Wisconsin voters weigh in on presidential candidates
-
- February
- 19
Voters in Hawaii, Washington state and Wisconsin registered their preferences for president today in the latest round of contests for the Democratic and Republican nominations.
Here’s what some voters in Wisconsin had to say about their choice:
Gary Retzak of Manitowoc voted for Democrat Barack Obama because he likes the Illinois senator’s “message of hope.’’
Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona received support from Steve Sanders, also of Manitowoc. “I voted for McCain, though I’m disappointed the two national parties are dictating our choices, rather than the populace, said Sanders, who was perhaps sorry the field of candidates has narrowed from what it was duing earlier primaries. “I find it fascinating that we are the most powerful country in the world and these are the four best people?”
Carl Berger of Manitowoc chose New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic primary, saying, “I want the golden years to come back.”
Lynn Retzak of Manitowoc, a former Clinton supporter, switched to Obama. “I think he’s the only one who has a chance to beat the Republicans,” she said.
Scott Pulak, a student at St. Norbert College in De Pere, voted for Obama. “I wanted to get my opinion out,’’ said Pulak. “I’ve seen the stuff on TV, like the presidential debates, and I like what he stands for.”
Craig Schmid, 21, full-time student at Mid-State Technical College’s Wisconsin Rapids campus and veteran who served in Kuwait for about one year, voted for Obama in his first presidential primary. “Obama is more for the health care system and getting more tax cuts for middle-income families,’’ Schmid said. “He’s also trying to bring troops back home, too, and trying to resolve that conflict.” – Contributing: Colleen Kottke, The Reporter, Fond du Lac; Charlie Matthews, Herald Times Reporter, Manitowoc; Patti Zarling, Green Bay Press-Gazette.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, February 19th, 2008 at 6:06 pm by Brian Tumulty.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
| 
Email This
Carl Berger says he likes Clinton because he
“wants the golden years to come back.”
Well, he better want Harry Truman or Eisenhower
instead, because the only thing golden about the
Clinton years was all that coinage they stashed
away for themselves.
I’m a first timer to this blog. I had a concern about Barak Obama’s religon. Is he Muslim or not. It was also brought to my attention that he will not say the pledge because of this. I do not know if any of this is true or false but as an American I hope someone is finding out before we vote him in. I have nothing against other religons but everything about our Country was built around the Christian religion.(Money, Pledge,Politics,Songs,Etc) If he does not say the pledge for other reasons we should find this out also.If all of this is false which I hope it is then lets move forward. Little Fish
Little Fish-
While most/some of our Founders were Christian, they also recognized that it’s hard for folks to agree on which version of religion, which is why they put in that stuff about freedom of religion, and the separation of church and state. So, it’s not really a Christian nation, although most of the moral issues dealt with in our laws are shared by most religions, including Christianity.
As for Obama, he’s not a Muslim, and he does say the Pledge. More info on that can be found at snopes.com.
Thanks for the info. Little Fish
Walt is right about Obama. His father was a Muslim but
apparently deserted the family long ago.
In terms of population, the US IS a Christian nation.
Especially if you include Catholics in the “Christian”
category. Most or even all of the Founding Fathers were
Christian, too.
The term “separation of church and state” has been
mis-used in recent years by the far Left. All it
really means, per the Constitution, is that Congress
cannot establish a state religion. It doesn’t mean that
religion, discussions about it, or religious displays are
to be banned from public property or discourse.
It’s not just establishment of a state religion. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;”
‘’The Free Exercise Clause . . . withdraws from legislative power, state and federal, the exertion of any restraint on the free exercise of religion. Its purpose is to secure religious liberty in the individual by prohibiting any invasions there by civil authority.’’ It bars ‘’governmental regulation of religious beliefs as such,’’ prohibiting misuse of secular governmental programs ‘’to impede the observance of one or all religions or . . . to discriminate invidiously between religions . . . even though the burden may be characterized as being only indirect.’’ Freedom of conscience is the basis of the free exercise clause, and government may not penalize or discriminate against an individual or a group of individuals because of their religious views nor may it compel persons to affirm any particular beliefs.”
Why wouldn’t you include Catholics as Christians? You mean all these years I haven’t been following Mr. JC? If you think about it, Protestants are derived from Catholicism, which if you want to keep going, is a splinter group of Judaism.
;-)
Thanks for the clarification re: the Constitution.
I do include Catholics as Christians, but some
of the left-wing crowd and media has turned “Christian”
into a word they apply to the “far right” Evangelicals
and try to lump all Protestants and Catholics under it.