Personally, since we know John McCain benefits...

I think Cindy McCain should release information. That is just my point of view.

Anyway, via FOXNEWS:

Cindy McCain says she'll never release her tax returns

Thursday, May 08, 2008

WASHINGTON — Cindy McCain says she will never make her tax returns public even if her husband wins the White House and she becomes the first lady.

"You know, my husband and I have been married 28 years and we have filed separate tax returns for 28 years. This is a privacy issue. My husband is the candidate," Cindy McCain, wife of Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting John McCain, said in an interview aired on NBC's "Today" on Thursday.

Asked if she would release her tax returns if she was first lady, Cindy McCain said: "No."

The Arizona senator released his tax return last month, reporting he had a total income of $405,409 in 2007 and paid $84,460 in federal income taxes. He files his return separately from his wife, an heiress to a Phoenix-based beer distributing company whose fortune is in the $100 million range.

Sen. McCain is routinely is ranked among the richest lawmakers in Congress, but he and his wife have kept their finances separate throughout their marriage. A prenuptial agreement left much of the family's assets in Cindy McCain's name.

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said Cindy McCain's refusal to release her tax returns gives the appearance of a double standard on the part of her husband

rest can be found on FoxNews website:

madd videos:

This irritates me

For the life of me, even though I know it was a "mistake", I do not see why the parents took their children hunting if they were not going to be totally on top of things. Sad, sad, sad but it could be avoided. I know some may differ with my opinion but I do feel it is valid that charges were brought. The complete story is at ABCNEWS. Here's a bit

Dad Who Killed Son in Turkey Hunt Charged

Boy's Death One of at Least Three Fatalities as Wild-Turkey Hunting Season Opens

By DAVID SCHOETZ
May 7, 2008

When Minnesota authorities arrived at the scene, they found Anthony Klaseus covered in blood and extremely distraught.

"I just shot my boy," Klaseus said, according to police. "How could I shoot and kill my son? I told him to stay put while I tried to get closer to the turkeys."

On Monday, two weeks later, Sibley County prosecutors charged Klaseus, 39, with second-degree manslaughter in the April 19 homicide of his 8-year-old son.

Adding one more layer of cruelty, Klaseus and his wife had named their only son Hunter.

The boy's death is one of at least three fatalities already reported in this spring's turkey hunting season -- it's a number that often exceeds the total annual U.S. turkey-hunting related fatalities.

In West Virginia, authorities have charged a 19-year-old with misdemeanor negligence after he fatally shot a 16-year-old he mistook for a turkey during a hunt last week. The hunter could face additional charges.

On Sunday morning, a Kentucky father mistook his 14-year-old son for a game bird in what police for now have called a tragic accident.

Do You Think She Will Listen?

CNN posted an article on their website today. I, personally, do not think that Hillary will listen because I truly do not believe that had thought through any other option than being the next president. I'm not sure she knows how to be gracious, yet I hope I am wrong. Anyway, here is a bit of the article which can be found by clicking this link:

McGovern to Clinton: Time to go

Posted: 11:43 AM ET

McGovern endorsed Clinton in October.

(CNN) – Former Sen. George McGovern urged Hillary Clinton Wednesday to drop out of the Democratic presidential race.

McGovern, who had endorsed Clinton, told CNN he was switching his support to endorse Barack Obama.

“It certainly was not out of any less respect for Senator Clinton,” McGovern told CNN in a telephone interview early Wednesday afternoon about his decision to switch his support to Barack Obama. “I think she has waged a really courageous and valiant campaign. She will have my affection and admiration for all of my days.

“But I think mathematically the race is all but won by Barack Obama and the time has come for all of us to unite and get ready for the general election in the fall.”

McGovern also told CNN he had just spoken to former President Bill Clinton about his decision to back Obama – a conversation he described as “very good.”

“I have had many conversations with him over the years, none better than today," McGovern said. "He did me the honor of talking to me about this. There will be no hard feelings with him or Senator Clinton.”

McGovern said he has not spoken to Sen. Clinton today, because he thought she would be too exhausted after Tuesday’s primary but plans to talk to her in the future.”

McGovern is not a Democratic superdelegate, though he is the first major Clinton supporter to publicly suggest the New York senator should abandon her presidential bid following Tuesday night's results.

Lately I've been thinking about

Prejudice....

I am thinking that we are all prejudice about something. We all prejudge. Is prejudging bad? I am challenging myself more and more on this. Today I realized that there are things I have a closed mind about. Some of the things, rightfully so, others I am not too proud about. I can't go into detail about it right now do to legal happenings but I look forward to blogging it out, chatting it out, hearing different sides. Maybe I will change my point of view, maybe it will reinforce the views I have now.

We'll see.

The Charlotte Observer endorses...

BARACK OBAMA! click this link to view story on their website. Here is some of what they had to say:

Time for a change

In the Democratic primary, we recommend Obama

Do the Democrats need a restoration of the past, or is it time for a change? We think it's time for a change. We recommend a vote for Barack Obama in Tuesday's primary.

The choice between Sen. Obama and Hillary Clinton is not easy. She is indeed ready to be president on day one. After two terms with her husband in the White House and almost eight years in the Senate, she knows how things work. Smart and tenacious, she offers a progressive agenda. There are many reasons to think she'd be a good president.

There are arguments against her as well. For example, many Democrats won't forgive her for voting to authorize President Bush to use force against Iraq. We don't fault her on that. She understood the need for firmness to force Saddam Hussein to admit UN inspectors to ensure Iraq wasn't building weapons of mass destruction. She received assurances that force would be used only as a last resort. She isn't responsible for the debacle in Iraq; President Bush is.

Concerns about Clinton

Yet we're troubled by, to cite a few examples, these aspects of her presidential campaign:• Many of her supporters seem intent on depicting Sen. Obama as the Jesse Jackson of 2008, a leader who appeals to an ethnic minority but not to the broader electorate needed to win.

• She sometimes exaggerates her influence and experiences, as when she claimed she "helped to bring peace to Northern Ireland" and said she ducked under sniper fire in Bosnia.

• Florida and Michigan were stripped of national convention delegates after breaking party rules by scheduling their primaries too early. The candidates didn't campaign in them. Yet after Sen. Clinton did well in those states, she pushed to change the rules and count the votes. That's a cynical, self-serving effort to corrupt the selection process.

• Her tendency to tell voters what they want to hear is disturbing. Her proposal to suspend the federal tax on gasoline this summer is campaign gimmickry, not leadership. Her assertion that she was a critic of NAFTA from the beginning is simply unbelievable. The record shows she was an ardent advocate of the trade deal.

Some Democrats accept that as just the way the political game always has been played. Perhaps it is. But is that the best Americans can expect? We think not.

Is Obama ready for the job?

As to Sen. Obama, he's one of the most powerful, effective speakers to seek the presidency in years. He offers a different vision of politics. Is he ready for to be president? His relative inexperience is reason for concern. He has been a U.S. senator for three years, an Illinois state senator for eight. He has no executive experience.

Experience is important, but it's no substitute for good judgment and the ability to assemble and wisely use capable advisers. George W. Bush had six years' experience as governor of a big, complex state, yet his administration has made some of the worst decisions in recent history.

Sen. Obama is a man of uncommon intelligence. He's a graduate of Columbia University with a law degree from Harvard, where he was editor of the law review. He bypassed lucrative job opportunities to become a community organizer with a church-based group seeking to improve living conditions in poor Chicago neighborhoods plagued with crime and joblessness.

In 2004, he became the third African American since Reconstruction to win a Senate seat. His record there is not extensive. It is impressive.

His first law -- cosponsored with Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla. -- ensured greater citizen access to information by creating a searchable online database on federal spending.

Early in his term he attracted the attention of Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., who at the time chaired the Foreign Relations Committee. Sen. Lugar invited him on a trip through the former Soviet Union, inspecting projects to decommission Cold War-era weapons. The two worked together to pass legislation to control the spread of weapons. Sen. Lugar later observed that Sen. Obama has "a sense of idealism and principled leadership, a vision of the future. At certain points in history, certain people are the ones that are most likely to have the vision or imagination or be able to identify talent and to manage other people's ideas. And I think he does this well."

Sen. Obama's legislative achievements are few, but that's no surprise. He's near the bottom in seniority. Republicans ran the Senate his first two years there, so Democratic proposals rarely went anywhere. Nevertheless he has helped shape the national debate on immigration, energy and some other important issues. He sponsored or co-sponsored the bills that made up what the Washington Post called "the strongest ethics legislation to emerge from Congress yet."

A change for the better

He has made missteps in his first national campaign, such as failing to quickly and firmly reject radical statements by his former pastor. But in the campaign, as in the Senate, he has shown the ability to learn.

I admit, I've always had a trouble digesting "collateral damage"

The lives = collateral damage just doesn't feel right to me. Reading this in USA Today was not a great way to start the day. I am glad it appears there were no deaths. I hope the lost of the ambulances will not cause further innocent lives to be in danger. - MyMindIsFull

More than 20 hurt after missiles fired near hospital

BAGHDAD (AP) — The U.S. military on Saturday fired missiles at a target about 50 yards away from the general hospital in Baghdad's Sadr City district, wounding more than 20 people and destroying ambulances, hospital officials said.

Dr. Ali Bustan al-Fartusee, director general of Baghdad's health directorate, told The Associated Press that 23 civilians were injured.

He said no patients in the hospital were hurt, but that some of the wounded included civilians outside on their way to visit patients, and that around 17 ambulances were damaged.

Earlier, hospital officials said 28 people were injured; the reason for the discrepancy was not immediately known.

The missile were fired from a launcher on the ground, the U.S. military said. It said in a press release that it destroyed a "criminal element command and control center" with missiles in northeastern Baghdad — where Sadr City is located — around the same time Iraqis reported the attack near the hospital.

Quote for the day

"The Secret of getting ahead is getting started." - Sally Berger

Watch the latest videos on YouTube.com

Rosie had an excellent point

and I think she did it in a way with tact. I may have to check out her blog more. I'm sure I won't agree with everything she says but I admit sometimes I've let others color my perception of her. Something I truly try not to do - mymindspeaks

Anyway this was on the rblog for 5/1/2008:

on we go

05.01.08 at 10:57 pm in love

she said
i would not have stayed in that church

many women said
i would not have stayed in that marriage

faith and forgiveness
woulda shoulda

who is 2 say
what defines each of us

not the actions or words
of another

it took a gutted deer
4 the queen to feel herself

look inside
breathe

Gas Tax Holidays sound good BUT....

From ABCNEWS

Hoosiers Loved Themelves a Gas Tax Holiday for 120 Days in 2000

May 02, 2008 5:09 PM

As Sens. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, and John McCain, R-Ariz., square off against Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, on a gas tax holiday for the summer -- McCain introduced his legislation in April; Clinton is introducing her bill today; Obama says it's a "gimmick" that offers voters pennies and no long-term solutions -- some Hoosier history may be in order.

Eight years ago, with what were then perceived to be soaring gasoline prices -- more than $2 a gallon for premium gas -- then-Indiana Gov. Frank O'Bannon suspended Indiana's 5 percent sales tax on gas, saving Hoosier motorists between seven and 10 cents per gallon.

"Spiraling gas prices have really caused an undue burden on the people of Indiana," O'Bannon said in June 2000.

O'Bannon used a 1981 statute that enabled him to declare a state of emergency and suspend the tax for up to 60 days. He said he'd reinstate the gas tax before the 60 day period ends if prices went down. If prices continued, he had the option to extended the tax suspension another 60 days.

"Gas prices in the state are causing an undue burden to the people of Indiana," he said. "I consider this an emergency."

Oh -- did I mention O'Bannon was up for re-election?

By July Indiana had the lowest gas prices in the country -- approximately $1.42 per gallon. But O'Bannon said there was no plan to lift the suspension.

"What do we know about next week, will there be a shortage then?" asked an O'Bannon spokeswoman. "We don't know. We're looking at this as a long-term effort."

By August, the suspension had cost the state -- but not consumers -- more than $22 million. O'Bannon renewed the gas tax holiday for another 60 days.

By September, political analyst Charlie Cook had written that "Indiana Momentum is clearly on the side of the Democratic incumbent, Frank O'Bannon, as this much-hyped race moves into its final stages...O'Bannon's decision to suspend the state gas tax for 60 days has resulted in glowing press."

On October 26, 2000, the five percent sales tax resumed.

In November, O'Bannon won.

Indiana GOP chairman Mike McDaniel attributed the gas tax suspension as one of the three reasons the Democrat was re-elected.

Oh -- did I mention that in July 2002, O'Bannon signed into law a 3 cent increase of the state gas tax?

I honestly didn't realize this (or else I forgot)

Complete article printed in USA Today available at this link:

Study: Warming water means less oxygen for sea life

By Randolph E. Schmid, AP Science Writer

WASHINGTON — Low-oxygen zones where sea life is threatened or cannot survive are growing as the oceans are heated by global warming, a new study warns. Oxygen-depleted zones in the central and eastern equatorial Atlantic and equatorial Pacific oceans appear to have expanded over the last 50 years, researchers report in Friday's edition of the journal Science.

Low-oxygen zones in the Gulf of Mexico and other areas also have been studied in recent years, raising concerns about the threat to sea life.

Continued expansion of these zones could have dramatic consequences for both sea life and coastal economies, said the team led by Lothar Stramma of the University of Kiel in Germany.

The finding was not surprising, Stramma said, because computer climate models had predicted a decline in dissolved oxygen in the oceans under warmer conditions.

Warmer water simply cannot absorb as much oxygen as colder water, explained co-author Gregory C. Johnson of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle.

again, complete article found at the USA TODAY website at this link

Quote For The Day

The future is there for those that take it - Eleanor Roosevelt

Something worth looking into - US Food Suppy

Came across this in USA Today. I will definitely do some more reading on it when I have the time. The complete story is at this link. Here's a part of the article:

Surplus U.S. food supplies dry up
By Sue Kirchhoff, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — As the farm economy collapsed in the 1980s, the U.S. Department of Agriculture was saddled with mountains of surplus cheese, corn and other foods that it socked away in warehouses and even caves.

As recently as 2003, the USDA had to buy so much powdered milk to support dairy prices that beleaguered officials shipped some to U.S. ranchers for cattle feed.

While the previous surpluses were costly and sharply criticized, much of the food found its way to the poor, here and abroad. Today, says USDA Undersecretary Mark Keenum, "Our cupboard is bare."

U.S. government food surpluses have evaporated because, with record high prices, farmers are selling their crops on the open market, not handing them over to the government through traditional price-support programs that make up for deficiencies in market price.

Worldwide, food prices have risen 45% in the past nine months, posing a crisis for millions, says the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization.

Because of the current economics of food, and changes in federal farm subsidy programs designed to make farmers rely more on the markets, large U.S. reserves may be gone for a long time.

The upshot: USDA has almost no extra food to supplement the billions in cash payments it spends to combat hunger at home and in developing nations.

A coalition of religious and farm groups, in an open letter to Congress this week, warned that low supplies increase the risk of hunger and higher prices, calling for creation of a strategic grain reserve.

"As a matter or national security, our government should recognize and act on its responsibility to provide a stable market for food in an era of unprecedented risk," says the letter from the National Family Farm Coalition and various groups.

Others experts say large government stockpiles are not only unnecessary, they are counterproductive. That includes John Block who, as President Reagan's Agriculture secretary during the 1980s, went to enormous lengths to get rid of extra food: giving commodities to farmers as payment for idling land, offering surplus grain as a subsidy to exporters and holding cheese giveaways for the poor.

"We shouldn't have large reserves stacked up. It was very costly for us," Block said, noting that for years he was accused by other nations of depressing their farm sectors by dumping extra U.S. food on world markets.

Still, even he terms the current world situation "shocking" in the sense that prices for so many types of food have risen at once.

The USDA's sole remaining sizable stockpile contains about 24 million bushels of wheat in a special government trust dedicated to international humanitarian aid. The special food program, which also holds $117 million in cash, has dwindled from its original 147-million-bushel level as Republican and Democratic administrations have used it but not fully replenished it.

That leaves the Bush administration with less flexibility to respond quickly to international food aid needs. President Bush in mid-April drew $200 million from the Emerson Humanitarian Trust, named after former congressman Bill Emerson, a Missouri Republican. Bush's action followed a desperate plea from the United Nations for food aid. Thursday, the president announced he would ask Congress for $770 million in separate, additional funding to meet international needs.

But Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer, at a recent food aid conference, says his agency faces tough decisions about managing the rest of the reserve in times of widespread hunger. "How far do we draw down?" he asked. "Do we take it down to zero because we need it? Do we hold some in there, because who knows what's going to happen, for emergency purposes later?"

Nutrition programs in need

Domestic nutrition programs, supported by once-bountiful commodity supplies, also face increasing stress. In a sign of how tight the situation has become, Keenum last summer dug into little-used legal authority to barter the last remaining USDA raw cotton and other surplus for about $120 million of canned meat and other processed goods desperately needed by domestic food banks and international programs.

"Now that we've created the program, it would be great if we had more stocks we could convert," Keenum says. "We just don't."

The fact that USDA's larders are depleted doesn't mean the country is out of food. The vast majority of U.S. grain is in the hands of farmers and private firms. Overall, the USA is expected to have carryover supplies of 241.9 million bushels of wheat this year, for example. But the USDA situation is indicative of broader trends, with domestic and international grain supplies in decline.

Bush Speaks on Food Aid

The Washington Post has the complete transcript. Please read it at this link. Here is a snippet of it:

PRESIDENT BUSH: In recent weeks, many have expressed concern about the significant increase in global food prices. And I share that concern.

In some of the world's poorest nations, rising prices can mean the difference between getting a daily meal or going without food. To address this problem, two weeks ago, my administration announced that about $200 million in emergency food aid would be available through a program at the Agriculture Department called the Emerson Trust.

That's just the beginning of our efforts. I think more needs to be done.

And so, today I'm asking Congress to provide an additional $770 million to support food aid and development programs. Together, this amounts to nearly $1 billion in new funds to both bolster global food security. And with other security assistance programs already in place, we're now projecting to spend nearly -- that we will spend nearly $5 billion in 2008 and 2009 to fight global hunger.

This funding will keep our existing emergency food aid programs robust. We have been the leader for providing food to those who are going without in the past, and we will continue to be the leader around the world.

It will also allow us to fund agriculture development programs that help farmers in developing countries increase their productivity. And, of course, this will help reduce the number of people who need emergency food aid in the first place.

As America increases its food assistance, it's really important that we transform the way that food aid is delivered.

In my State of the Union address this year, I called on Congress to support a proposal to purchase up to nearly 25 percent of food assistance directly from farmers in the developing world. And the reason you do that is in order to break the cycle of famine that we're having to deal with too often in a modern era. It's important to help build up local agriculture.

I ask Congress to approve this measure as soon as possible. It's a common-sense way to help deal with food emergencies around the world.

Now, other countries have a role to play as well. America is in the lead. We'll stay in the lead. And we expect others to participate along with us.

We're working with our G-8 partners and other developed nations to secure commitments from their governments for additional food aid. We're also working toward the conclusion of a successful Doha agreement that will reduce and eliminate other tariffs and other barriers as well as market-distorting subsidies for agricultural goods.

BUSH: And the reason why getting a Doha round done is important is it will end up reducing the cost of food -- importing food. It'll make it cheaper for consumers all around the world. In other words, we want to change the system to make it easier for people to get less expensive food.

I admit I didn't see this endorsement coming

but I respect what he did and the way he did it. AOL news has the complete article but here is a bit, I do hope you will take the time to read the article for yourself at this link:

Defection of longtime superdelegate jolts Clinton

By DAVID ESPO,

AP

Posted: 2008-05-01 17:16:32

SOUTH BEND, Ind. (AP) - Hillary Rodham Clinton was jolted Thursday by the defection of one of her longtime superdelegate supporters, a former national party chairman who urged fellow Democrats to "reject the old negative politics" and unify behind Barack Obama.

"A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote to continue" a long, self-destructive Democratic campaign, Joe Andrew added in a letter designed to have an impact on the turbulent race nationally as well as in his home state of Indiana, site of a primary next week.



I also thought what he wrote here was particularly interesting:

In his letter, Andrew not only challenged Clinton's claims about electability, but he also bluntly denounced the type of campaign tactics practiced by some in the Clinton circle.

"If the campaign's surrogates called Governor Bill Richardson, a respected former member of President Clinton's cabinet, a "Judas" for endorsing Senator Obama, we can all imagine how they will treat somebody like me," he wrote.

"They are the best practitioners of the old politics, so they will no doubt call me a traitor, an opportunist and a hypocrite. I will be branded as disloyal, power-hungry, but most importantly, they will use the exact words that Republicans used to attack me when I was defending President Clinton."

Andrew was far gentler on Clinton and her husband, both of whom he praised. But at one point, he wrote: "In an accident of timing, Indiana has been given the opportunity to truly make a difference. Hoosiers should grab that power and do what in their heart they know is right. They should reject the old negative politics and vote for true change."

Andrew made his move on a day in which Obama and Clinton campaigned across Indiana, where 72 convention delegates will be at stake. Polls point toward a close race in a state that even some of Clinton's supporters concede is critical to her campaign.