McCain-Palin would move U.S. in right direction

Thursday, October 23, 2008

We have to admit it's tempting to make no endorsements this year.

With the state of the economy and the new taxpayer burden related to the banking bailout, it would be nice to be able to check that "none of the above" box many voters have been clamoring for over the years.

The decision isn't easy for Southwest Nebraskans and Northwest Kansans when it comes to the presidential race.

This "red" part of the country is usually a cinch for the Republican candidate, but this year, the standard bearer, Sen. John McCain, opposes ethanol subsidies, which have created one of the few bright spots in our economy.

His opponent, Illlinois Sen. Barack Obama, is a champion of the industry.

Some of the differences between Obama and McCain are clear-cut.

McCain opposes abortion, and has voted for abortion restrictions and says he would seek to overturn Roe v. Wade, but would not seek a constitutional amendment to ban abortion.

Obama supports abortion.

On gun control, McCain favors background checks at gun shows, but voted against banning assault-type weapons and to shield gun-makers and dealers from civil suits. "I believe the Second Amendment ought to be preserved -- which means no gun control," he said.

Obama favors leaving gun-makers and dealers open to lawsuit and as an Illinois state lawmaker, supported a ban on all forms of semiautomatic weapons and tighter restrictions on firearms.

McCain would provide a $5,000 tax credit for family health insurance, while Obama would mandate coverage for children and require employers to share cost of insuring workers.

McCain pledges "no new taxes" if elected, while Obama would raise income taxes on the wealthiest and their capital gains and dividends taxes, corporate taxes, and breaks for poor workers and elderly.

McCain opposes a scheduled withdrawal from Iraq, while Obama could have combat troops out by the end of 2009.

Other issues are less clear, however.

Both are in favor of reopening trade with Cuba under certain conditions, both support the death penalty, both oppose a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and support some legal rights for same-sex couples, both have supported limits on greenhouse gases, both favor help for struggling homeowners, legal status for illegal immigrants if some conditions are met, and relaxing restrictions on federal financing of embryonic stem cell research.

The addition of Gov. Sarah Palin to the ticket, however, helped cement the Republican ticket's conservative credentials. She's an easy target for criticism, but her qualifications easily match or exceed those of Obama, given a dispassionate review.

Obama is leading in the polls, and his personal confidence and charisma are appealing.

But the majority of Southwest Nebraskans and Northwest Kansans don't want to see the country shift to the left, the direction Obama and his running mate, Joe Biden, would take it, especially as it relates to the Supreme Court.

For that reason, the McCook Daily Gazette is endorsing Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin for president and vice president.

View 30 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • What about the ethanol subsidies that McCain wants to cut from existence. He states that there is no need for them and doesn't feel that Ethanol is an energy saver? Doesn't that in the end hurt the farmers in SW Nebraska?

    -- Posted by Rural Citizen on Thu, Oct 23, 2008, at 1:05 PM
  • By the way before anyone starts, I'm still undecided.

    -- Posted by Rural Citizen on Thu, Oct 23, 2008, at 1:07 PM
  • Rural Farmer, do you think that corn based ethanol is an energy saver?

    -- Posted by plainsman on Thu, Oct 23, 2008, at 1:42 PM
  • If ethanol is a viable energy source then why is there any need for subsidies? Subsidies are great when starting or jump starting a product, but at some point that product (ethanol) needs to stand on its own two feet and enter the free market. Here the consumer will determine its future, not the government.

    -- Posted by remington81 on Thu, Oct 23, 2008, at 2:18 PM
  • Good point remington. Then why does the government have to allow such large tax incentives for oil companies?

    -- Posted by Rural Citizen on Thu, Oct 23, 2008, at 3:22 PM
  • Umm...am I the only one who thinks this is a less-than-ringing endorsement?

    I'm sure the Gazette had far more inspiring words to say about Bush in 2000 and 2004 (ahem...thanks for THAT advice) and Ross Perot in 1994 (yeah, the ONLY paper in the US to endorse him).

    Maybe this paper should take its own "dispassionate review" of Sarah's credentials, history and associations.

    It might be time for Southwest Nebraska to realize that whenever the country 'shifts to the left', it's actually a good thing for the economy of that geographic area. The past eight years of leadership sure haven't helped much. Are y'all better off now than you were 8 years ago?

    Nice endorsement. Noted.

    -- Posted by davejavu on Thu, Oct 23, 2008, at 3:43 PM
  • There's a big difference between tax incentives and subsidies, there not even the same thing. The oil companies receive tax incentives if they re-invest profits back into oil production i.e. expansion and exploration. Remember US companies play a very, very small roll in global oil production. I wish our government ran as well as our oil companies.

    -- Posted by remington81 on Thu, Oct 23, 2008, at 4:39 PM
  • "It might be time for Southwest Nebraska to realize that whenever the country 'shifts to the left', it's actually a good thing for the economy of that geographic area. The past eight years of leadership sure haven't helped much. Are y'all better off now than you were 8 years ago?

    Nice endorsement. Noted.

    -- Posted by davejavu"

    Sorry, dave, I have seen too many countries with 'Left' shifting in my lifetime. I never saw one that could compete with our Republican governmental system.

    Has anyone noticed that the Liberal mindset has all evil starting 8 years ago, and the 8 before that was so much better run? Liberal folks seem to think that Conservative folks cannot see them comparing apples with oranges. Seven of the last eight years has been primarily spent keeping this country safe from further harm since 9-11.

    Consider the basic difference between the choices:

    A. Left (Liberal) shifting = Someone work, Someone else shares the wealth.

    B. Right (Conservative) shifting = Someone don't work, someone don't eat.

    Somewhat overstated, but basically correct.

    The Gazette gave us a neutral (fair and balanced) presentation. Ponder hard, folks, for this election is far more crucial to our existence, as a nation, than is obvious to the casual observer.

    Let us all, make up our mind, promote the vote, and do so ourselves.

    Sincerely offered. Arley Steinhour

    -- Posted by Navyblue on Thu, Oct 23, 2008, at 6:43 PM
  • No, Arley, with all due respect, five of the last seven years have had us invading and trying to liberate IRAQ and there is absolutely no connection between Iraq and the horrific events of September 11, 2001. Please don't kid yourself on that one.

    But you're right. It is like comparing apples to oranges. Bush took a huge budget surplus from Bill Clinton and turned it into a deficit that my kids and grandkids and their kids will be harnessed with.

    I used to be a Republican, now I'm an Independent because I could no longer associate myself with the wingnuts of either party--and there are plenty.

    What I'm saying about this endorsement is that if felt forced, as if to say "well, we HAVE to endorse the Republican cuz it's what we do 'round these parts, so here goes..."

    But I agree with you. Everyone must vote, but along with your duty to vote comes another important duty: to get informed about what's really going on.

    As for this past and very-near-future SW Nebraskan, I already voted, and I cast my vote for the person with the statesmanship, wherewithal and temperament to handle the crisis we find ourselves in.

    -- Posted by davejavu on Thu, Oct 23, 2008, at 6:56 PM
  • Davejavu, So what you're saying is that you'd just love to see our country turn into a Socialists society? And don't even start to tell me that isn't what Obummu is trying to push. It's pretty clear from his own words that he wants to take the hard earned money from us and give it to the ghetto mammas and slum lords who've never worked a day in their lives,(spreading the wealth).

    Biden even said the other day that "Just watch, mark my words, in 6 months Obama will be thrown into a severe crisis and his initial reaction will look like he didn't do the right thing." No kidding? Yes, he'll yell "I surrender." and show his yellow streak.

    Obama and Obiden's strong stance against the ownership of firearms is enough for me to never vote for them.

    One of the other reason's Nebraska is a "red" state is because we have more intelligent people per capita than other states, say New York, Commiefornia and Massholechusetts.


    -- Posted by Jim Foster on Thu, Oct 23, 2008, at 9:38 PM
  • Jim, spread your hate and ignorance someplace else -- you're an angry man. What kind of person says Ghetto Mamma and professes to be intelligent in the same message??

    This is just a thought, but you may be more successful in convincing others of your point of view if you didn't include all the rhetoric.

    -- Posted by commonsense2 on Thu, Oct 23, 2008, at 10:22 PM
  • Once again, we get guidance about national affairs from the worldly staff of the McCook Christian Chronicle.

    I'm not surprised abortion was brought up first in this piece. Don't you think it's suspect how Republicans always campaign on these hot-button issues like guns and God, but never do anything about them once they get in office? It's the only way they know how to get the votes from those of us who live in this neck of the woods -- because they sure aren't looking out for our best interests otherwise.

    -- Posted by Abe Linkin on Thu, Oct 23, 2008, at 10:53 PM
    Response by McCook:
    Compliment accepted.
  • The great thing, Abe Linkin, is that polls show Obama neck and neck with McCain in other rural areas across the nation. It might just be that other rural folks realize if they're not making more than 250K, their taxes go down. And no one is coming to take your guns or abort your pregnancy! And on the gun issue, I invite you all to visit Obama's website and read his stance on guns. FOXNews is doing you all a tremendous disservice.

    People are waking up. Nebraska will too. I have faith.

    As for the comment on rural Nebraska being smarter, Jim, I do believe that Southwest Nebraskans are an intelligent lot. I come from there and I'm moving back there after six years away. I just think many need to turn off Faux News (and obviously put down the McCook Gazette) and start doing some actual research on the elections they vote in.

    God bless you all. 'Specially you, Mr. Foster.

    BTW, who starts out an endorsement by saying "We have to admit it's tempting to make no endorsements this year." Since the Democrat seems to have a better grasp of the issues, we actually considered just foregoing the whole endorsement thing. Gimmeabreak. Your bias is apparent.

    -- Posted by davejavu on Fri, Oct 24, 2008, at 6:18 AM
  • Dave, don't even go there. Here is Obama's record on gun control. This is what it is, it's history and it's real. This guy will do and say anything to get votes. He has no class at all and cannot be trusted.

    FACT: Barack Obama voted for an Illinois State Senate bill to ban and confiscate "assault weapons," but the bill was so poorly crafted, it would have also banned most semi-auto and single and double barrel shotguns commonly used by sportsmen.

    FACT: Barack Obama voted to allow reckless lawsuits designed to bankrupt the firearms industry.

    FACT: Barack Obama wants to re-impose the failed and discredited Clinton Gun Ban.

    FACT: Barack Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly used for hunting and sport shooting.

    FACT: Barack Obama has endorsed a 500% increase in the federal excise tax on firearms and ammunition.

    FACT: Barack Obama has endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership.

    FACT: Barack Obama supports local gun bans in Chicago, Washington, D.C., and other cities.

    FACT: Barack Obama voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal prosecution of people

    who use firearms in self-defense.

    FACT: Barack Obama supports gun owner licensing and gun registration.

    FACT: Barack Obama refused to sign a friend-of-the-court Brief in support of individual Second Amendment rights in the Heller case.

    FACT: Barack Obama opposes Right to Carry laws.

    FACT: Barack Obama was a member of the Board of Directors of the Joyce Foundation, the leading source of funds for anti-gun organizations and "research."

    FACT: Barack Obama supported a proposal to ban gun stores within 5 miles of a school or park, which would eliminate almost every gun store in America.

    FACT: Barack Obama voted not to notify gun owners when the state of Illinois did records searches on them.

    FACT: Barack Obama favors a ban on standard capacity magazines.

    FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory micro-stamping.

    FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory waiting periods.

    FACT: Barack Obama supports repeal of the Tiahrt Amendment, which prohibits information on gun traces collected by the BATFE from being used in reckless lawsuits against firearm dealers and manufacturers.

    FACT: Barack Obama supports one-gun-a-month handgun purchase restrictions.

    FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on inexpensive handguns.

    FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on the resale of police issued firearms, even if the money is going to police departments for replacement equipment.

    FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory firearm training requirements for all gun owners and a ban on gun ownership for persons under the age of 21.

    -- Posted by remington81 on Fri, Oct 24, 2008, at 9:24 AM
  • Remington, I understand your passion about guns but there were just a couple falsehoods and misleading things about what you copied and pasted:


    -- Posted by davejavu on Fri, Oct 24, 2008, at 10:18 AM
  • "...his personal confidence and charisma is appealing..."

    Compound subject needs a plural verb.

    How did you ever get a job at a newspaper, sir/madam?

    -- Posted by wfberan on Fri, Oct 24, 2008, at 12:09 PM
  • Correct me if I'm wrong here, but is the moderator of this website actually mocking the commentors on this 'news' story?

    I don't feel bad about anything I wrote earlier. If you make a political endorsement, don't expect everyone to like it. Just like I knew getting on here and offering a dissenting voice wouldn't make me popular on here.

    But mocking me? This 'news'paper is a complete joke if that's really what's going on here.

    -- Posted by davejavu on Fri, Oct 24, 2008, at 2:37 PM
  • The McCook Daily Gazette, the second best paper in town behind the McCook High School Stampede...You should probably stop making typographical, factual, and grammatical errors in nearly every story before you move on to endorsing candidates

    -- Posted by KansasBisonFan on Fri, Oct 24, 2008, at 2:40 PM
  • Wise Words (I think they fit perfectly)!

    During this political season let's be reminded of these wise words. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away people's initiative and independence. You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves.

    Abraham Lincoln

    -- Posted by remington81 on Fri, Oct 24, 2008, at 3:44 PM
  • Davejavu, first off you don't go to the Obama website to get the truth about his gun voting record. Do you honestly think he'll say anything disparaging about them where everyone can see it? Google "Obama's voting record on the gun issue".

    Commonsense2 (or lack thereof), what's wrong, Ghetto Mamma kinda hit home? I like to use rhetoric to try to sink some "commonsense" into some of the thick skulls out there. Like yours.

    Why dance around a subject when you can hit people right in the mouth with it? A little too forcefull for you I see.

    Remmington81, I commend you.


    -- Posted by Jim Foster on Fri, Oct 24, 2008, at 5:49 PM
  • Jim Foster, your lack of respect is the very reason A LOT of people WILL NOT vote for your candidate of choice. You represent your cause very poorly--as do McCain and Palin.

    I'm done on here. The moderator is mocking and rude, and frankly my voice is better put to use by calling voters in the swing states--which I've been doing all afternoon.

    Vote '08 for whomever you choose. It's your right.

    -- Posted by davejavu on Fri, Oct 24, 2008, at 6:32 PM
  • Remington,

    I liked your quote. I really did. But it's commonly attributed to Lincoln, though he did not actually say it. It was written by a minister who wrote a book about him, and included some quotes of his own. Here's a link that tells about it.


    Easy to make that mistake. A lot of websites attribute it to Lincoln. No matter. It's a good quote. Just thought I'd throw that out there...

    BTW, Remington, I've enjoyed debating with you, but this is not a fair forum.

    Carry on...

    -- Posted by davejavu on Fri, Oct 24, 2008, at 6:40 PM
  • Dave, please stop, I respect your efforts to help the fine folks of SW NE open their minds and see beyond what is comfortable.

    Jim, there is no problem with my common sense, truth told, I am a republican but still not voting for McCain -- the simple reason for my change of heart is that I expect a lot from my employees and the President is no different. Unfortunately the republicans have produced only disappointment and regret. This disappointment is much like your tasteless comment -- I expect more from you as a member of our community.

    Fine folks from SW Nebraska, vote your conscience!!

    -- Posted by commonsense2 on Sat, Oct 25, 2008, at 12:07 AM
  • I intend to vote my conscience and it will be for McCain/Palin. I too generally avoid posting on these sites because very few (conservative AND liberal) can post without vitriol from the opposing viewpoint. I also believe both tickets will be unable to fulfil ALL the promises made. I oppose Sen. Obamas "spread the wealth" doctrine; in my opinion it stifles initiative and personal responsibility. And yes, I expect to hear acid comments from the "other" side.

    -- Posted by doodle bug on Sat, Oct 25, 2008, at 1:14 PM
  • You say of Alaska Gov. Palin, "... her qualifications easily match or exceed those of Obama, given a dispassionate review."

    Here's a report from the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman on the contentious Wasilla mayoral race, which is going to a runoff: "Metiva, a current city councilman, got 31.6 percent of the vote Tuesday (275 votes), which is slightly ahead of local attorney Rupright's 28.3 percent (246), according to unofficial vote tallies."

    Mayor of Wasilla...tough job.

    -- Posted by GeorgeWBush on Sun, Oct 26, 2008, at 3:00 PM
  • Wow..bravo.. The McCook Gazette drummed up an endorsement for a presidential candidate. As all Americans we should stop and applaud this performance. HA!

    They (at the Gazette) shouldn't have felt the need for such newsworthy performance that they provided...I mean why put together an article depicting their endorsement when the writer begins an article with "We have to admit it's tempting to make no endorsements this year." Well, The McCook Gazette could've spared everyone (including those bleeding red) the rhertoric from writing such an endorsement! It's as if they jumped in line behind all the other Pro-McCain/Palin endorsers prior to doing some logical writing for this article.

    Oh but I am mistaken, SW Nebraska doesn't want to hear about both sides of the ticket; so why bring up what Senator Obama could do for our country? Besides everyone believes what they read in such journalist taste provided by The McCook Gazette or on TV with Fox News. Everyone could use a lesson in thinking "outside" the box and focus on how the last 8 years has effected them. Better yet, how about the last 3 weeks...its fantastic how Bush is taking no responsibility for his actions in the economy, but why would he - his term is nearly over. In Obama, we can see change because he promotes what he says and it has meaning; we don't need more of McBush ecomonics.

    As a former resident of SW Nebraska and Nebraska, I am saddened by the complete rif-raff that people have read, heard or stolen from gossip columns. I am proud to say I am a supporter of Senator Barak Obama and in doing so, voted early in support of the Obama/Biden ticket, to make this bleak future of ours (healthcare reform, ecomony deficit, war in Iraq/Afghanistan, etc.) soon be replaced with a fresh face in Washington who knows his roots.

    -- Posted by skirkc03 on Sun, Oct 26, 2008, at 8:01 PM
  • CommonSense2;

    Thanks for the advice! I will vote my conscience, and it will be for McCain-Palin. I cannot, in good conscience, vote for someone with Socialist ideas and an agenda that is not in accordance with Christian teachings. I could go on at length about why Obama will be a dangerous President, but you (and other liberals) wouldn't read with an open mind.

    But thanks again for reminding me, and others, to vote with our conscience! Hopefully anyone else who attends church regularly and claims to be a Christian will do the same thing!

    -- Posted by Willie B Wright on Tue, Oct 28, 2008, at 9:57 AM
  • It's interesting to note that the largest newspaper in Alaksa, the Achorage Daily News has endorsed Obama/Biden. They say Palin is "too risky" to be the VP.

    -- Posted by chase on Tue, Oct 28, 2008, at 6:11 PM
  • Commonsence2 It is so interesting that someone would be against socialistic ideas and claim Christianity as a reason to not support a candidate.

    Christ would be turning over in his tomb, if he hadn't got up and left it, at the thoughts of this Country looking after the poor.

    -- Posted by Meshedup on Tue, Oct 28, 2008, at 9:47 PM
  • Meshedup,

    Agree, and thanks for pointing that out. So ironic!!!

    -- Posted by commonsense2 on Tue, Oct 28, 2008, at 11:39 PM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: