ray martinez

Web Criminals

2009-09-02T22:28:00.000-06:00

Web Criminals

Criminal acts against a person have taken on a whole new meaning when it comes to the technological age. People are becoming victims of personal attacks daily on their personal computers. Will you be the next victim when logging on? If you have a concern or complaint, you can go to the Internet Crime Complaint Center at http://www.ic3.gov/default.aspx . The Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) is a partnership between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the National White Collar Crime Center (NW3C), and the Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA). IC3 accepts online Internet crime complaints from either the person who believes they were defrauded or from a third party to the complainant. Naturally, you will have to provide them with pertinent information about yourself. The IC3 received 275,284 complaints in 2008; this was up 33.1% from 2007. Most of these cases were fraud, which netted approximately $264.6 million dollars in loss; an average of $931.00 per complaint.

Here are some tips to prevent credit card fraud:

•1. Ensure a site is secure and reputable before providing your credit card number online.

•2. Don't trust a site just because it claims to be secure. Secure sites usually have the letter "s" after the http//www.such and such...if this was a secure site it would read: https//www.such and such.

•3. If purchasing merchandise, ensure it is from a reputable source.

•4. Promptly reconcile credit card statements to avoid unauthorized charges.

•5. Do your research to ensure legitimacy of the individual or company.

•6. Beware of providing credit card information when requested through unsolicited emails.

•7. Attempt to obtain a physical address, rather than a P.O. box or mail drop.

•8. Ensure you are utilizing the most up-to-date patches for your software.

Phishing/Spoofing

Be suspicious of any unsolicited email requesting personal information. Avoid filling out forms in email messages that ask for personal information. Always compare the link in the email to the link that you are actually directed to. Log on to the official website, instead of "linking" to it from an unsolicited email. Contact the actual business that supposedly sent the email to verify if the email is genuine.

Some key points to consider:

•· Keep your password hidden or memorized.

•· Consider signing up for free paperless online billing or invest in a paper shredder.

•· I wouldn't download files or attachments with an .exe extension, even the ones from your family and friends. Most of the time your family and friends don't know they are forwarding you a virus.

•· Load your computer with Norton or McAfee to prevent viruses from e-mail cards-they can download malware onto your computer.

•· When creating a password, use something that is complex like, #uRlEarn!ng. There are programs that run through the dictionary until they find a password that unlocks.

•· Never click onto a bank e-mail that asks you to click onto another site that asks for personal information. Your bank will not ask for personal information on a website-those are fake sites.

Fort Collins keeps raising the bar /taking discretionary spending away

2009-09-02T22:25:00.001-06:00

The City of Fort Collins Utilities are going to rise by 9.5% in 2010.

Water will go up 3%.

Wastewater will go up 10%.

Residential trash for customers has gone up over 30% for residences because of a recent City Ordinance.

The General Revenue is down $8.2 million---so we will dip into reserves, which is going down.

Yet, Utilities will spend $21 million in the next 2 years for smart meters? Why is this so demanding now when the City is in a budget crunch? Can't smart meters wait for a couple of years?

Fixed income for people, especially the elderly, is not going up and they will have less spending discretion.

Unemployment is up and/or we are still loosing jobs.

This doesn't include the State fees that are going up like vehicle license plates and the Federal Income tax collection will rise next year.

Sounds like everything is going up or down in the wrong direction, whatever direction that may be.

How much hot air can a balloon hold?

ASCSU, PIKE advocate giving back to FoCo - Opinion

2008-10-06T11:11:00.000-06:00

ASCSU, PIKE advocate giving back to FoCo - Opinion

ray martinez: Adam Vartanyan writes about his views on Obama

2008-09-24T10:38:00.000-06:00

ray martinez: Adam Vartanyan writes about his views on Obama

15 Citizen Initiatives, 4 Referred Measures Headed for Ballot

2008-09-23T15:22:00.001-06:00

15 Citizen Initiatives, 4 Referred Measures Headed for Ballot

NCLA Policy Post Newsletter plus some added comments by others and Ray Martinez

The NCLA Policy sent a recent update about their position on some of the amendments, which I have edited to some of my views and added some views from others. Nevertheless, the positions taken in the following amendments are mine as well. You can also view NCLA's (Northern Colorado Legislative Alliance) position at www.NCLAonline.net

An update of legislative issues affecting the northern Colorado business community

September 1, 2008

15 Citizen Initiatives, 4 Referred Measures Headed for Ballot
Is Your Business Ready?

The August 4 deadline to submit at least 76,000 valid signatures for citizen-initiated ballot measures did nothing to pare down the list of proposed amendments voters will face on Election Day. It is likely all 15 initiatives will make the ballot, along with four referred by the legislature.

The Northern Colorado Legislative Alliance (NCLA), the joint public policy advocacy effort of the Fort Collins, Loveland and Greeley Chambers of Commerce and the Northern Colorado Economic Development Corporation, wants to ensure the business community is educated about each of these issues and their potential impact to business.

Click here to review a Power Point presentation opposing the labor-backed Amendments 53, 55, 56 and 57.

Read on to find out the positions the NCLA and the three chamber and NCEDC Boards of Directors have taken on business-related issues certified for the ballot and the reasons for those positions. Links to the state's Blue Book analysis of each measure are included. The three chambers and the NCEDC have ratified the NCLA's positions on Amendments 52, 53, and 55-57. The remaining issues have been ratified by the NCEDC Board but not the chamber Boards, unless noted otherwise. Look for more details and how to get involved and ensure your voice is heard in coming e-mail alerts. You can also visit www.NCLAonline.org to learn more.

Amendment 47: Right to Work - NCLA Support
Prohibits forcing employees to join a union or pay related fees or dues. It applies to new contracts and renewals of current contracts. The NCLA has taken a position to support Amendment 47. It should be any employee's right to choose whether or not to belong to a union and pay union dues. The passage of Amendment 47 will also portray Colorado as a business-friendly state and help attract and retain valuable primary employers in Colorado.

Amendment 49: Limit Deductions from Public Employee Paychecks - NCLA Support (not yet ratified by chambers)
Prevents state and local governments from deducting certain items, including union dues, from employee paychecks. The measure puts the burden for collecting union and other dues from public employees back onto the individual organizations and remove the taxpayer from the position of bookkeeper for these groups.

Quite simply, it is unethical for government to be the banker, accountant, and collection agent for political special interests. Government should be using our tax dollars, and our civil servants' time, to provide crucial public services, not to funnel money to political organizations. Without Amendment 49, thousands more government employees will have their union dues collected, accounted and delivered at taxpayer expense. There is no reason why political contributions and organizations dues should go through the people's payroll system at taxpayer expense. Go to www.ethicalstandardsnow.com for more information.

Amendment 50: Limited Gaming in Central City, Black Hawk, and Cripple Creek - NCLA Neutral (not yet ratified by chambers)
Allows voters in cities with legalized gambling to extend the hours of limited gaming operations. They could also choose to add roulette and/or craps and increase the maximum bet from $5 up to $100. About 22% of the additional state revenue from the bet limit hike would be given to the limited gaming cities and 78% would go to financial aid for students attending community colleges. The NCLA (Northern Colorado Legislative Alliance) voted to stay neutral on Amendment 50 because, while it supports improved funding education for higher education, it is concerned with the measure's reliance on gamblers to fund one of the state's most valuable resources.

Amendment 52: Severance Tax - Transportation - NCLA Support
Creates the Colorado Transportation Trust Fund to generate $90 million in new transportation dollars annually. Amendment 52 would secure excess revenue being generated from the severance tax applied to oil and gas companies. The I-70 corridor would receive funding priority for the first decade. Although Amendment 52 falls short of funding the estimated annual $1.5 billion transportation shortfall, the NCLA supports Amendment 52 because it begins to address the need in providing a dedicated source of funding to maintain and expand Colorado's ailing transportation infrastructure. Amendment 52 uses revenues collected under the existing severance tax structure (money that would otherwise flow to the Department of Natural Resources) to provide an infusion of several hundred million dollars over the next decade to tackle traffic congestion along our roads, giving priority to the massive needs along the I-70 corridor. It will allow the Department of Natural Resources budget to grow only as fast as inflation, spilling surplus revenues into critical road and bridge needs. This is no new tax and no new toll fees. According to State Representative Cory Gardner, this is a constitutional amendment that protects this funding from being used for other pet projects. Amendment 52 will trump #58 if they both pass, as to where the money is allocated. Go to www.betterroadsnow.com for more information.

Amendment 53: Criminal Accountability of Business Executives - NCLA Oppose
Extends criminal liability to any executive official of a company for a knowing omission to discharge a specific duty of affirmative performance on the business entity by law. Plaintiffs would not be required to have legal standing, such as a stockholder or vendor, and successful plaintiffs could recover attorney fees while successful defendants could not. The NCLA opposes Amendment 53 because it will likely discourage businesses from moving to or expanding in Colorado and could discourage service on nonprofit boards for fear of prosecution. Its passage will also require businesses to purchase additional insurance products. Furthermore, the NCLA believes 53is unnecessary because executives are already held responsible for illegal actions under Colorado law. This amendment includes non-profit organizations and HOA (Home Owners Associations).

Amendment 55: Allowable Reasons for Employee Discharge or Suspension - NCLA Oppose
Amends the Colorado Constitution to prohibit businesses with 20 or more employees from discharging a full-time employee without "just cause", doing away with Colorado's at will employment system. Courts would be allowed to award reinstatement, damages and back wages, and layoffs would be restricted. The measure also prevents employers from drawing up contracts that define causes for termination. The NCLA opposes Amendment 55 because it restricts business' freedom to contract and will have a chilling effect upon Colorado's economy. Businesses need the ability to adjust their workforces as they see fit. Additionally, employees may suffer as businesses move away from full-time employees to part-time or contract workers to avoid the amendment.

Amendment 56: Employer Responsibility for Health Insurance - NCLA Oppose
Requires every employer with 20 or more employees, including part-time employees, in the state to provide major medical health care coverage for its employees and their dependents or pay into the Health Care Insurance Authority created by the measure. Employers would be responsible for 80% of their employee's premium and 70% of their dependents' coverage. The NCLA opposes Amendment 56 because it dramatically raises costs for employers by forcing them to provide a voluntary benefit to employees. Amendment 56 will have a chilling effect upon the Colorado economy by discouraging expansion, relocation and retention of business in the state. Indirectly, businesses will also be forced to consider raising prices, reducing workforces, decreasing salaries or other benefits, and not hiring applicants with families.

Amendment 57: Additional Remedies for an Unsafe Workplace - NCLA Oppose
Allows for civil lawsuits against companies for on-the-job injuries outside of the workers' compensation system. Employees could sue for compensatory and punitive damages, pain and suffering, emotional distress, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, and other losses. The NCLA opposes Amendment 57 because it believes the current workers' compensation system fairly balances the rights and needs of employers and employees. Allowing workers to sue for additional benefits will lead to additional litigation, increased prices, reduced benefits and wages, and the loss of businesses and jobs in Colorado. I believe it will double the amount of litigation and premium costs.

Amendment 58: Severance Taxes on the Oil and Natural Gas Industry - NCLA Oppose
Raises about $321 million a year by doing away with an ad valorem property tax credit currently given to the oil and gas industry. Most of the new funds would be used for college scholarships for low-income Coloradans, but wildlife, clean energy, water, transportation projects in affected areas, and a permanent trust fund would also receive some of the dollars. The NCLA opposes Amendment 58 for a number of reasons. First, while the NCLA supports making higher education more affordable for students, it believes new funding needs to be directed to the institutions themselves to alleviate budget cuts suffered earlier this decade. Second, the NCLA believes more than doubling the state's severance tax paid by oil and gas companies will hurt one of Colorado's top industries and discourage them from production in Colorado. Finally, local governments would be greatly impacted by the removal of the property tax credit. The three chambers also oppose Amendment 58. The NCEDC (Northern Colorado Economic Development Corporation) is neutral on 58--to me it is a no-brainer to oppose it. There must be a split decision within their organization.

Referendum O: Citizen-Initiated State Laws - NCLA Support (not yet ratified by chambers)
Makes it more appealing to put statutory rather than constitutional amendments on the ballot by increasing the number of signatures required for constitutional changes and bumping up deadlines for such amendments. It also requires signatures for issues to come from all of Colorado's congressional districts and requires a public and legislator comment meeting for all proposed initiatives. Finally, to protect citizen-initiated statutory measures, changes would require a 2/3 vote of the legislature for 5 years after their passage. The NCLA supports Referendum O because it believes few issues rise to the level of constitutional amendments. Most belong in statute where they are easier to amend if tweaks are needed. The 2/3 vote requirement to make changes, however, ensures broad-based support. Requiring signatures to come from all corners or the state will help ensure issues enjoy rural and urban support. Go to www.oyescolorado.org for more information.

Amendments 53, 55, 56, 57 are referred to as the No Poison Pill movement and more information is found at www.nopoisonpills.com ...these amendments are a "no" for me.

The Pueblo Chieftain paper endorses McCain in a Democrat area

2008-09-22T09:02:00.000-06:00

This is interesting! The Chieftain is traditionally a liberal newspaper in a heavy democratic voting community.

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:
The Pueblo Chieftain Endorses John McCain

"This is a critical election. Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin are proven reformers, and they offer the better choice for the nation. That's why we wholeheartedly endorse John McCain and Sarah Palin."
-- The Pueblo Chieftain

"The Presidency"
The Pueblo [CO] Chieftain
Editorial
September 21, 2008

Two months ago political pundits of all stripes were conceding this year's presidential election to Democrat Barack Obama. His Republican rival, John McCain, was behind in fundraising and seemed to lack the "buzz" enjoyed by his opponent.

But things have changed, and now it seems that the race is too close to call. It's being called "the most interesting election" or "one of the most interesting elections" people can recall. We'll attribute that hyperbole to our short national attention spans.

What matters most are the real differences between Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain. The differences in policy and in political philosophy are chasmic - so much so that there is a clear choice: Sen. John McCain.

Sen. Obama promises all things to many people - albeit he is short on specifics - and the only way we as a nation could pay for the goodies would be substantially higher taxes. But history has shown that higher taxes are a systemic drag on the economy, while lower tax rates help grow the economy, increasing government revenues in the bargain.

Sen. McCain, on the other hand, has been steady in his call to not only maintain the most recent tax cuts but to further cut the tax burden so many Americans bear. In doing so, he's holding true to the policies of both John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan to allow the American economy to flourish.

The differences between the two candidates on national security are stark. Sen. Obama says he opposed going to war in Iraq, although it began before he was elected to the Senate, and he talks about bringing the troops home and spending a so-called peace dividend on domestic social programs.

That begs the question about the war: Are we in it to win or not?

Sen. McCain says we should win the war, and he has been an avowed supporter of the U.S. troop surge which has proved so successful. The war is not won yet, but it's turned diametrically in that direction.

To turn tail and run would give confidence to those who would try to destroy us. Sen. McCain would not do that, for he knows the primary responsibility of the national government is the defense of its citizenry.

One issue that has not received much attention in the national media but should is that of the federal judiciary. Over the past five decades, that judiciary has attempted, unfortunately with some success, to create laws that otherwise could not be passed by the elected representatives of the people.

Sen. Obama says he would nominate more such activist judges - judges who can serve their terms throughout the remainder of their lives. We're talking about the potential to take this country hard to the left, without general consensus of the governed.

Sen. McCain says he would nominate judicial candidates who hew to the concept that Congress makes the laws and the judiciary rules on their constitutionality. After all, that division of powers is what the Constitution says in black and white.

We've had some differences with Sen. McCain, notably the campaign finance "reform" legislation he co-sponsored with Sen. Russ Feingold. That law has led to unintended consequences of spreading campaign cash to organizations that face no accountability.

But at the core, John McCain holds to the conviction that Americans must not be shackled with high taxes, that this country and its personal freedoms are worth defending to the hilt, and that our courts should not be the playgrounds of those of a mind to experiment with their own notions of law and policy.

A few words about the vice presidential nominees. Sen. Obama and his running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, share in common two of the most liberal, often left-leaning, records in the Senate. They are, to borrow a phrase used by Democrats in previous elections, out of the American mainstream.

Sen. McCain's running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, brings a fresh voice to the table. Despite the liberal attempts to demean her, she's tough and up to any challenge that might come her way.

This is a critical election. Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin are proven reformers, and they offer the better choice for the nation. That's why we wholeheartedly endorse John McCain and Sarah Palin.

Read The Editorial

###

Ben Lujan, NM Speaker of the House on the right

2008-09-21T21:18:00.000-06:00

Carlos Gutierrez, U.S. Sec. Of Commerce

2008-09-21T21:10:00.000-06:00

2008-09-21T14:23:00.000-06:00

2008-09-21T14:19:00.000-06:00

2008-09-21T14:17:00.000-06:00

2008-09-21T14:11:00.000-06:00

Mayor photos

2008-09-21T14:08:00.000-06:00

McCain and Obama tax plans--a big difference

2008-09-21T13:34:00.001-06:00

The Difference between McCain and Obama on Taxes

Think there is no difference between the candidates? Here is Tax Data, with references, all US voters SHOULD be required to read, and understand.

==========================================================================
Proposed changes in taxes after the 2008 General election:
==========================================================================
CAPITAL GAINS TAX
MCCAIN 0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples).
McCain does not propose any change in existing home sales income tax.

OBAMA 28% on profit from ALL home sales

How does this affect you? If you sell your home and make a profit, you will pay 28% of your gain on taxes. If you are heading toward retirement and would like to down-size your home or move into a retirement community, 28% of the money you make from your home will go to taxes. This proposal will adversely affect the elderly who are counting on the income from their homes as part of their retirement income.
==========================================================================
DIVIDEND TAX
MCCAIN 15% (no change)
OBAMA 39.6%
How will this affect you? If you have any money invested in stock market, IRA, mutual funds, college funds, life insurance, retirement accounts, or anything that pays or reinvests dividends, you will now be paying nearly 40% of the money earned on taxes if Obama becomes president. The experts predict that 'Higher tax rates on dividends and capital gains would crash the stock market, yet do absolutely nothing to cut the deficit.'
==========================================================================
INCOME TAX
MCCAIN (no changes)
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $31,250

OBAMA (reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 125K - tax $38,750
Under Obama, your taxes could almost double!
==========================================================================
INHERITANCE TAX
MCCAIN 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)
OBAMA Restore the inheritance tax
Many families have lost businesses, farms, ranches, and homes that have been in their families for generations because they could not afford the inheritance tax. Those willing their assets to loved ones will only lose them to these taxes.
==========================================================================
NEW TAXES PROPOSED BY OBAMA
New government taxes proposed on homes that are more than 2400 square feet.
New gasoline taxes (as if gas weren't high enough already)
New taxes on natural resources consumption (heating gas, water, electricity)
New taxes on retirement accounts, and last but not least....
New taxes to pay for socialized medicine so we can receive the same level of medical care as other third-world countries!!!
==========================================================================
You can verify a lot of the above at the following web sites:
http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/election/2008/index.html
http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/election/2008/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.taxes.html

http://elections.foxnews.com/?s=proposed+taxes
http://bulletin.aarp.org/yourworld/politics/articles/mccain_obama_offer_different_visions_on_taxes.html
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/candidates/barack_obama/
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/candidates/john_mccain/

Adam Vartanyan writes about his views on Obama

2008-09-21T13:22:00.001-06:00

I thought you might find this person's comments interesting and factual..

Guest Writer Adam Vartanyan-- views on Obama

Adam Vartanyan is a Financial Advisor in Denver, Colorado. He occasionally writes as a guest columnist. Today's views are on the Presidential election about Barack Obama.

On Taxes:

Let me pose a question...it has been touted in the media and proclaimed by the Democratic Party that 95% of Americans will receive a reduction for income taxes that they pay under Obama's plan. Fact: 41% of Americans who filed income tax returns in 2006 did not have any tax liability and a good majority received money back over and above what they had withheld over the year. Now, tell me, how in the world 95% of people in America will receive a reduction in the amount they pay in taxes when 41% of them don't pay any income taxes at all?

Maybe this needs to be broken down and simplified for most people. So let's look at an explanation of how our tax system works in the United States. Read the explanation below. I love the Beer analogy.

Our Tax System Explained in Beer!

By: David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D. Professor of Economics University of Georgia
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. 'Drinks for the ten now cost just $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink free.
But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings). The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings). The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings). The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings). The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 ( 22% savings). The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free.
But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. 'I only got a dollar out of the $20,' declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10! ''Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I did!

''That's true!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks! ''Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor! 'The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works.
The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore.

By: David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D. Professor of Economics University of Georgia
People are going to complain all day long. That's the beauty of America--they have that right. They'll complain about how the wealthy are receiving tax breaks while completely forgetting about the fact that they never paid any money in the first place. So please...do not get caught up in the hype. Think through things rationally and logically and I know you'll be able to see through the smoke and mirrors.

I heard Biden on the news say on 9/19/08 that paying taxes is our patriotic duty. What?

On Experience

I absolutely love the new debate of who has more experience, Sarah Palin or Barack Obama. This is the softball of all softballs in my opinion. Let's look at Barack's Experience

I didn't say it...they did. As I watched almost every presentation at the DNC, I was amazed at how many times the speakers attempted to pad Obama's resume by talking about his work as a community organizer. To quote Wikipedia, Community organizing is a process by which people living in proximity to each other, are brought together to act in their common self-interest. Community organizers act as area-wide coordinators of programs for different agencies in an attempt to meet community needs for various services". This is the ultimate, "you have got to be kidding me". My Fraternity at CSU fulfills this definition year in and year out in Northern Colorado. It is no wonder why the RNC attacked the "community organizer" bit. Don't get me wrong; I think organizing communities around a cause you are passionate about is great. MLK worked as a community organizer along with Gandhi, Susan B. Anthony and many others, but when did that become a stepping-stone to the highest office in the land? If I were a campaign operative for the Obama campaign, I would be forced to talk about his "community organizing" experience because there is not much else to elaborate about. While a State Senator in Illinois, Over 130 times, this person voted "present" on major legislation. That's right...present! Don't be fooled, the vote "present" serves only one purpose, preserving a clean record. That is not leadership. What about Barack as a US Senator? Well, he got a full two years in before he announced his candidacy for leader of the free world. Can anyone tell me what major legislation he passed in those two years that qualifies him for commander in chief? Further, Obama has become so desperate to build his resume that he has resorted to citing his own presidential campaign as an indication of his executive experience.

Oh, I forgot to mention, that while in Chicago, Obama co-found the Woods Fund of Chicago with convicted terrorist Bill Ayers. A point worth noting...he sat on this board working alongside Ayers for over nine years. A far cry from attempting to distance himself from Ayers by saying "I was only 8 years old" when those attacks took place. Further, in 1995 Ayers hosted a "meet the candidate" dinner at his home for Barack and Michelle Obama. Do yourself a favor and research Ayers, who as recent as this month, September 2008, is on record stating that he is unrepentant of his WTC Bombings and wished they did more!

His background and experience is worth questioning...But hey, he can read Teleprompters pretty well, and he also looks powerful standing between Styrofoam Greek columns. Let's make him president!

When you begin to compare Obama to McCain on experience it is clear Obama is wet behind the ears. That is why the left will shift the comparison to Obama vs. Palin, attempting to frame Palin as more inexperienced than Barack...right? Wrong.
How about a comparison...
She has been a Mayor, he hasn't.
She has been a Governor, he hasn't
She has been in charge of a National Guard, he hasn't
She has stood up against her own party and reached across the isle, he hasn't.
She has made tough decisions...EXECUTIVE decisions, he votes "present".
She has run a business, he hasn't
She has an approval rating of 80% and is the most popular Governor in America.

Be careful how you diminish Palin's experience as Mayor. I know first hand the responsibility and executive decisions that fall to a Mayor and it should not to be taken lightly. In addition, she has run a small business. I know here in Colorado 80% of the businesses in the state are considered small business. The fact that she knows and understands the small business owner through her first hand EXPERIENCE is comforting to me.

I'm tired of the Harvard education argument. We all know that there is no substitute for experience. The choice is between two candidates, one who has learned in a classroom and the other who has been tried and tested on the battlefield and as a public servant decade after decade. I don't know about you, but the choice is clear to me.

On Immigration:

McCain has attempted to pass comprehensive immigration reform. You can reference the McCain-Kennedy bill put forth last year. This bill had pros and cons associated with it, however, it proves McCain can get things done and can reach across the isle to move our country forward. What has Barack done, other than encouraging drivers' licenses be given to illegal immigrants? By the way, Biden voted against granting illegal immigrants drivers' licenses in 2007 along with supporting the Bush Plan to build a fence and grant a path to citizenship. I'll hand it to Biden; at least he has a record of making decisions on challenging issues.

On Change:

Both candidates are proposing change, and there is no doubt that change is needed. Keep in mind change is a path, not a destination. So are we talking about change for the better or change for the worse? In a campaign filled with words on both sides, we must look to actions and past decisions. When I look into the past of McCain and Palin, I see a culture and history going against the grain and changing things for the better. What has Barack changed? Show me actions/decisions in his past where he has reformed policy. Now the left will push the fact that McCain voted 95% of the time with Bush. There is one main problem with that argument...are we to assume that everything Bush has done is wrong...of course not. Additionally, I challenge you to examine the voting record of Biden and determine what percentage of the time he aligned with Bush. After all, Biden was the chair of the Senate Foreign policy committee where he actively supported the decision to go to war along with the President.

On Foreign Policy:

McCain vs. Obama...Let us think about this for a minute...Come on we all know the answer to that. Obama managed to take a Public Relations tour to Iraq and Europe and we're going to put that in his foreign policy experience column. Ha. Just ask the soldiers that Obama snubbed because they interfered with his PR fiasco. At least we know that Obama would rather communicate to 200,000 screaming Germans or go to the gym to shoot some hoops instead of taking the time to visit with our wounded troops. Men and women, by the way, who are fighting for our freedom, included in which is his freedom to run for president. I can go further, look at Obama's flip flopping on the Russia/Georgia conflict. In addition, his ridiculously changing views on the Israeli Palestinian conflict, which is not pro-Israel. Maybe this has something to do with his relationship to Louis Farrakhan...I'm not sure but I hope not. How about the fact that Barack is willing to meet with the terrorist leaders without pre-conditions--that is odd. With the ever-changing global landscape and move to increased globalization and interconnectedness, I am sure of one thing...The last person I want running around the global community representing America is Barack Obama.