10/24/2008 8:19:31 AM #

Well let me ask you a question Michael, how can you morally vote for Senator McCain? He KILLED people! He killed innocent people to protect his country! All these poor innocent victims were doing were shooting at him and torturing him.

Thats the answer you will get Michael, because when liberals are backed into a corner, it doesn't matter to them what they say, they just say it.

Adam

10/24/2008 9:55:39 AM #

AMEN. In view of the current Obama craze, it is appears this is a time in history when Americans' craving for a savior has clouded their better judgment. Allowing themselves to be romanced by a packaged candidate who presents himself to support their elevated political/social American born ideology, yet blatantly defies it in his relationships with anit american mentors, associations and their activities is niave, irresponsible and desperate. It is sad and disturbing that this guy could hold the highest office in our country.

Rev Wright did not mind accepting $150 million dollars from "God Damn America" for the good works of his church. Bill Ayers did not mind bombing the pentagon to protest violence in Viet Nam, or recreating his affluent american life after his criminality. Refusing grants for math and sciene for american youths and spending it on programs that will not help develop their skills to advance their futures is an abomination. These associates of Obamas are vile hypocrits and defy American principles.

Kathy

10/24/2008 10:31:04 AM #

Oh the truth of it all! I'm a married, 36 year old caucasian female in the second highest tax bracket, and am definitely voting against Obama. I have regular "discussions" with a friend of mine who is a 22 year old student and of course an Obama supporter.

Her mantra never changes. "Bush and his cabinet are SOLELY responsible for everything that has happened over the last 4 years." When I ask her if she is aware of two little groups of people we call the House and the Senate, she says yes, but Bush made them vote that way!

When it comes to the topic of the economy, she is convinced that the only way for the US to get out of this economic situation is to increase taxes on the wealthy. She is totally for spreading the wealth around. She acknowledges the pure "socialism" of it all and says if I don't like it I should move!!!! All this coming from someone who is still 22 and has not earned an income for herself yet, hence has personally paid no taxes.

When facts and statistics are thrown her way, they are completely ignored. She says there are no hard facts, no black and white, and that everything is perception and opinion. So holy news flash Micheal...apparently there is no such thing as facts!

It's almost as if these Obama supporters are zombies out of a bad "B" rated movie, who have the mantra down and no brains left whatsoever. God help us all!

Dawn

10/24/2008 12:47:03 PM #

Obama would never have reached this point without the breathless assistance of his media lackeys. He's a smooth salesman. He reveals more about himself in the rare faux pas than he does in a dozen speeches. Honestly however, we owe the death of the America we knew to the Republicans and not the Democrats. The Republicans had the House, Senate and Presidency. They could have packed the Supreme Ct and lower federal courts with Constitutional judges. They could have sliced takes, fixed the excess of Gay marriage and uncontrolled abortion exptremes. Instead they decided to get even for decades of Democratic greed and corruption by getting theirs too. Now the pendulum has swung. The average man and woman is a mindless dolt. Addled by years of public school neglect and social engineering, they are incapable of independent thought. They rely on Oprah and Olbermann to "inform" them. With no real education or inclination to educate themselves, most "citizens" are sheep to be led one way or the other. Obama is now the shepherd. I'm hardly a biblical scholar, but I recall that somewhere therein Jesus warns us to "Beware false prophets". If Obama is not a false prophet he is at least the Judas goat leading us to slaughter. God Bless American and God save us all!

Ric

10/24/2008 1:05:45 PM #

The Obama campaign called my home a few weeks ago. The caller wanted to know if I had any questions about Obama that he could answer. So I asked him to give me one good reason to like Obama, just one. He then went into the campaign talking points (to be expected). So I stopped him and said I had heard all the campaign retoric and that I wanted one good reason to like the guy. He couldn't give me anything. He agreed with me that Obama has no experience on things like foreign policy and the economy. He agreed with me that Obama has a lot of shady connections. He agreed with me that Obama was constantly shifting his position on issues. Yet, he supported the man and said he would be a good leader and an advocate of change.

I hung up the phone while shaking my head in confusion.

A few days later the McCain campaign called. It was the same type of call. Yet the difference was that the McCain volunteer worked beyond the talking points of the campaign and told me why he personally felt McCain would be a better President than Obama. I didn't feel like someone was talking down to me. I felt like I was talking to someone generally interested in my concerns and questions.

I'm still not a McCain fan. But weighing the Obama option and all the baggage that comes with is is pushing me into the McCain camp.

Mac

10/24/2008 3:25:30 PM #

The newest argument I'm hearing is that McCain doesn't care about the poor. This is coming mostly from liberal Christians that are intent on believing that Jesus was a socialist. Some people have yet to get the memo that throwing more money at a problem does not make it go away.

Kristen

10/24/2008 3:53:44 PM #

I'll try this again (i.e. adding my looney liberal literary libations (try saying that fast 5 times)) to the partisan pool on your page.

Just because we don't agree with your standards... just because our priorities aren't in line with yours... just because we disagree on "the natural truth" and what really constitutes facts... none of that means that we have no standards. It means that we don't agree with your logic (or illogic, depending how harsh we choose to view your mode of thinking).

Take for instance your notion that Trinity United is a "racist" church and that Reverend Wright is a looney racist. Many of us may agree that he's pushed the envelope on several issues and at several times, but to call his church racist...

Let me define racist for you Mike (and Jay and Michelle, since you all seem to like to make up your own definitions):

# a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others
# discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion
# Racism has many definitions, the most common and widely accepted being that members of one race consider themselves intrinsically superior to members of other races.

Here's another:

1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

These are all off of the web, but I'm sure you'd find something similar in a written dictionary.

You all seem to think that racism is "the belief that 'race matters'." That's not racism... to some that may be reality; to others that may be of no consequence to them. But it's not racism.

Regardless, at what point in time did Rev. Wright, Trinity United, or Barack Obama display any notion that the Black race was superior to another race and thus able to discriminate or prejudice based on it. I don't believe you can't answer that question. And I'm quite sure that if you tried, it could be easily refuted. But I leave open the invite for you to do so. Don't just call them racist, but lay out your thinking and proof please.

So, given we don't think Wright or Trinity are connected to racism, that's one less argument that we'd have against Senator Obama.

Now you all talk about the "experience" of McCain and think people who support Obama have discounted that. We haven't. But what we realize is that *judgment* is much more important, in this day and age, that routine experience. We are about to eclipse what I believe Jay Severin has argued is the worst Presidential reign in American history. President Bush (43) was Governor of one of the largest and most complex states in the U.S. His father was President of the U.S. He served as a business executive. And all of that experience has placed us in a position of decreased homeland security, burgeoning military budgets for an unjust, unwarranted war (I'm with Jay on the issue of Iraq), the inability to fight and defend ourselves where it really matters (Afghanistan and Iran), and the worst financial crisis since the Depression. Bill Clinton (arguably one of America's most popular and respected Presidents - Lewinsky scandal notwithstanding), had tons of Gubernatorial experience prior to his election as President and he still made poor judgment decisions (i.e. not intervening in Rwanda). Experience is just a surrogate for the determination that someone should have the ability to make adequate judgment calls given the time they've spent doing whatever they do. Experience is the epidermis to the dermis of judgment -- experience sits on top of judgment. So if you have someone who has adequate and appropriate judgment, experience isn't a factor.

On the issue of judgment, and regarding the issue that you present as most important to you (the protection of your children as it relates to the U.S.'s homeland security), we, the Obama supporters, have two McCain judgment calls that we question sincerely. 1. His choice and decision to support President Bush in going into Iraq in the first place; something he still hasn't said was a bad decision, in spite of the evidence (and I know you and I disagree here)... and 2. His choice of Sarah Palin as a "heartbeat away from the Presidency". If you are afraid of what the world would do to us in an Obama administration, can you seriously think it would be any worse than in a Palin administration???

Now that I've eliminated (at least for my personal comfort) two the arguments you all have against him, I'll lay out in bullet form, my reasons (and I'm sure others would agree):

* Fundamental good judgment
* The understanding that correct answers don't necessarily lie on the Left side of the aisle -- some conservative ideas are better and often times a compromise between the two ideologies is warranted.
* Understanding that being a bully in the world only gets you so far (i.e. do you want to be feared or respected). Obama believes we need to be both. Bush and McCain think flexing our military girth will get us everything we need and that's not proven the case in recent history.
* His concern for the middle class and belief that as the middle class goes, so goes the U.S. Trickle down economics has just lead us to an even larger gap between the haves and have nots. Funneling the tax cuts to the richest has not proven to help those in the middle or at the bottom. I believe it's about time we see how it works when you give the greatest benefit to the middle.
* His energy policy is more suited to freeing us from our handjobbing of the Middle East. Everything, including Nuclear, is on the table, as long as it is safe and does not put us in a worse position generations from now.
* Most important to me is not a policy choice, but his willingness to let go of doctrinal thought and do what's right. McCain, USED to be that person. He used to be a maverick. That's why he used to oppose the tax cuts he's pushing when they were proposed by President Bush. The problem with McCain is that he's transformed his ideology while running on a vastly differing historical record.

I'm Black and not voting for Barack Obama because he's Black. If OJ Simpson were running for President, or Alan Keys, or Alicia Keys (lol) I wouldn't vote for them because they are Black. Many of us didn't support Al Sharpton when he was running for President, so to make the ridiculous assertion that we are voting on race at all, or race alone, is completely laughable. Especially when arguably every black has, at one point in time, voted for a White man (or woman) and there are a significant number of Whites who don't like McCain but are voting AGAINST Obama, not because they disagree with him, but because they're not comfortable having a black man hold that office.

jw.

Jonathan S. White

10/24/2008 4:33:58 PM #

Michael you bring up an excellent point. However I think we are dealing with an unusual beast this time.

Youth. They don't care about the questions you have raised. That is not relevant to them - and since Obama can pour millions into capturing their vote, we have a big problem.

I wrote a piece about this:
http://rkdpolitics.blogspot.com/

Arkady

10/24/2008 5:59:39 PM #

If he can improve our economy, make it so more people can actually afford health-care, wean us of our dependency on foreign oil, or even just undo a bit of the damage Bush did over the past eight years (which McCain wants to increase), then who cares if he's racist? He can be as racist as he wants to be, he can run around screaming "Black Power" or whatever, as long as the situation here in the U.S. improves, I just don't care.

On the other hand, how can someone morally defend voting for McCain? McCain refuses to leave Iraq until we "win," which, depending on who you listen to, can either never be accomplished or has already been accomplished several years ago. Do you really want to spend countless tax dollars and American soldiers' lives on a war which never should have begun in the first place? And what about our financial crisis? McCain's idea of doing something about it is giving tax breaks to the rich and waiting for the market to repair itself. Yeah, that's what we need... a president who will turn his back on the important issues. And what about our children? What's he going to do for them? Give them abstinence-only sex education, which only produces MORE teen pregnancies, rather than less?

Actually, forget about all that for a moment... let's look at a worst-case scenario. What if we vote in McCain, and he kicks the bucket? Suddenly, we're stuck with Palin. She has even less experience that Obama does. As least Obama's running mate has actual foreign policy experience.

Personally, I wish a third-party candidate had a good chance of winning. I'm not a big fan of either Obama or McCain.

Derek

10/24/2008 8:52:17 PM #

I never thought I would see the day when some incompetent could shout the word "change" and have so many sheep flock to follow him. Why? That one word - CHANGE.

I have yet to hear an Obama supporter give me any compelling argument for voting for him - if you ask, they can't tell you one beyond the word CHANGE.

We already have an incompetent man in office? After eight years, do we need another?

Mike James

10/25/2008 5:42:53 AM #

The two questions no McCain supporter can answer:

Where did the real John McCain go, and who is this man formed by the GOP in their own image who is barely a shadow of his former self?

Being such a self proclaimed Patriot why can't I support Obama when he ends up being a good President for the people instead of undermining him because he is not Republican?

Please people read at least 10 news outlets a day, representing all angles, and then see who is really for the people. We are all exposed to shady people almost daily but that doesn't mean we agree with everything they do, and that is why all these trumped up unimportant charges against Obama are not sticking.

It's has been sad in the last 8 years to see our country be taken such advantage of, leaving us to try and get back on track as a world leader after such a bad turn in our history.

gummbie

10/25/2008 7:46:21 AM #

Mac

Your call experience is the essence of the difference between the two stark choices. If you are still not convinced, we are in real trouble.

MS

10/25/2008 3:36:27 PM #

Michael, after the financial crisis, the mismanagement of Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina and the national budget, I have two questions for you. Is there anything that could happen during a Republican administration that you would not defend? Would you vote for Bush against Obama if he was allowed to run for a third term?

Neal

10/25/2008 11:14:32 PM #

Michael,

When combating enemies who do not attack us on a open field or enemies who have a single weapon that can annihilate whole cities we can no longer use the old approaches. Do you want a guy who throws troops and arms at everything or someone who can diplomatically prevent the attack.

"The American Way of war" by Eugene Jarecki will explain the fear of neo-cons for us. You will bankrupt us in an attempt for perfect security.

The question I ask you is what candidate is less likely to get the call at 3AM for his ability to diplomatically avoid conflicts?

Troy

10/26/2008 5:44:58 AM #

Neal, have you even listened to the Michael Graham Show? He's voting for the more moderate liberal Democrat in this particular race... McCain. He won't vote for someone that listened to anti-American, anti-semetic spew for 20 years without getting up and leaving so I'm guessing the answer would be "Bush in 08, he's Mike's candidate!"

Dave B

10/26/2008 5:49:43 AM #

I would like to address the question: "Who would you want to answer the phone at 3:00 AM?" I say vote for McCain/Palin. Sarah will be up feeding the baby anyway and chances are McCain will be up trying to pee for the tenth time that night.

Dave B

10/26/2008 10:22:55 AM #

Michael,
Thanks for answering Jonathan's lunatic post....because I was going to but it would have taken more than 1000 words to do it - but you did it! Jonathan is the typical koolaid follower of obama who can't see the racism of Rev. Wright, Black Theology, Obama's pledge for 20 years to same...
By the way, here's another anti semetic story about Obama - a video that the media has refused to release:
gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/.../...o-of-barack.html

Marcia

10/26/2008 5:16:14 PM #

Michael,

If God existed, He knew how I like your show and that I listen to it every morning although only for half an hour since this is how much time I spend in a car on my way to work. I also supported McCain right before he chose Palin as his running mate. I no no longer care who wins. Anyway, the answer to your question is very simple.

Its premise is a lie.

It's a lie that Barack Obama went every Sunday to listen to racist anti-semitic rants. Sermons were taped and of the 2 years we have 30 seconds of unquestionably very rough stuff. It's obvious that nothing else Rev. Wright said was remotely as crimina, or else it would have been found and demonstrated by every conservative news source.

I think you presented these stats yourself: when black people heard those words by Wright, their support for Obama went up. Which obviously tells you that we have a problem with what I will call for lack of a better word "the black culture". Any poitically active black person has likely been around people of that sort. (Spare me "OMFG, you're a racist!!1" The stats are what they are.

The question is: has Obama picked racism and anti-Americanism from people like Wright or did he not? The answer is obviously, he did not. He has absolutely nothing to do with "black racism" or "anti-Americanism". There's nothing in his behavior that even could be attributable exclusively to the blacks. He really transcends the race.

Ultimately this is why the Republicans are losing this election. OK, I will not speak for the entire nation. This is why they are losing me. Obama is wrong on every issue that has to do with economy. This is what the debate should be about. Instead people like Jay Severin are claiming we're in danger from a black racist bent on defeating the US from within.

Well, I have evaluated Barack Obama and your charges. I have come to the conclusion that you are liars. If this is your central and most fundamental argument in the campaign, as you yourself claim it is, I think you should lose the election.

Oleg

10/26/2008 11:06:51 PM #

I bet I can name more Republican's endorsing Obama than Republicans endorsing McCain. Take Bill Weld for example. He endorses Obama.

Former Massachusetts Gov. William Weld, a Republican, endorsed Democrat Barack Obama for president on Friday, citing the senator's good judgment, "deep sense of calm" and "first-class political temperament."

And Former Minnesota Gov Arne Carlson...

Arne Carlson, a former Republican governor in Minnesota, has endorsed Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

Carlson said Thursday that the Illinois senator's stances on the Iraq war, the economy and green energy goals won him over. Carlson, who served from 1991 to 1998, also cited recent comments by GOP Congresswoman Michele Bachmann questioning whether politicians have "pro-America or anti-America views."

Neil Sagan

10/27/2008 8:45:54 AM #

BRAVO MICHAEL BRAVO
And it wont make a lick of difference He WILL be our president

Regina

10/27/2008 8:47:32 AM #

Johnathan, Obviously Obama's popularity demonstrates that Americans at large are not racists. It appears that he will be our next President. My choice not to vote for Obama, and apparently the reasons most choose not to vote for Obama, has nothing to do with his race. It is a lack of comfort with his tax plans and his radical associations, which he has lied about. (for example, the Ayers connection, where Obama and Ayers together refused math and science grants for inner city youths in Illinois and blew the $80 Million on radical anti establishment programs that gave them no skills what so ever and did not better their future) Colin Powell said, when he endorsed Obama, that the most important issue for the next president is education. Hmmm. Based on Obama's irresponsible and useless spending of $80 million in support of unrepentant terrorist that he "barely knows", looks like he might not fit the bill. (no pun intended) For the record, most people i know would walk out of a church in protest of a leader who spoke destructively about America and the legal citizens whose diverse cultural background she has embraced. I would expect my President to do the same.

Kathy

10/27/2008 9:12:38 AM #

The Elect of Mammon

Obama is the better choice [unsigned _Financial Times_ editorial]
Published: October 26 2008 19:31

"Mr Obama’s purposes do seem mostly right, though in saying this we give him the benefit of the doubt. Above all, he prizes consensus and genuinely seeks to unite the country, something it wants. His call for change struck a mighty chord in a tired and demoralised nation – and who could promise real change more credibly than Mr Obama, a black man, whose very nomination was a historic advance in US politics?"

JHM

10/27/2008 9:22:41 AM #

You are correct in your attention to Rev. Wright, Michael. It is his longtime friendship and alliance with him that speaks volumes about the character of Senator Obama. First, integrity matters in a President. No sentient being can argue that he was unaware of the anti-white, anti-middle class, anti-European rantings of Wright or the teachings of Black Liberation Theology that Wright and his congregation subscribe to. When you are married and have your children baptized by the pastor of 20 years you become more, not less, attuned to the theology of that Church. In Evangelical and Pentecostal churches, the focal point is the Pastor. One does not join, stay or leave a church unless the congregant seeks him out, is spiritually satisfied with or disillusioned by the Pastor. From day one Senator Obama has lied about this relationship. Why should we believe anything else he has to say.

Paul

10/27/2008 2:54:16 PM #

My bottom line is - who would you rather vote for? A man who spent 20 years listening to his pastor and "spiritual mentor" spewing hate-filled "sermons" and whose wife claims to never having been proud of her country until just now, and who associated with an unrepentant domestic terrorist, or a man who in the service of his country, was shot down over Vietnam, captured, jailed and tortured for over 5 years, then went on to serve his country honorably in the United States Congress and then as a Senator. One who still shows the results of his years of torture by not being able to raise his arms to shoulder height.

Who has a wife involved in several humanitarian organizations and who together with her husband adopted a baby in Bangladesh from Mother Theresa, who would have surely died had she not received expert medical care.

It would appear to me the choice is clear. That's why I'm voting for John McCain.

Jennie

10/27/2008 5:36:36 PM #

Food for thought:

How many Catholics in this country practice birth control? How many Catholics in this country believe in 'an eye for an eye'? How many Catholics in this country practice 'love thy neighbor'? I've been a Catholic all of my life, I go to Church every Sunday morning. There are many things that my priest will say that I do not hold as my own conviction. Just because I've listened to it for 44 years, doesn't mean it is my belief. And to think that Obama, who everyone seems to forget or chose not to remember, was raised by his WHITE family, would denounce those who've loved and cared for him is absurd. We need to stop fueling this race fire. God forbid something happen because of it-you will all have blood on your hands.

Katie

10/27/2008 8:54:06 PM #

Sorry Oleg, you will be voting for a racist - the facts are the facts and are well documented in Obama's own words (books/videos - all available to anyone who does their research).
I am not voting for a racist - its scary that ANYBODY would

Marcia

10/28/2008 1:29:29 AM #

<blockquote>Sorry Oleg, you will be voting for a racist - the facts are the facts and are well documented in Obama's own words (books/videos - all available to anyone who does their research).
I am not voting for a racist - its scary that ANYBODY would</blockquote>

I will not be voting for Obama. However, when on Nov. 4th you start asking yourself: OMFG, how come a BLACK RACIST!!111 gets in excess of 300 electoral votes, please remember the right answer:

You . are . a . right . wing . kook .

I don't doubt that you're scared. There's medication for that. Please get well soon.

Oleg

10/28/2008 3:32:41 AM #

Katie: Obama was the one to stir up the race issue. When Hillary and her supporters didn't, he did. The same applies to McCain. He's the one that tried to become a victim to suck in the guilty white vote that Hillary was taking from him. He HAD to do it or else he would just be another far left wing smooth talking empty suit with little or no accomplishments and totally unprepared to be president. It PROTECTS him from criticism and allows surrogates to attack opposition as racism. I'm watching Sarah Palin being hanged in effigy on TV. Are 50% of the population going to riot over that?

Dave B

10/28/2008 10:14:41 AM #

Neil writes
(Arne Carlson, a former Republican governor in Minnesota, has endorsed Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama.

Carlson said Thursday that the Illinois senator's stances on the Iraq war, the economy and green energy goals won him over. Carlson, who served from 1991 to 1998, also cited recent comments by GOP Congresswoman Michele Bachmann questioning whether politicians have "pro-America or anti-America views.")

The senator's STANCES
He's had several stances on Iraq
He's had several stances on economy
He's had several stances on energy

Thats the problem!!!

Al

10/28/2008 12:16:12 PM #

I think Katie its time to find a new church. No where in the bible does it say to practice Birth control. An eye for an eye only applies to Old Testament. We our commanded to love one another as he has loved us. If my pastor was preaching hate and anti semitic remarks you can bet I would have only one visit there.If my pastor was hanging out with a terrorist (Bill ayers) I believe the word is Buh bye!

Erin

10/30/2008 6:37:43 AM #

All I really hear when I read this crap is "wah,wah,wah... I'm a sore loser!" My answer to your question is that I would MUCH rather Mr. Obama answer that phone at 3 a.m. and ask some questions, not rush to start dropping bombs and sending MY son into a war zone. HE was against the phony WMD war that the Republicans lied their way into, going along like the sheeple they are, as long as it involves bombing or shooting. Where is all this executive experience McCain supposedly has? He knows NOTHING about finances, and neither does Palin. Republicans had the Supreme Court, Congress, and the Presidency in their hands, and look what they did with it. They had their chance, proved their incompetence, and now GOD has answered our prayers.

Sharon

10/30/2008 6:41:59 AM #

Uh, Erin, you totally missed Katie's point, showing your ignorance about catholicism. She didn't say the Bible said to practice birth control. The Catholic church is against birth control because it is interfering with God's will. Before you correct someone, you should check your own facts. But thanks for proving to me your level of Republican intelligence and showing how on earth you could vote for McCain.

Sharon

11/3/2008 7:18:31 PM #

Sharon You should check your facts no where did I write whom Im voting for. So it shows your intelligence that your using valuable air to to prove Nothing. You missed my point if a church is throwing do's and dont's that arent lining up with the bible guess what find a new Church!!! God gave you a brain use it.

Erin

11/4/2008 6:08:09 AM #

This is the first time in my adult life that I am NOT proud of my country.

I no longer have a desire to work hard and earn more. I am resigned to take the govt handouts and poor quality DHS health care to survive.

Great civilizations always die of suicide.

MS