No Contest McCain won

No Contest at all really. Obama consistently falls flat on which way he should flop when his pre-written teleprompter is not allowed. Open debate requires conviction on your stances, truly understanding the subject matter and not catering it to whatever group you are talking to.
No wonder Obama is backing out of anymore open forums lol. I could have written this article. It almost feels like I did with all the emails lately.

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, August 18, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Election '08: Last weekend's McCain-Obama protodebate made it clear why Obama won't keep his promise to debate McCain "anywhere, anytime." McCain, with a robust resume and details at his fingertips, won big.

It was only in May that Sen. Barack Obama cockily proclaimed he would debate Sen. John McCain "anywhere, anytime." But in June, Obama said no to McCain's challenge to have 10 one-on-one town hall meetings.

After what happened at Lake Forest, Calif.'s evangelical Saddleback megachurch Saturday evening, we may have found that debating is Obama's Achilles' heel. Whether or not you like the idea of such events being held in religious venues, the plain-and-simple method of questioning used by Saddleback pastor and best-selling author Rick Warren revealed fundamental differences between these two men.

"It's one of those situations where the devil is in the details," Obama said at one point. He could have been referring to his own oratorical shortcomings when a teleprompter is unavailable. We learned a lot more about the real Obama at Saddleback than we will next week as he delivers his acceptance speech in Denver before a massive stadium crowd.

The stark differences between the two came through the most on the question of whether there is evil in the world. Obama spoke of evil within America, "in parents who have viciously abused their children." According to the Democrat, we can't really erase evil in the world because "that is God's task." And we have to "have some humility in how we approach the issue of confronting evil."

For McCain, with a global war on terror raging, there was no equivocating: We must "defeat" evil. If al-Qaida's placing of suicide vests on mentally-disabled women and then blowing them up by remote control in a Baghdad market isn't evil, he asked: "You have to tell me what is."

Asked to name figures he would rely on for advice, Obama gave the stock answer of family members. McCain pointed to Gen. David Petraeus, Iraq's scourge of the surge; Democratic Rep. John Lewis, who "had his skull fractured" by white racists while protesting for civil rights in the 60s; plus Internet entrepreneur Meg Whitman, the innovative former CEO of eBay.

When Warren inquired into changes of mind on big issues, Obama fretted about welfare reform; McCain unashamedly said "drilling" — for reasons of national security and economic need.

On taxes, Obama waxed political: "What I'm trying to do is create a sense of balance and fairness in our tax code." McCain showed an understanding of what drives a free economy: "I don't want to take any money from the rich. I want everybody to get rich. I don't believe in class warfare or redistribution of the wealth."

To any honest observer, the differences between John McCain and Barack Obama have been evident all along. What we saw last weekend was Obama's shallowness juxtaposed with McCain's depth, the product of his extraordinary life experience.

It may not have been a debate, but it was one of the most lopsided political contests in memory. No wonder Obama wants to keep debate formats boring and predictable.

Stop the insanity

HARROLD, TX -- A tiny Texas school district may be the first in the nation to allow teachers and staff to pack guns for protection when classes begin later this month, a newspaper reported.

Trustees at the Harrold Independent School District approved a district policy change last October so employees can carry concealed firearms to deter and protect against school shootings, provided the gun-toting teachers follow certain requirements.

In order for teachers and staff to carry a pistol, they must have a Texas license to carry a concealed handgun; must be authorized to carry by the district; must receive training in crisis management and hostile situations and have to use ammunition that is designed to minimize the risk of ricochet in school halls.

Link to rest of story.

Amen.

So many of our youth are absolutely fantastic, so many just want to do the best they can. So many are at school just to learn and make a few friends. The biggest majority are in school for the best reasons!
Unfortunately there are the minute amount that see taking out a classroom of peers as their only shot at whatever the goal is. Their peers are sitting ducks with clipped wings. Lets not leave out the great teachers that push the youth to learn, push push push because they know these kids are capable of so much more than the school system asks. These teachers end up as targets too.

If the teachers are allowed to have good training, I am so willing for my tax dollars to pay for it. These few nut jobs that waltz in packed with weapons for no other reason than to kill have zero reason to fear retaliation while in progress of their horror fantasy. If I know that the teachers can stop it dead on, how many nutters are going to think twice? Thrice?

Teachers are not normal. They LOVE these masses of children given to them 8 hours a day. Talk about dedication, cause it sure aint about pay! The last thing they would do is actively harm the students (outside of the nutters that make it into their ranks through lies and beguiling). I can't see them shooting to kill an attacker, but to stop them from killing the innocent kids in the class room? Absolutely. Not even to kill the attacker. Really, I see this as nothing but a good defense to the cowards coming after the ones they know are not able to defend themselves.

Look at Florida. When the gun ban was on crime rose over three times from the year before. Gun ban lifted and the criminals knew their next mark could possibly be protected. Crime fell to levels lower than before the ban.

The problematic thinking here is that people actually believe that criminals care about registering their guns and will abide by the laws. Look at the UK and Australia. Private gun ownership became severely limited and violent crime rose. When guns become harder to get, they turned to knives. Now they want to ban knives...what next? If someone wants to harm another person they can use a high heeled shoe. Shall we ban them too?

The proof is shown in Florida, once the concealed ban was lifted crooks knew they could be facing deadly retaliation and crime fell.

As far as I see it, this would prove true in schools. If these punks who felt so slighted knew the Prof could fire back, I doubt they would feel so free to waltz in and start a new armageddon in social studies.

Techno chicken

Love it

read more | digg story