The post was aimed at Jodi.  I've noticed through this entire thread, she points out and basically does a "shame on you" comment about every single slight against Obama, by an non-Obama supporter, no matter how insignificant.  But, when Obama supporters do the same kinds of slights against McCain, she is strangely silent.  Most of the supporters on here, from both sides, call out bad behavior and tactics regardless of whether or not it's aimed at their candidate or the opposing candidate.  Not Jodi.  Her extremely vocal outcries when the slight is against Obama and her odd silence when it's not, shows her approval of the tactics as long as they aren't against her candidate.  That shows what kind of a person she is despite the facade she attempts to display.

*******

I knew your post was aimed at Jodi, But I really do feel that if an Obama supporter did the same thing she would say it was hateful. Hell, I realize I'm extremely partisan but I can see that the Palin effigy was hateful. But I was responding directly to you calling her out for not seeing the hatred in the radio station prank. I don't see the hatred either. Stupidity yes, hatred no. However what that woman did to young children was just wrong. And hateful. I may not like McCain or Palin but I would never do something like that.

Thinking about it, I wondered why I get so fired up about politics. And then it hit me. The area I live in is extremely conservative. And not the good kind like Bruce and a few other Republicans on this board. They're the Bible thumping kind that give their party a bad name. I'm constantly bombarded with NRA materials, anti-gay and anti-abortion propaganda and downright hatred form many of them.

I could not even begin to tell you how many times I have heard Obama referred to as a nigger. When Murtha said that parts of Pennsylvania were racist he was dead on. It sickens me. And god forbid you tell them you support gay marriage. I'm very vocal about my beliefs. but putting up with some of the ignorance I see every day is hard. You can only spend so much time arguing with buffoons.

I think that causes me to paint all Republicans with too a broad stroke that many of them don't deserve. So to any of you on this board I have done this too, I apologize. It wasn't intentional. I let my passion get the better of me.

One President since the 80's was fiscally responsible, and he was a Democrat.  Time for another. 

**************

Two points:

1. I wouldn't lump Ronald Reagan in with that crowd. The nation's economy was far better off when Reagan left office in 1989 than it was when he was elected in 1980. The two Bushes? Well, I'm afraid I can't offer a defense there. No doubt the economy declined under their administrations.

2. You are absolutely right that the economy fared very well under Bill Clinton. But Clinton was a different type of Democrat than Obama - Clinton was much more of a pro-business centrist. Can Obama improve the economy? That remains to be seen, but his approach will be different from Clinton's.

But in my passion I have painted people like Bruce with the same brush as Palin and that he didn't deserve.

************

That's mighty kind of you, William. However, I don't remember any slights from you, so I certainly wasn't offended by anything you might have said.

Win or lose (and it looks like my ticket is going to take a pounding tomorrow), we should remember that we're all Americans and we're all on the same team, so to speak.  

 The great Reagan Presidency left a huge deficit, the terrific Bush the 1st Presidency the same thing, and Bush baby the worst of the lot.  One President since the 80's was fiscally responsible, and he was a Democrat.  Time for another. 

Mark:

In fairness to Reagan and Bush the Elder both raised taxes when it was the fiscally responsible thing to do.  Indeed, even Clinton has acknowleged that the Bush Tax increase (which helped cost Bush the 1992 election) was the first steps toward reducing the deficit.  Thats not taking anything away from Clinton, who was a very effective president, but I think sometimes that fiscal responsibility on the part of Reagan and Bush is forgotten by not only Democrats but Republicans as well.  Cutting taxes, keeping all programs and starting a war is not fiscall responsibility.  Dubya was not only a poor president, he was a poor republican (at least in the way we remember "traditional" republican conservatism, separate and apart from the insidious "social conservatism" that has infected the party).