Comments for CommonSenseReport

Comment on Do as I say, not as I do by gwlewis

gwlewis — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 17:32:34 +0000

Marriage in the practical sense has come to mean the official union of one person to another. Do those who wish to define marriage in an ostensibly christian sense realise they are in effect excluding the interpretations of other religions?

Comment on Oregon is Obama country by commonsensereport

commonsensereport — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:54:28 +0000

My apologies….my disappointment in Novick’s loss clouded my memory of the outcome. Thanks for the correction.

Comment on Oregon is Obama country by Ted Gleichman

Ted Gleichman — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 19:53:18 +0000

FYI, it is factually incorrect to say that “Merkley cruised to an easy victory.”

Oregon House Speaker Merkley beat activist Novick only 45-42, and this narrow victory required the expenditure of something on the order of $2 million — including more than $400 thousand from the DSCC in direct funding to the Merkley campaign and independent expenditures on his behalf.

Actually, Merkley cruised to a difficult victory.

Comment on Oregon is Obama country by waitaminute

waitaminute — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:15:54 +0000

since when is a 45-42 squeaker an “easy victory”??

Comment on Only a fool or a fraud….. by commonsensereport

commonsensereport — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:45:18 +0000

I know it was….I still find it entertaining. We all knew President Bush has loved to talk tough about war. It was fitting that after McCain made a commercial about talking tough, Pres. Bush acknowledged what we all knew.

Comment on Only a fool or a fraud….. by Ben K

Ben K — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 18:53:53 +0000

That commercial was cut before said what he said.

Comment on Enough is Enough for Obama by commonsensereport

commonsensereport — Sun, 19 Aug 2007 04:23:31 +0000

Thank you for your comment…..I haven’t done much outreach with my blog yet, but I welcome your opinions.

I believe Sen. Clinton’s role as first lady does better prepare her for the Presidency. Unlike other first ladies, Sen. Clinton worked out of the West Wing. She took an active role in the administration and certainly learned from that experience. Upon becoming Senator of New York, she pursued a spot on the Armed Services Committee, another position that kept her informed on foreign policy.

The latest controversy over Pakistan may not be a huge deal in the grand campaign, but I do believe that it is important. Our President must know that his/her words and actions have consequences around the world.

I read Doug Schoen’s book, The Power of the Vote, where he wrote about S. Korea…I believe…..without taking the time right now to look up the information, his point was that a pro-American candidate was hurt in the election b/c of Pres. Bush’s actions, allowing a more anti-American to win. I apologize for the lack of detail here, but my point is that how is the leader of Pakistan supposed to keep support of his constituency and stay “friendly” with us, while our potential President is laying out scenarios where he would unleash military attacks inside their country?

Foreign policy is complicated. Those who try to simplify it gloss over important details that could be dangerous to us.

I don’t mean to necessarily attack Obama. However, I do believe Clinton’s experience is more extensive than Obama’s, a point that we disagree with.

As for wanting a candidate who defies conventional wisdom and present new bold ideas…..that sounds good, but what are these bold ideas?

Comment on Enough is Enough for Obama by vwcat

vwcat — Sun, 19 Aug 2007 03:24:35 +0000

exactly what is Clinton’s great foreign policy experience?
Seems more like the media bought into the Clinton campaign spin hook line and sinker.
If the media did a more critical assessment they would notice that Hillary’s answers in debates and off have a decided lack of substance. Just spin, triangulation and double speak. never solutions or ideas.
They would notice her lack of any policy.
They would notice that being first lady is not legit experience. That is one of the silliest things the press has come out with.
In reality she doesn’t have much experience and has yet to show judgement or leadership.
Because Obama doesn’t say the usual crap and convential wisdom but does have new ideas that are solid the pundits are in a wad over this and proclaim him inexperienced. Actually the 8 years in the state is much more substantive than being a first lady.
Good thing these so called journalists were not around in 1932 when the country was at a critical juncture like now and the man running for president and eventually elected also defied convential wisdom and had alot of new and different ideas and changed the country for the better. But, the pundits of today would have gone off the deep end and declared him questionable.

Comment on What’s wrong with John Cox? by Michael

Michael — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 04:38:19 +0000

Don’t feel too badly for John Cox.

The problem here is that John Cox is an utter nobody. Your or I or our local barber aren’t “owed” coverage by CNN and MSNBC just because we say we’re going to run for president – despite the fact that we fail to have ANY elective experience.

Yet, that’s Cox’s position. Without ANY experience in elective politics other than losing three local elections in a row, he believes he’s entitled to coverage by the MSM. The fact that he’s raised just $14,000 in 18 months of daily campaigning doesn’t add him any credibility, either.

The liberal media can be selective, and that’s infuriating. But they also know how to sniff out a phoney like John Cox who simply isn’t a serious candidate. And they are right to do so in this case.

Republicans have a LOT of choices this time who are viable and who can beat the Dems. We don’t need publicity-seekers like Cox around taking valuable debate time away from the candidates who are serious.