Finding Professional Help With Your Home’s Air Conditioner

byadmin

You and your family count on several appliances around your home to keep you comfortable and make everyday life easier, including your air conditioner. You may have recently found your air conditioner to start operating poorly, but you can find the professional help you need to get back to cool comfort quite quickly. No matter how much work your cooling system requires, you should find a residential air conditioning contractor in Honolulu HI to be the best solution.

You likely have never really thought about the things that could go wrong with your cooling system, and you don’t have to when you have an expert you can count on. You can focus more on other tasks around your home when you can trust a residential air conditioning service Honolulu, HIto be handling the work your air conditioner requires to get back to good-working order. There may be many sources that the problem could be coming from, but you won’t have to worry about them when a licensed contractor is making necessary repairs.

You can often find the best sources of information by doing a little research. You may find the internet to be a very good way to find any sort of product or service you require at any time of the day. You can utilize this tool to find a residential air conditioning contractor in Honolulu, HI to come quickly. You can input some information into a search engine to come up with several companies in your area. They will often have their own websites for you to look at and determine if they are able to help with your needs. You can narrow your search down further when you include the brand of air conditioner you need help with, as you will only come up with companies that have experience with your brand.

After you have found a few service companies that you believe you could use, you can then call and get quotes for the work you require. They may want to come to your home to give you a more accurate quote for the repairs or replacement necessary. You can compare each residential air conditioning contractor Honolulu, HI to determine who you believe will do the best work. They should then come within a few days to get your air conditioner running better than ever before.

Going On A Monster Hunt, Gonna Catch A Big One…

As a kid, when imagining what hed wish for if he was granted three wishes by some magic or for a good deed, one of my brothers wishes was that he would catch the Loch Ness Monster. Hes a younger brother so it didnt suit me to admit it but I always thought that was a pretty cool wish, youd be famous, probably be get some scientific accolade and strike a blow for ardent believers-in-a-bit-more everywhere, as well as basically ending up with your own dinosaur, or sea monster or whatever it is – either way thats a much cooler way to get to school than walking.There are plenty of new and unusual creatures lurking in the worlds darkest, quietest nooks and crannies evading human notice thus far, so why not a really big, impressive one? Its arrogant to believe weve seen everything – in the first few years of the 21st Century scientists have already discovered a number of new species of flora and fauna, including skeletons of the tiny hobbit-esque Flores Man, so who can be 100% sure that scientific proof of the existence of Big Foot, the Mongolian Death Worm or Chupacabras won’t be turned up next?My little brother isnt the only one with big scaly dreams, monster hunting has actually made itself into a science. Monster Hunter has been replaced by the more scientific Cryptozoologist but theyre still out there, actively searching for these could-be creatures, which they refer to as cryptids (meaning mystery animals) rather than monsters. Cryptids fall into two main categories, creatures that are generally believed to be extinct but which cyrptozoologists believe may not be (dinosaurs hiding out deep under the surface of remote lakes, or lochs for example) or creatures which cryptozoologists believe exist but where there is no scientific evidence to prove it (as in the Beast of Exmoor, strange big cat/ wolf hybrids living on the moors.). One of historys most famous cryptozoologists and a prolific writer on the subject, Bernard Heuvelmans, believes cryptozoology should be undertaken with the same stringent and empirical scientific standards and reasoning as other sciences, but with an interdisciplinary understanding of the biological and zoological sciences and an open mind. He also advises cryptid hunters to pay attention to local stories, urban legends and folk lore, the bare bones of which are often founded on historic facts (stories of sea monsters are now thought to describe encounters with giant squids.). His argument is that civilisations developing on opposite sides of the world wouldnt all imagine the same kinds of mythical creatures so there must be some truth to legends like Big Foot, whos popped up on every continent.Unfortunately for my brother, though there is still hope, the non glamorous side of cyrptozoology involves a lot of sitting quietly, hidden in the bushes, but I can see why hed be tempted by the potential rewards are great – people at the beginning of the 20th Century didnt believe in the Giant Panda, Megamouth Shark or Coelacanth – and they were all still around, hiding out, out of view. The people who ended up with the unimpeachable evidence proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that their quarry existed were the ones who had the most faith and patience. Hunters of the most popular cryptids like Champ, the Yeti and the Loch Ness Monster seem to cop the most flack. Searching for a creature which has managed to evade decades worth of similar searching (and sonar testing etc.) is your best chance of being disappointed and made fun of. People will hit you with the gene pool argument of: its not just one creature which would need to survive here but a whole breeding population of which no skeletal evidence has ever been foundeveretc. The pay off is that if you were to find proof of one of these celebrity A-list cyptids you would be very very very famous and probably wealthy with it. If you weigh it up, and the risk of spending your life alone in a van, watching over a still lake, waiting for something to happen sounds too high, you can hunt something smaller, there must be hundreds of undiscovered beetles out there – some of which probably have exciting horns or markings and fit the classification of mystery animal.To my little brother I say: remain patient, remember that no one believed in platypuses, giant squids or Komodo Dragons to begin with either.

Three Reasons To Choose Forex Software System Trading

Looking around today, you will easily find an endless number of people making huge profits through forex trading. Though most of them are those who have years of experience in this form of trading, but still there are few who are just beginners. But then, how are they able to earn money so quickly?

The answer to the above question lies with the advanced tool like forex software system trading that enables even the beginners to earn good money through forex trading. Today, millions of people are already benefiting from this tool and it is because of its relevance that even the experienced people go for taking its help.

If you also want to go for this trading software and if you want to know why you must go for it, then given below are the 3 reasons which you should consider:

  • Offers full information of the prevailing market trends: The first and the most important reason to go for this trading software is that it offers full information of the prevailing market trends which further helps in taking the fruitful decisions.
  • Helps in predicting future trends: With the help of good trading software, a person can easily predict the future market trends. This prediction helps a person to take correct decisions that helps in giving great returns.
  • Helps in making the whole trading system simple: With other things, the biggest advantage of reliable trading software is that it helps in making the whole forex trading simpler. The information that is provided by the software is not just updated and accurate but is easily understandable as well. Thus, even a beginner can take the maximum benefit out of the information provided by the software.

Given above are the 3 reasons why you should also go for forex software system trading.

Revision Rhinoplasty Can Repair A Bad Nose Job

Revision Rhinoplasty Can Repair a Bad Nose Job

by

Stiphen burger

Revision rhinoplasty is the term for a secondary (or tertiary) nose surgery performed to change the results of a previous rhinoplasty procedure. Because the nose has been surgically altered before, repeated rhinoplasty is complex and becomes more so with each surgery.

Reasons for dissatisfaction with a rhinoplasty may be that a large nose was not reduced enough or too much, the resulting shape of the nose is not favorable, the nasal tip is pinched, or the nose appears crooked or twisted. Often, problems with the tip are caused by excessive removal of cartilage. Cartilage will have to be rebuilt to restore a more natural-looking nasal tip. In cases of nose trauma, the injury may have been so great that more than one surgery is needed to fully correct it. These are examples and you may have your own reason for being dissatisfied with your nose job.

It is always better to get the results you desire the first time around. About 5-12% of rhinoplasty patients need a revision procedure to make minor or major adjustments. It is important to choose a doctor who specializes in revision rhinoplasty and has an exacting attention to detail to repeat rhinoplasty surgery. The fewer surgeries needed, the better.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtv9CmaCyu8[/youtube]

It is always better to get the results you desire the first time around. About 5-12% of rhinoplasty patients need a revision procedure to make minor or major adjustments. It is important to choose a doctor who specializes in revision rhinoplasty and has an exacting attention to detail to repeat rhinoplasty surgery. The fewer surgeries needed, the better.

It is always better to get the results you desire the first time around. About 5-12% of rhinoplasty patients need a revision procedure to make minor or major adjustments. It is important to choose a doctor who specializes in revision rhinoplasty and has an exacting attention to detail to repeat rhinoplasty surgery. The fewer surgeries needed, the better.

It is always better to get the results you desire the first time around. About 5-12% of rhinoplasty patients need a revision procedure to make minor or major adjustments. It is important to choose a doctor who specializes in revision rhinoplasty and has an exacting attention to detail to repeat rhinoplasty surgery. The fewer surgeries needed, the better.

It is always better to get the results you desire the first time around. About 5-12% of rhinoplasty patients need a revision procedure to make minor or major adjustments. It is important to choose a doctor who specializes in revision rhinoplasty and has an exacting attention to detail to repeat rhinoplasty surgery. The fewer surgeries needed, the better.

It is always better to get the results you desire the first time around. About 5-12% of rhinoplasty patients need a revision procedure to make minor or major adjustments. It is important to choose a doctor who specializes in revision rhinoplasty and has an exacting attention to detail to repeat rhinoplasty surgery. The fewer surgeries needed, the better.

Dr. Philip Miller, with over 20 years of experience as a New York rhinoplasty surgeon, has extensive experience evaluating rhinoplasty results and performing revision rhinoplasty to correct or improve upon previous procedures. If you are in search of a rhinoplasty specialist to revise your nose, contact Dr. Miller s New York City office to set up an appointment.

For more information about

revision rhinoplasty

please visit www.rhinoplastymaster.com

Article Source:

ArticleRich.com

Florida man charged with stealing Wi-Fi

Update since publication

This article mentions that Wi-Fi stands for “Wireless Fidelity”, although this is disputed.

Thursday, July 7, 2005

A Florida man is being charged with 3rd degree felony for logging into a private Wi-Fi (Wireless Fidelity) Internet access point without permission. Benjamin Smith III, 41, is set for a pre-trial hearing this month in the first case of its kind in the United States.

This kind of activity occurs frequently, but often goes undetected by the owners of these wireless access points (WAPs). Unauthorized users range from casual Web browsers, to users sending e-mails, to users involved in pornography or even illegal endeavours.

According to Richard Dinon, owner of the WAP Smith allegedly broke into, Smith was using a laptop in an automobile while parked outside Dinon’s residence.

There are many steps an owner of one of these access points can take to secure them from outside users. Dinon reportedly knew how to take these steps, but had not bothered because his “neighbors are older.”

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Florida_man_charged_with_stealing_Wi-Fi&oldid=850568”

“Dr Dino” gets 10 years in prison after failure to pay taxes

Friday, January 19, 2007

In November 2006 Pensacola, Florida evangelist Kent Hovind and his wife, Jo, were found guilty on 58 federal counts of “willful failure” to payroll taxes, structuring bank withdrawals, and obstructing federal agents. On January 19, 2007 Hovind was given ten years in federal prison, ordered to pay $640,000 in owed funds to the Internal Revenue Service, pay prosecution’s court costs of $7,078, and serve three years parole once released. Originally in November, Hovind was ordered to forfeit $430,400 and faced a maximum of 288 years in prison.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=%22Dr_Dino%22_gets_10_years_in_prison_after_failure_to_pay_taxes&oldid=3853461”

Missing boy scout from North Carolina found alive

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Michael Auberry.

Michael Auberry, the Boy Scout from Greensboro, North Carolina who went missing on Saturday was found alive by rescuers at 11:00 a.m. EST.

“We have our missing Boy Scout,” said Tina White of the United States National Park Service.

“Search and rescuers who located him have their hands on him. He is in the care of search and rescue workers. Probably the most important thing we heard on the radio is A-1, which means he is in good condition,” added White.

The 12 year-old boy was dehydrated but unharmed. He went missing when he walked away from the campsite, during lunch time, where his scout troop was staying in the mountains of North Carolina. He wanted to sleep in Saturday morning and stayed behind at the campsite with an adult scout leader.

“He was in good spirits [when he disappeared]. He ate lunch, chatting with the boys. He was walking around with I think some Pringles and a mess kit. The next moment, sounds like a blink of the eye, he was gone,” said the boy’s father, Kent Auberry.

Members of the boy’s church were praying for his safe return when the news broke that he was found alive.

“This shows that when everybody works together, good things happen. We just believed that he was going to be found,” said Susan Norman Vickers, the associate minister of the Christ United Methodist Church.

The boy had been missing for over 4 days. Some 70 people with heat detecting equipment and a plane helped in the search.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Missing_boy_scout_from_North_Carolina_found_alive&oldid=4584755”

Acne Treatment With Coconut Oil 3 Mistakes To Avoid

No doubt coconut oil is effective for acne treatment, but not all acne sufferers will get their acne treated and healed with the tropical oil. Why? This is because they have committed these 3 mistakes:

Mistake 1 – No Improvement in Diet

You know what, acne is directly related to diet, which means, a bad diet can lead to an imbalance in hormones and hence, cause your skin to become oily and acne-prone.

Imagine on one hand you’re using coconut oil to cleanse your body and skin of toxins, on the other hand you’re dumping more garbage into your body by eating all sorts of toxin-laden junk foods, how can you expect the tropical oil to treat your acne effectively?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPx5YEP7wEs[/youtube]

Therefore, enrich your diet with more healthy foods to ensure you don’t undo the oil’s skin healing effect or your acne treatment with coconut oil will become futile.

Mistake 2 – Mix with Other Products

You might think that your acne treatment can be sped up by mixing the use of other products with coconut oil. But did you know that most over-the-counter products could in fact aggravate your acne by intoxicating your skin with more toxic chemicals?

While the tropical oil is cleansing your skin of toxins, it’s advisable to not use other so-called acne-curing products so that the oil can focus fully on treating and clearing your acne.

Mistake 3 – Quit Using Coconut Oil for Acne Treatment Too Easily

As the oil of coconut is detoxifying, it’ll purge toxins out of your skin before it helps to clear your skin of acne. In other words, you may get more acne breakouts than before using the tropical oil during the treatment.

Not knowing such healing crisis, it can freak you out and make you give up your acne treatment with coconut oil easily, and run back to using over-the-counter commercial products for acne treatment, which could aggravate your skin in the long run.

So, once you commence using the oil of coconut for acne treatment, keep using it until your acne heals. It may take several days to several weeks before your skin can improve and become acne-free, depending on how much toxins you have accumulated in your body and underneath your skin over the years. In short, patience is the key to effective acne treatment with coconut oil.

Nokia Inc. announces plans for iPhone rival

Thursday, August 30, 2007

Announced early Wednesday morning at Nokia’s GoEvent, in a plan to expand the company’s revenue, Finland-based company Nokia Inc. is developing a mobile phone similar to its rival iPhone, which will be available in the near future for Nokia customers. The phone is expected to be available by 2008.

Most of the features are the same as the iPhone’s. They include music, games, and many other features, even ones that the iPhone may not have. Ovi (in Finnish meaning “Door”) will be the door for more than 2 million songs and games available for download on the new device. Users will be able to download wirelessly in their own home or anywhere there is access to a computer.

But this is not the first time Nokia has made an attempt like this to increase its revenue. In October of 2003 the company revealed the N-Gage, a game-playing cell phone, but was “stocked-out” due to poor sales. The N95 smartphone, which was released in the U.S. on April 7, 2007 (before the iPhone on June 29, 2007) includes WiFi, a GPS, a music player, and a 5 megapixel digital camera. The three other phones that were revealed at the event in London will be in-stock next quarter. The new N81 and the modified N95 smartphones were among the revealed at yesterday’s event; the N81 is a new member to Nokia’s smartphone family; the N95 has been modified by having more memory and a sleeker LCD screen.

When Nokia was asked about the striking similarity between this and the iPhone, Nokia’s Executive Vice President and General Manager of Multimedia, Anssi Vanjoki, said, “If there is something good in the world then we copy with pride.”

Nokia first demoed their iPhone rival August 29th. During their demo they omitted the fact that the demo was for the software to be in use, not the actual hardware.[1]

The phone in development
Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Nokia_Inc._announces_plans_for_iPhone_rival&oldid=610221”

McCain and Obama face off in U.S. presidential candidate debate

Sunday, September 28, 2008

The two major party presidential candidates in the US, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, faced each other yesterday in the first TV debate. Despite that McCain had asked to postpone the debate, both were present at the University of Mississippi. The debate, which was moderated by PBSJim Lehrer, was planned to be focused on foreign policy, however due to concerns about the US financial crisis, the debate began focused on economy.

McCain repeatedly referred to his experience, drawing on stories from the past. Often, he joked of his age and at one point seemed to mock his opponent. Obama spoke of mistakes and repeatedly laid out detailed plans.

The debate was widely seen as a draw. A CBS poll conducted after the debate on independent voters found that 38% felt it was a draw, 40% felt Obama had won, and 22% thought that McCain had won. Voters and analysts agreed that Obama had won on the economy, but that McCain had done better on foreign policy issues, which were the focus of the debate. However, Obama had a more substantial lead on the economy than McCain did on foreign policy.

The McCain campaign faced some ridicule prior to the debate, after airing an internet ad declaring McCain had won the debate hours before it had started.

The candidates were asked where they stood on the country’s financial plans.

Obama put forward four proposals for helping the economy. First, to “make sure that we’ve got oversight over this whole [bailout] process”. Second, to “make sure that taxpayers, when they are putting their money at risk, have the possibility of getting that money back and gains”. Third, to “make sure that none of that money is going to pad CEO bank accounts or to promote golden parachutes”. And lastly, “make sure that we’re helping homeowners, because the root problem here has to do with the foreclosures that are taking place all across the country”.

He then went on to say, “we also have to recognize that this is a final verdict on eight years of failed economic policies promoted by George Bush, supported by Senator McCain, a theory that basically says that we can shred regulations and consumer protections and give more and more to the most, and somehow prosperity will trickle down”.Lehrer then turned to McCain, giving him two minutes as well.

McCain, on the other hand, stressed the urgency of the crisis and the partisanship present in Washington before going on. “This package has transparency in it. It has to have accountability and oversight. It has to have options for loans to failing businesses, rather than the government taking over those loans. We have to — it has to have a package with a number of other essential elements to it,” he told viewers, pausing to briefly mention energy and jobs before Lehrer stopped him.

Lehrer asked the two to come back to his question and urging them to speak to each other, first turning to Senator Obama.

“We haven’t seen the language yet,” Obama began, speaking to Lehrer and not McCain. “And I do think that there’s constructive work being done out there”, he said, before noting he was optimistic a plan would come together. “The question, I think, that we have to ask ourselves is, how did we get into this situation in the first place?”

He continued, stressing his foresight on the issues two years ago, before Lehrer turned to McCain, asking if he planned to vote for the bailout plan.

McCain stammered that he hoped so. Lehrer asked again, and McCain replied, “Sure. But — but let me — let me point out, I also warned about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and warned about corporate greed and excess, and CEO pay, and all that. A lot of us saw this train wreck coming.”

McCain then continued, giving a story about former US President Dwight Eisenhower, who “on the night before the Normandy invasion, went into his room, and he wrote out two letter”. Eisenhower, he said, had taken accountability for his actions.

HAVE YOUR SAY
Who won the debate? Did the debate change your opinions on either of the candidates or the issues?
Add or view comments

“As president of the United States, people are going to be held accountable in my administration. And I promise you that that will happen.”

Obama then agreed with McCain, adding that more accountability was needed but not just when there’s a panic. “There are folks out there who’ve been struggling before this crisis took place,” Obama continued, “and that’s why it’s so important, as we solve this short-term problem, that we look at some of the underlying issues that have led to wages and incomes for ordinary Americans to go down, the — a health care system that is broken, energy policies that are not working, because, you know, 10 days ago, John said that the fundamentals of the economy are sound”.

Obama was asked to say it to McCain. Obama replied, “I do not think that they are”. Lehrer asked him to say it more directly to McCain, and Obama laughed, repeating himself to McCain.

McCain joked about his age, saying, “Are you afraid I couldn’t hear him?”

Obama said that he and McCain disagreed fundamentally and that he wanted accountability “not just when there’s a crisis for folks who have power and influence and can hire lobbyists, but for the nurse, the teacher, the police officer, who, frankly, at the end of each month, they’ve got a little financial crisis going on. They’re having to take out extra debt just to make their mortgage payments”. Tax policies, he said, were a good example.

McCain disagreed. “No, I — look, we’ve got to fix the system. We’ve got fundamental problems in the system. And Main Street is paying a penalty for the excesses and greed in Washington, D.C., and on Wall Street. So there’s no doubt that we have a long way to go. And, obviously, stricter interpretation and consolidation of the various regulatory agencies that weren’t doing their job, that has brought on this crisis”.

Lehrer went on to the next question, asking if there were fundamental differences between the approaches of the two.

McCain began by saying he wanted to lower “completely out of control” spending. He promised as president to “veto every single spending bill” He then attacked Senator Obama’s use of earmarks, citing it as a fundamental difference.

Senator Obama agreed that earmarks were being abused, but not that it was a large problem. “Earmarks account for $18 billion in last year’s budget. Senator McCain is proposing — and this is a fundamental difference between us — $300 billion in tax cuts to some of the wealthiest corporations and individuals in the country, $300 billion. Now, $18 billion is important; $300 billion is really important.” He then attacked McCain’s tax plans, saying, “you would have CEOs of Fortune 500 companies getting an average of $700,000 in reduced taxes, while leaving 100 million Americans out”.

He then stressed his focus on the middle class, saying, “We’ve got to grow the economy from the bottom up. What I’ve called for is a tax cut for 95 percent of working families, 95 percent”.

McCain was called on.

“Now, Senator Obama didn’t mention that, along with his tax cuts, he is also proposing some $800 billion in new spending on new programs,” McCain said, attacking his opponent. He also said that Obama had only suspended pork barrel spending after he started running for president.

“What I do is I close corporate loopholes,” Obama objected, “stop providing tax cuts to corporations that are shipping jobs overseas so that we’re giving tax breaks to companies that are investing here in the United States. I make sure that we have a health care system that allows for everyone to have basic coverage”.

He then turned to McCain, asking him to look at his tax policies, which he said were ignoring the middle class and a continuation of Bush policies.

Lehrer asked McCain to respond directly to Obama’s attack on his tax policies.

“Well — well, let me give you an example of what Senator Obama finds objectionable, the business tax,” McCain began. He then explained the reasoning behind his business tax cuts, saying that companies would want to start in countries where they would pay less taxes. “I want to cut that business tax. I want to cut it so that businesses will remain in — in the United States of America and create jobs”.

Obama explained that his tax cuts would affect 95% of taxpayers, then replied, “Now, John mentioned the fact that business taxes on paper are high in this country, and he’s absolutely right. Here’s the problem: There are so many loopholes that have been written into the tax code, oftentimes with support of Senator McCain, that we actually see our businesses pay effectively one of the lowest tax rates in the world”.

McCain, he said, opposed closing loopholes but just wanted to add more tax breaks on top of that.

This was a clear victory for Barack Obama on John McCain’s home turf. Senator McCain offered nothing but more of the same failed Bush policies, and Barack Obama made a forceful case for change in our economy and our foreign policy.

He went on, attacking McCain’s health credit idea, saying that McCain wanted to tax health credits. “Your employer now has to pay taxes on the health care that you’re getting from your employer. And if you end up losing your health care from your employer, you’ve got to go out on the open market and try to buy it”.

McCain responded with an example of Obama voting for tax breaks of oil companies.

Obama cut in, “John, you want to give oil companies another $4 billion”, he pointed out.

McCain shot back, attacking Obama’s earmark spending and tax policies. “Who’s the person who has believed that the best thing for America is — is to have a tax system that is fundamentally fair?”, he said, referring to himself. “And I’ve fought to simplify it, and I have proposals to simplify it”.

He then accused Obama of voting “to increase taxes on people who make as low as $42,000 a year”. Obama repeated several times that McCain’s accusations were untrue.

McCain then accused him of giving tax cuts to oil companies, which Obama once again said was untrue. “The fact of the matter is, is that I was opposed to those tax breaks, tried to strip them out,”he said. “We’ve got an emergency bill on the Senate floor right now that contains some good stuff, some stuff you want, including drilling off-shore, but you’re opposed to it because it would strip away those tax breaks that have gone to oil companies.”

Lehrer then broke in, stopping the argument. He switched to a new question, asking what priorities and goals for the country the candidates would give up as a result of the financial crisis.

He allowed Obama to answer the question first, who said many things would have to be delayed but not forgotten. He then began to list what he felt the country had to have to continue to compete.

“We have to have energy independence,” he said, “so I’ve put forward a plan to make sure that, in 10 years’ time, we have freed ourselves from dependence on Middle Eastern oil by increasing production at home, but most importantly by starting to invest in alternative energy, solar, wind, biodiesel”.

He continued, saying that the health care system had to be fixed because it was bankrupting families.

“We’ve got to make sure that we’re competing in education,” he continued. “We’ve got to make sure that our children are keeping pace in math and in science.” He also mentioned making sure college was still affordable.

He also stressed making sure the country was still stable structurally, “to make sure that we can compete in this global economy”.

Lehrer then turned to McCain, asking him to present his ideas.

“Look, we, no matter what, we’ve got to cut spending”, McCain began and reminded the audience that he “saved the taxpayers $6.8 billion by fighting a contract that was negotiated between Boeing and DOD that was completely wrong”.

Lehrer broke in, asking if it was correct that neither of them had any major changes to implement after the financial crisis.

Obama replied that many things would have to be delayed and put aside, and that investments had to be made. He then agreed with McCain that cuts had to be made. “We right now give $15 billion every year as subsidies to private insurers under the Medicare system. Doesn’t work any better through the private insurers. They just skim off $15 billion. That was a give away and part of the reason is because lobbyists are able to shape how Medicare work”.

McCain then made a suggestion. “How about a spending freeze on everything but defense, veteran affairs and entitlement programs”. Lehrer repeated “spending freeze?” and McCain went on, “I think we ought to seriously consider with the exceptions the caring of veterans, national defense and several other vital issues”.

Obama disagreed with McCain’s idea, saying it was “using a hatchet”. Some vital programs, he said, were seriously underfunded. “I went to increase early childhood education and the notion that we should freeze that when there may be, for example, this Medicare subsidy doesn’t make sense”.

The two candidates began to argue more directly.

“We have to have,” McCain argued, “wind, tide, solar, natural gas, flex fuel cars and all that but we also have to have offshore drilling and we also have to have nuclear power”.

He accused Obama of opposing storing nuclear fuel.

Lehrer interrupted the two with another question, asking how the financial crisis would affect how they ran the country.

Obama replied first. “There’s no doubt it will affect our budgets. There is no doubt about it”. He went on to stress that it was a critical time and the country’s long term priorities had to be sorted out.

There was one man who was presidential tonight, that man was John McCain. There was another who was political, that was Barack Obama. John McCain won this debate and controlled the dialogue throughout, whether it was the economy, taxes, spending, Iraq or Iran.

McCain replied by criticizing Obama’s health care plans. “I want the families to make decisions between themselves and their doctors. Not the federal government,” he said, then called for lower spending.

He went on to speak about the national debt and stressing the importance of low taxes.

Obama went on the offensive, attacking McCain’s record of voting. “John, it’s been your president who you said you agreed with 90 percent of the time who presided over this increase in spending”, he said, accusing him of voting for an “orgy of spending”.

McCain countered that he had opposed Bush “on spending, on climate change, on torture of prisoner, on – on Guantanamo Bay. On a — on the way that the Iraq War was conducted”. He called himself a maverick, and referred to his running mate as a maverick as well.

Lehrer asked the two what the lessons of Iraq were.

McCain answered first, stressing that the war in Iraq was going well. “I think the lessons of Iraq are very clear,” he answered, “that you cannot have a failed strategy that will then cause you to nearly lose a conflict”.

He went on to praise the efforts in Iraq, saying the strategy was successful and the US was winning. “And we will come home with victory and with honor. And that withdrawal is the result of every counterinsurgency that succeeds”, and continued that Iraq would make a stable ally.

Lehrer asked Obama how he saw the lessons of Iraq, who began by questioning the fundamentals of the war and whether the US should have gone in the first place.

“We took our eye off [bin Laden]. And not to mention that we are still spending $10 billion a month, when they have a $79 billion surplus, at a time when we are in great distress here at home, and we just talked about the fact that our budget is way overstretched and we are borrowing money from overseas to try to finance just some of the basic functions of our government”.

The lesson, he said, was to “never hesitate to use military force”, but to use it wisely.

McCain was asked if he agreed on the lesson, though he did not comment on a lesson learned. Obama, he said, had been wrong about the surge.

The two opponents then began arguing, as Lehrman tried to mediate them.

McCain felt it was remarkable that “Senator Obama is the chairperson of a committee that oversights NATO that’s in Afghanistan. To this day, he has never had a hearing”.

“The issues of Afghanistan,” Obama responded, “the issues of Iraq, critical issues like that, don’t go through my subcommittee because they’re done as a committee as a whole”.

He then began to attack McCain’s optimism. “You said that we were going to be greeted as liberators. You were wrong. You said that there was no history of violence between Shiite and Sunni. And you were wrong”.

McCain responded to the criticism by telling a story of when he spoke to troops who were re-enlisting. “And you know what they said to us? They said, let us win. They said, let us win. We don’t want our kids coming back here. And this strategy, and this general, they are winning. Senator Obama refuses to acknowledge that we are winning in Iraq”.

McCain repeatedly accused Obama of opposing funding to troops.

Obama responded by speaking to Lehrer, to explain why he had voted against funding troops. “Senator McCain opposed funding for troops in legislation that had a timetable, because he didn’t believe in a timetable. I opposed funding a mission that had no timetable, and was open- ended, giving a blank check to George Bush. We had a difference on the timetable”.

“Admiral Mullen suggests that Senator Obama’s plan is dangerous for America,” McCain cut in once Obama had finished.

Obama said it was not the case, that the wording was “a precipitous withdrawal would be dangerous”.

McCain then argued that Iraq, and not Afghanistan, was the central battle ground against terrorism. He also attacked Obama’s surprise that the surge had worked.

Lehrer switched to a new question. “Do you think more troops — more U.S. troops should be sent to Afghanistan, how many, and when?”

Obama mentioned he had been saying more troops in Afghanistan were needed for over a year. He argued that no Al-Qaeda were present in Iraq before the invasion, and the people there had nothing to do with 9/11.

He then went on to list a three part plan beginning with pressuring the Afghani government to work for it’s people and control it’s poppy trade. He also pressed the need to stop giving money to Pakistan.

To be frank, I’m surprised McCain didn’t play the POW card more tonight, consider how frequently he and his campaign have used it earlier in the campaign.

McCain responded by saying Iraq had to be stabilized and that he would not make the mistake of leaving Iraq the way it is.

“If you’re going to aim a gun at somebody,” he said, “you’d better be prepared to pull the trigger”.

Obama responded by arguing that if the Pakistani government would not take care of terrorists in it’s borders, action had to be taken. He then commented on past US policies with Pakistan, saying that the US support of Musharraf had alienated the Pakistani people.

“And as a consequence, we lost legitimacy in Pakistan. We spent $10 billion. And in the meantime, they weren’t going after al Qaeda, and they are more powerful now than at any time since we began the war in Afghanistan. That’s going to change when I’m president of the United States”, he finished.

McCain quickly replied that Pakistan was a failed state at the time. He then went on to talk about his voting record. “I have a record of being involved in these national security issues, which involve the highest responsibility and the toughest decisions that any president can make, and that is to send our young men and women into harm’s way”.

Obama argued that Afghanistan could not be muddled through, and that problems were being caused by not focusing on Al-Qaeda. As he finished, Lehrer attempted to announce a new question, but McCain quickly attacked Obama, saying his plans would have a “calamitous effect” on national security and the region.

Lehrer directed his next question towards McCain, asking about his thoughts on Iran and it’s threat to the US.

McCain’s reading of the threat in Iran was “if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it is an existential threat to the State of Israel and to other countries in the region”. He stressed the need to avoid another Holocaust, and the need for a league of democracies

Anybody hearing a snicker from McCain while Obama is talking?

to battle Iran. “I am convinced that together, we can, with the French, with the British, with the Germans and other countries, democracies around the world, we can affect Iranian behavior”.

Obama went next, focusing on the Iraq war’s effect on Iran. Iraq, he said, was Iran’s “mortal enemy” and had kept Iran from becoming a threat. “That was cleared away. And what we’ve seen over the last several years is Iran’s influence grow. They have funded Hezbollah, they have funded Hamas, they have gone from zero centrifuges to 4,000 centrifuges to develop a nuclear weapon”.

He then went on to say that refusing to use diplomacy with hostile nations has only made matters worse and isolated the US.

Lehrer turned to McCain, asking him how he felt about diplomacy as a solution.

McCain hurried through his response, attacking Obama on his willingness to meet with hostile leaders without preconditions. People like Ahmadinejad, he said, would have their ideas legitimized if a President met with them.

Obama responded by pointing out that Ahmadinejad was only a minor leader. Meeting leaders without preconditions, he said, “doesn’t mean that you invite them over for tea one day”. He then turned to attacking McCain, who he said “would not meet potentially with the prime minister of Spain, because he — you know, he wasn’t sure whether they were aligned with us. I mean, Spain? Spain is a NATO ally”.

McCain retorted that he was not yet President so it would be out of place. The two then began to argue over the comments of Dr. Kissinger’s stance on meeting foreign leaders.

McCain argued that meeting with and legitimizing ideas was dangerous and naive, and said it was a fundamental difference of opinion.

Obama accused McCain of misrepresentation, stressing that he would not speak without low level talks and preparations.

McCain responded by mocking Obama. “So let me get this right. We sit down with Ahmadinejad, and he says, ‘We’re going to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth,’ and we say, ‘No, you’re not’? Oh, please”.

The two started arguing among each other, as Lehrer attempted to interject, finally succeeding with a new question. He turned to Obama, asking how he saw the relationship with Russia and it’s potential.

Obama began spelling out his opinion, stating that he felt the US approach to Russia had to be evaluated. He then continued that the US has to press for a unified alliance and for Russia to remove itself from other nations, adding that the US had to “explain to the Russians that you cannot be a 21st-century superpower, or power, and act like a 20th-century dictatorship”.

He went on, stressing the importance of diplomacy and affirming relationships, and inviting Russian-influenced countries into NATO. “Now, we also can’t return to a Cold War posture with respect to Russia. It’s important that we recognize there are going to be some areas of common interest. One is nuclear proliferation”.

McCain responded by attacking Obama’s reaction to the Russian-Georgian conflict, criticizing his initial comment that both sides should show restraint, calling it naive. “He doesn’t understand that Russia committed serious aggression against Georgia. And Russia has now become a nation fueled by petro-dollars that is basically a KGB apparatchik-run government”.

Lehrer asked Obama if there were any major differences between the two’s opinion on Russia, who answered that he and McCain had similar opinions on Russia. He then stressed foresight in dealing with Russia, as well as reducing dependence on foreign oil through alternative energy.

“Over 26 years, Senator McCain voted 23 times against alternative energy, like solar, and wind, and biodiesel,” he mentioned.

The two began to argue over alternative energy. As Lehrer began announcing the next question, McCain interjected. “No one from Arizona is against solar. And Senator Obama says he’s for nuclear, but he’s against reprocessing and he’s against storing So,” he continued, as Obama objected, “it’s hard to get there from here. And off-shore drilling is also something that is very important and it is a bridge”.

McCain continued, as Obama interrupted to correct him, saying that he had voted for storing nuclear waste safely.

The two began interrupting each other, each trying to get a word in, before Lehrer stopped them and moved on.

“What do you think the likelihood is that there would be another 9/11-type attack on the continental United States?” asked Lehrer.

McCain said that America was far safer since 9/11, which he claimed a hand in. He went on to stress better intelligence and technology in keeping America safe, but that he felt the US was far safer.

Lehrer then turned to Obama.

Obama disagreed slightly, saying America was safer in some ways, but “we still have a long way to go”. He also felt that the US was not focusing enough on Al-Qaeda and fighting in Iraq was not making the US safer.

McCain accused Senator Obama of not understanding that “if we fail in Iraq, it encourages al Qaeda. They would establish a base in Iraq”.

Lehrer asked if Obama agreed.

Obama argued that the sole focus was currently Iraq, but that “in the meantime, bin Laden is still out there. He is not captured. He is not killed”. He noted that $10 billion was spent in Iraq every month, instead of going to healthcare. He argued that veterans were not getting the benefits they deserved, and that the next president’s strategies had to be broader.

McCain responded by attacking Obama saying he didn’t think Obama had the knowledge or experience to be President.

Obama then said that the job of the next President would be to repair America’s image and economy.

McCain concluded by citing his POW experience. “Jim, when I came home from prison, I saw our veterans being very badly treated, and it made me sad. And I embarked on an effort to resolve the POW-MIA issue, which we did in a bipartisan fashion, and then I worked on normalization of relations between our two countries so that our veterans could come all the way home”.

“And that ends this debate tonight,” finished Jim Lehrer.

Retrieved from “https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=McCain_and_Obama_face_off_in_U.S._presidential_candidate_debate&oldid=1985219”