit 15 would simply not be on the list at all. The other problem was that you often had to be allowed or buzzed into many of these condo complexes. This basically meant looking for condos, routinely unoccupied due to the season that, even if occupied, could not be accessed. Consequently, we’d just drop a stack of literature on their doorstep, which will likely be picked up sometime this coming June.

So in the process of trying to locate a particular address on Ocean Boulevard, Wes backed his car up right into a pole. Looking down, arranging literature at the time, I was startled at the hit and said, ‘Ooo!’ and looked over at Wes. Thinking, this can’t be good we both hopped out of the car and took a look at his bumper. There was a new yellow stripe down the back side of his car and he said, “Ah, it’s just paint.” Relieved that it wasn’t too serious and that the damage didn’t trouble Wes, we hopped back into the car, and started trying to figure out where our next stop was. As we headed forward we spotted the house number of the next stop; Wes hit the brakes and his coffee flew off the dashboard, hitting me in the arm and soaking my left side. This time Wes looked stunned as I sat there looking at my sweater covered in coffee. “Well, it’s not hot,” I said. He handed me towels and clearly felt badly that I was wearing his drink. I had a t-shirt on under the sweater, so I hopped out of the car again, rung out the sweater and dried it off as best I could with some towels, put it back on, and hopped back into the car. While I smelled of coffee all day, the sweater was dark so it didn’t really matter.

We got through the rest of the doors without much incident, but had trouble finding one particular side street. Finally, we found the tiny narrow street in question; we headed down to the end where we eventually spotted the number of the home on a trashcan outside of a sliding glass door. I got out, knocked on the door, and a young guy, who apparently had just woken up, and was wearing a pair of old boxers and a t-shirt opened the door, saying nothing.

‘Hi, I’m a volunteer with the McCain campaign, and…’

‘No,’ he said and he shut the door and went back to bed.

I got back in the car and said, “Obama.”

As we started to head out of the narrow street I looked back, and Wes said, “Don’t worry, I won’t hit anything… …I saw you watching.”

“Well, I wasn’t going to say anything.”

On the way back to the office he said, “You did a good job.”

“Thanks. You too…”

“Except for the pole.”

“Well that and the coffee, but other than that you did a good job.”

---

Veteran's Good Humor

In The Beginning - It's Curiosity

Excerpt from An Independent Call the amusing story of a New Hampshire McCain supporter.

In the beginning I just thought I’d go see the different candidates at the campaign events in New Hampshire. Four years prior, not long after I moved to New Hampshire from Massachusetts, my sister was volunteering for Senator Kerry’s campaign. She’s a loyal and active Democrat; our parents are Republicans. We talked on the phone after the Iowa caucuses when Howard Dean screamed during his concession speech. She hadn’t heard it called the ‘I have a Scream Speech’ yet, and I said that I felt for him. I figured if I were in politics that would be the sort of thing that would take me out. It wouldn’t be scandal or corruption; I’d simply do something so embarrassing that no one would take me seriously again.

My sister told of a news clip she had just seen of a woman who had met Senator Kerry, then fainted. The video looked like a shot from the Wizard of Oz with Senator Kerry standing over a pair of feet. I was starting to realize that I had missed quite a show by not attending Primary events, so I simply thought this time it would be interesting to see. I certainly had no plans of picking a candidate early, and no interest in joining a campaign. I thought it might give me something to write about on my website, but basically I was just curious.

Evan Bayh Opposes Omnibus Spending Bill

Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana wrote an Op-ed in the Wall Street Journal yesterday coming out against the huge appropriations bill that would increase spending eight percent from last year. His article Deficits and Fiscal Credibility is definitely worth a read, below is an excerpt.

This week, the United States Senate will vote on a spending package to fund the federal government for the remainder of this fiscal year. The Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009 is a sprawling, $410 billion compilation of nine spending measures that lacks the slightest hint of austerity from the federal government or the recipients of its largess.

The Senate should reject this bill. If we do not, President Barack Obama should veto it.

The omnibus increases discretionary spending by 8% over last fiscal year's levels, dwarfing the rate of inflation across a broad swath of issues including agriculture, financial services, foreign relations, energy and water programs, and legislative branch operations. Such increases might be appropriate for a nation flush with cash or unconcerned with fiscal prudence, but America is neither.

Drafted last year, the bill did not pass due to Congress's long-standing budgetary dysfunction and the frustrating delays it yields in our appropriations work. Since then, economic and fiscal circumstances have changed dramatically, which is why the Senate should go back to the drawing board. The economic downturn requires new policies, not more of the same.

---

Senator Evan Bayh Rejects Bloated Appropriations Bill

McCain Upset About Earmark Broken Promise

What's $1 Trillion?

With the Economic Stimulus approaching the $1 trillion mark, lets look at what $1,000,000,000,000.00 equates to…

$1,597,444 check for all of the 626,000 people that have filed unemployment claims this month.

$227,272 check for all 4.4 million people collecting unemployment benefits.

$333.33 check for every American man, woman, and child.

It would take a worker making $50,000 a year 20 million years to earn $1 trillion.

If ever ticket of every home Red Sox home game at Fenway Park for the 2009 season was sold for $308,642.00 each that would equal $1 trillion.

The GDP of Mexico is just over $1 trillion.

The GDP of India is also just over $1 trillion.

The combine GDP of the following countries is approximately $1 trillion…

Uruguay, Lebanon, Yemen, Uzbekistan, North Korea, Cyprus, Estonia, Ethiopia, Cameroon, Trinidad and Tobago, Ivory Coast, Panama, El Salvador, Tanzania, Equatorial Guinea, Iceland, Bahrain, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macau, Jordan, Bolivia, Ghana, Brunei, Paraguay, Gabon, Zambia, Uganda, Senegal, Botswana, Honduras, Burma, Albania, Jamaica, Republic of the Congo, Georgia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Afghanistan, Nepal, Armenia, Cambodia, Mozambique, Madagascar, Republic of Macedonia, Chad, Mali, Malta, Burkina Faso, Mauritius, Namibia, Haiti, Benin, The Bahamas, West Bank and Gaza, Nicaragua, Papua New Guinea, Moldova, Niger, Laos, Jersey, Kyrgyzstan, Liechtenstein, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Aruba, Zimbabwe, Montenegro, Guinea, Malawi, Rwanda, French Polynesia, Fiji, Barbados, Mauritania, New Caledonia, Kosovo, Togo, Suriname, Swaziland, Guam, Guernsey, Isle of Man, Somalia, Central African Republic, Sierra Leone, Cape Verde, Faroe Islands, Greenland, Lesotho, Eritrea, Belize, Bhutan, Maldives, Guyana, Antigua and Barbuda, Gibraltar, San Marino, Saint Lucia, Djibouti, Liberia, Burundi, British Virgin Islands, The Gambia, Seychelles, Grenada, Northern Mariana Islands, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Vanuatu, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Comoros, Samoa, East Timor, Solomon Islands, Guinea-Bissau, Dominica, American Samoa, Tonga, Micronesia, Cook Islands, Palau, São Tomé and Príncipe, Marshall Islands, Anguilla, Kiribati, Tuvalu
 
If you'd like your political representatives to now what $1 trillion equates to, their contact info can be found at...
 
Senators - http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
 
Representatives - https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml
 

---

Stimulating Math

Democrats Discuss Taking Over People's 401K's

If you don't think an Obama, Pelosi, Reid run government would result in a dramatic swing to the left, read US News and World Reports article on congress' discussion of takng over people's 401K's. 401K's are not 'rich people' savings plans they are middle America's retirement and savings plans, and Dems are looking to make them into 'government created' accounts. Would Obama, Dems Kill 401(k) Plans?

I hate to use the "S" word, but the American government would never do something as, well, socialist as seize private pension funds, right? This is exactly what cash-strapped Argentina just did in the name of protecting workers' retirement accounts (Efharisto, Fausta's Blog). Now, even Uncle Sam isn't that stupid, but some Democrats might try something almost as loopy: kill 401(k) plans.

House Democrats recently invited Teresa Ghilarducci, a professor at the New School of Social Research, to testify before a subcommittee on her idea to eliminate the preferential tax treatment of the popular retirement plans. In place of 401(k) plans, she would have workers transfer their dough into government-created "guaranteed retirement accounts" for every worker. The government would deposit $600 (inflation indexed) every year into the GRAs. Each worker would also have to save 5 percent of pay into the accounts, to which the government would pay a measly 3 percent return. Rep. Jim McDermott, a Democrat from Washington and chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee's Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, said that since "the savings rate isn't going up for the investment of $80 billion [in 401(k) tax breaks], we have to start to think about whether or not we want to continue to invest that $80 billion for a policy that's not generating what we now say it should."

Hat Tip to Smart Girl Politics original article Kiss Your 401k Goodbye!

---

Democrats Discuss Taking Over People's 401K's

McCain Good for Business and Good for the Economy

Often times pro business even pro small business policies are looked upon with disdain as can be seen in Senator Obama recently comments criticizing Senator McCain for caring more about Wall Street than Main Street. However, this is a myopic view of the economy. Pro business policies create jobs, pro business policies help grow the economy. Putting the breaks on an already sagging economy with increased taxes does nothing for the American worker exept make life harder. CNBC notes that small business owners recognize that McCain Understands Small Business Owners

The following is a statement from American Small Business League (ASBL) President Lloyd Chapman: One look at Senator John McCain's website will tell you, this is a man that knows and cares about America's 27 million small businesses. He knows 56 percent of all Americans work for small businesses. John McCain is a small business guy through and through.

Time also reported on the 300+ professional economists that back McCain. Conversely the Union Leader disusses how Senator Obama's tax plan does not add up in their article It doesn't compute: Obama's tax plan a ruse.

Numerous organizations, including the Associated Press, have noted that Obama's proposals spend hundreds of millions of dollars more than his tax hikes raise. What is less well known is that Obama's tax plan itself sends out of Washington far more than it brings in. Obama's campaign twice admits that in the wording of the tax plan.

According to the plan, "his tax relief for middle-class families is larger than the revenue raised by his tax changes for families over $250,000." That sounds like he's giving a net tax cut. But much of what he calls "tax cuts" are actually cash payments to low- and middle-income Americans. Ultimately, he sends out of Washington hundreds of billions of dollars more than it takes in.

In other words, Obama promises more in benefits to low- and middle-income Americans than his plan can finance with his tax hikes on "families" making more than $250,000 a year. And note the word, "families." Even though Obama says that no "family" making less than $250,000 a year will see a tax increase, in fact his plan raises taxes on individuals making $200,000 a year or more.

The bottom line is that Obama is not being honest about his tax and spending plans. It is impossible -- impossible! -- for him to finance his giveaways by taxing only those making $250,000 or more. He will have to raise taxes substantially on people making much, much less than that.

Senator Obama's plans to "spread the wealth" are anti-growth measures done in the name of fairness. However, there is nothing fair about halting economic growth. There is also nothing fair about punishing success.

---

McCain Good for Business and Good for the Economy

Obama's Plan to Spread the Wealth

Despite the Obama campaign's and media's attempt to discredit 'Joe the Plumber', a fellow who simply asked Senator Obama a question at a campaign event, his question remains valid, and Obama's response proves insightful. Obama's $250,000 a year tax increase provides a barrier to success for the middle class, particularly for entrepreneurs and small business owners. For these people on the bubble there is a penalty for growth. Consequently, this puts the brakes on the growth of many small businesses, which are responsible for a large percentage of new jobs. Raising taxes in a struggling economy on any economic bracket is a terrible idea. Tax increases slow economic growth, and that hurts people across the board. If jobs dry up, it's not the $250,000 plus crowd that will be hurt the most, it will be the middle class.

Senator Obama's response to Joe is interesting. 'Spreading the wealth' is a principle of socialism. This combined with Senator Obama's plan to reduce taxes for 95% of the people, when 30-40% of the people don't pay federal income tax has all the hallmarks of a socialist policy. Senator Obama has never addressed whether people who don't pay taxes would receive a government check. Either his numbers are off or he is creating a welfare class is his plan. Subsidizing low income is the perfect way of encouraging people not to achieve. Why work harder if the government will pay you not to. Why start a new business if the government will penalize you for your success. This is the perfect plan to deaden the economy; penalize success, reward mediocrity, and limit the growth of new/small businesses.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KXRq2bErVc]
Obama's Plan to Spread the Wealth

You Don't Have to Love McCain

I'm obviously a big fan of Senator McCain; have been since fairly early in the primaries. At a closed door meeting for supporters in NH with no media in attendance Senator McCain, having just come off a Republican debate where the candidates had all taken a number of shots at Senator Clinton, opened the meeting by stating that he respects Senator Clinton and would not attack her personally. Then he said, "you have to remember this is all about love," and I nearly fell off my chair. He got a big ovation, and it points to one of the reasons I am such a big fan of the Senator. It isn't always good for his campaign, but he has a good heart; and even if one disagrees with him on issues they can be comforted by the fact that he will listen to and respect those who disagree with him.

Part of what I like about Senator McCain is what many conservatives don't like about him. He does break with his party, he's not an ideologue, he is uncomfortable in launching political attacks. So the argument to many, whether they are to the left or to the right of Senator McCain, is not about loving him him or his policies, but it's about respecting him and recognizing him as qualified. He is what he is, and he has a long record that he can be judged on.

The alternative would swing the country dramatically to the left. The alternative has a cloudy record at best, and a radically leftist record at worst. Associations with people like Wright, Ayers, Rezko, Johnson, Reins, and Khalidi, leave serious questions about the judgment and philosophy of the Democratic nominee.

In an article by Mona Charen Is This the End of Conservatism?, which also should be titled 'Is this The End of Moderation and Balance?', describes some of the plans Democrats are putting together to not only to move the country to the left, but to change the rules so that Democrats will always have an advantage. While this may sound good to some Democrats, stacking the deck is not an appropriate or Democratic way of implementing policy changes.

In the first place, the Democrats can, with a super-majority, change the rules of the game. They can make the District of Columbia the 51st state with two new senators (guaranteed to be Democrats in perpetuity). They can reinstitute the so-called Fairness Doctrine that required radio stations to provide equal time to all political viewpoints. While the doctrine was enforced by the Federal Communications Commission, radio stations shied away from politics altogether. With the demise of the doctrine, conservative talk radio flourished. Liberal talk radio has never found much of an audience. Reviving the doctrine would kill one of the principal irritants to liberals and Democrats -- to say nothing of disemboweling the First Amendment.

To elect a super-majority of Democrats at a time of economic dislocation is to flirt with depression. Nearly all economists agree that two moves by the Hoover administration deepened and prolonged the panic of 1929 and turned it into the Great Depression. One was raising taxes and the other was imposing protectionist trade policies. Senator Obama proposes to do both of those things. Obama's smooth reassurance that only the top 5 percent of earners in America will see their taxes rise is a) almost certainly false, and b) besides the point. If the most productive members of society -- those who create the majority of jobs -- are taxed we will have fewer jobs. It's the old rule that if you tax something you get less of it. While Obama is killing jobs by taxing the productive, he proposes to "renegotiate" NAFTA and other trade deals thus putting the one bright corner of our economy, the export sector, in his crosshairs.

Obama has a million schemes to redistribute the wealth of the top 5 percent, (who by the way, already pay more than 50 percent of the taxes in our steeply progressive system). He wants to provide college for "anyone who wants to go and agrees to perform community service," and community development block grants, and childcare, and universal pre-school, and housing, and retirement and on and on. He seems determined that more people will ride in the wagon than pull it.

"Well," you may say, "if the Democrats drive the country into a deep recession, so much the worse for them. The Republicans will come back strong -- even with two senators from DC!" Perhaps. But in hard times people tend to ask for more government, not less, and this tumble started while George W. Bush was in the White House. Franklin Roosevelt continued to invoke the boogey man of Herbert Hoover long after the Depression was his own. In fact, Democrats used Hoover successfully for 40 more years!

Finally, there is a one-way ratchet in public policy. Liberal reforms are never undone. How hard have conservatives tried to eliminate the Department of Education or subsidies to public television? Would they have more success uncreating a new nationalized health care system?

An Obama/Pelosi/Reid regime -- if it were to get a filibuster-proof majority -- will certainly be able to shift the country's direction sharply to the left. The only question is -- would the shift be permanent?

---

You Don't Have to Love McCain

Obama Funding Complaints

As mentioned in the previous post Reports of Obama Fundraising Fraud (below) there have been questions about the manner in which the Obama campaign has raised such large sums of money. Newsweek has also taken notice of the problems with small donors in its article Obama’s ‘Good Will’ Hunting, and has noted that the McCain campaign has made all of its small donor information public while the Obama campaign has refused.

"Good Will" listed his employer as "Loving" and his occupation as "You," while supplying as his address 1015 Norwood Park Boulevard, which is shared by the Austin nonprofit Goodwill Industries. Suzanha Burmeister, marketing director for Goodwill, said the group had "no clue" who the donor was. She added, however, that the group had received five puzzling thank-you letters from the Obama campaign this year, prompting it to send the campaign an e-mail in September pointing out the apparent fraudulent use of its name.
...(In a similar case earlier this year, the campaign returned $33,000 to two Palestinian brothers in the Gaza Strip who had bought T shirts in bulk from the campaign's online store. They had listed their address as "Ga.," which the campaign took to mean Georgia rather than Gaza.) "While no organization is completely protected from Internet fraud, we will continue to review our fund-raising procedures," LaBolt said. Some critics say the campaign hasn't done enough. This summer, watchdog groups asked both campaigns to share more information about its small donors. The McCain campaign agreed; the Obama campaign did not. "They could've done themselves a service" by heeding the suggestions, said Massie Ritsch of the Center for Responsive Politics.

The American Spectator in its article Obama's Fishy $200 Million reports that an unnamed auditor for the Federal Elections Commission is being prevented investigating questionable fundraising techniques by the Obama campaign.

The Obama campaign has already had to deal with several FEC complaints about fraudulent donors and illegal foreign contributions, and the FEC says it has no record that those complaints have been resolved or closed. As well, the Obama campaign has been cagey at times about the means by which it has made its historic fundraising hauls, which now total almost $500 million for the election cycle. The Hillary Clinton campaign raised questions about the huge amount of e-retail sales the Obama campaign was making for such things as t-shirts and other campaign paraphernalia, and how such sales were being tracked and used for fundraising purposes. While the profits of those items counted against the $2,300 personal donation limit, there have always been lingering questions about the e-retail system...

...The FEC analyst says that Obama's filings indicate he has received large, bundled sums of donations from overseas, sometimes exceeding a quarter millions dollars. "It's suspicious, but it's the small donations made by credit card that need to be examined. We've raised red flags on many of these and the Obama campaign just ignores us. After this election, after we've sifted through everything -- if we're allowed to sift through everything -- I am confident that we are looking at perhaps the largest fine every leveled against a national campaign entity."

Similarly Newsmax reports in their article Secret, Foreign Money Floods Into Obama Campaign that online fund raising combine with no requirement to report donors who contribute less than $200 has lead to serious questions about Obama contributors.

Under campaign finance laws, an individual can donate $2,300 to a candidate for federal office in both the primary and general election, for a total of $4,600. If a donor has topped the limit in the primary, the campaign can 'redesignate' the contribution to the general election on its books.

In a letter dated June 25, 2008, the FEC asked the Obama campaign to verify a series of $25 donations from a contributor identified as 'Will, Good' from Austin, Texas.

Mr. Good Will listed his employer as 'Loving' and his profession as 'You.'

A Newsmax analysis of the 1.4 million individual contributions in the latest master file for the Obama campaign discovered 1,000 separate entries for Mr. Good Will, most of them for $25.

In total, Mr. Good Will gave $17,375.

Following this and subsequent FEC requests, campaign records show that 330 contributions from Mr. Good Will were credited back to a credit card. But the most recent report, filed on Sept. 20, showed a net cumulative balance of $8,950 still well over the $4,600 limit.

There can be no doubt that the Obama campaign noticed these contributions, since Obama's Sept. 20 report specified that Good Will's cumulative contributions since the beginning of the campaign were $9,375.

In an e-mailed response to a query from Newsmax, Obama campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt pledged that the campaign would return the donations. But given the slowness with which the campaign has responded to earlier FEC queries, there's no guarantee that the money will be returned before the Nov. 4 election.

Similarly, a donor identified as 'Pro, Doodad,' from 'Nando, NY,' gave $19,500 in 786 separate donations, most of them for $25. For most of these donations, Mr. Doodad Pro listed his employer as 'Loving' and his profession as 'You,' just as Good Will had done.

Foreign contributions are particularly suspect.

Until recently, the Obama Web site allowed a contributor to select the country where he resided from the entire membership of the United Nations, including such friendly places as North Korea and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Unlike McCain's or Sen. Hillary Clinton's online donation pages, the Obama site did not ask for proof of citizenship until just recently. Clinton's presidential campaign required U.S. citizens living abroad to actually fax a copy of their passport before a donation would be accepted.

With such lax vetting of foreign contributions, the Obama campaign may have indirectly contributed to questionable fundraising by foreigners.

The National Review is also reporting on "Sen. Obama's eye-popping fundraising operation" in their article Obama's Funny Money, or Who's "Loving" "You," Barry?

At TD Blog the article Whistleblower Ignored by DOJ, FEC, FBI: $200 Million in Fishy Obama Donations! they are asking readers to contact the authorities and request that they investigate these allegations.

DOJ, Office of Inspector General
e-mail: oig.hotline@usdoj.gov
hotline: (contact information in English and Spanish): (800) 869-4499

FEC Office of Complaints Examination & Legal Administration Division
(202/694-1650)

FBI Tip Hotline
866-483-5137

---

Update: Washington Post reports RNC to File FEC Complaint on Obama Fundraising Practices

The RNC is alleging that the Obama campaign was so hungry for donations it "looked the other way" as contributions piled up from suspicious, and possibly even illegal foreign donors.

"We believe that the American people should know first and foremost if foreign money is pouring into a presidential election," said RNC Chief Counsel Sean Cairncross.

Cairncross alleged there was mounting evidence of this, and cited a report in the current issue of Newsweek magazine that documents a handful of instances where donors made repeated small donations using fake names, such as "Good Will" and "Doodad Pro."

---

Funny Funding for Obama

Are You Purple?

The McCain campaign has focussed on Independents and Democrats with their Citizens for McCain group. They have even set up an online phone bank specifically for Independents and Democrats. If you are Independent or Democrat McCain supporter this is a great way to help the campaign. Phone calls are instrumental in bringing in votes and getting supporters out to polls. Just a few (or more) a day can have an impact.

Daytime Calls Phone Bank 10:00AM -6:00PM (EST):

Evening and Weekend Calls Phone Bank 6:00PM -9:00PM (EST):

---

If you aren't an Independent, but still want to make phone calls from home - www.JohnMcCain.com/PhoneBank

---

Are You Purple?

Republicans Democrats Fannie Mae Freddie Mac

The Presidential Debate and the Bracelet Moment

Senator McCain talked, as he has previously, about Matthew Stanley and his family of Wolfboro, NH, and the bracelet Senator McCain wears in his honor.

Senator Obama reading the name off 'his bracelet' was tacky, and poorly done.

The story of John McCain, Matthew Stanley, and the bracelet.

Speak Out Against Media Bias

The McCain Palin 2008 blog is sponsoring a petition protesting media bias with the support of groups/sites across the political spectrum. While many have witnessed a decisive pro-Obama slant in this news reporting during this election, this bias became glaringly apparent when Governor Palin was selected as the vice-presidential nominee. Whether it is an organization like the New York Times having to retract stories about Governor Palin because they printed rumor and not fact; networks investigating the children of the Governor; or network pundits questioning the Governor's 'mothering' skills, this over-the-top behavior and blatant bias is unacceptable. With over 1200 people having already signed we urge all readers to speak out against an irresponsible media by signing the following petition.

Petition - Speak Out Against Media Unfairness and Sexism

Petition Founder - McCain Palin 2008 Blog

Co-Sponsors -
Grizzly Groundswell
Free Me Now
Hillary Clinton Forum
Lets Get This Right
McCain Now
Nobama
Palin for America
Puma Truth is Gold
Purple People Vote