In Londonderry, NH yesterday, Obama mocked all the Joe the Plumbers out there when he said, "And then he's trying to suggest that a plumber is the guy he's fighting for...How many plumbers you know makin' a quarter million dollars a year?"

Patterico's Pontifications posted some examples (http://www.patterico.com/2008/10/07/obamas-tax-plan-and-small-businesses/) of the maximum average annual receipt allowed to be classified as a small business according to the Small Business Administration:


Crop production of all types — $750,000
Animal production except for cattle & chicken/eggs — $750,000
Cattle feedlots — $2.5M
Chicken/egg production — $12.5M
Forestry & logging — $7M
Fishing — $4M
Irrigation, sewage, water supplies — $7M
Housing construction — $33.5M
Heavy and civil engineering construction — $33.5M
Dredging and cleanup — $20M
Concrete, framing, and other housing contractors — $14M
Car dealers — $23-29M
RV, motorcycle, & boat dealers — $7M
Furniture, hardware, clothing & sporting good stores — $7M
Electronic stores — $9M
Supermarkets, gas stations & department stores — $27M
Pharmacies — $7M

Here is the entry on plumbing contractors specifically according to the SBA:

238220 Plumbing, Heating, and Air-Conditioning Contractors $14.0 million

While poor ol' Joe the Plumber is getting hammered now, how many small businesses are going to get hammered under an Obama administration? How many plumbing contractors do you think DON'T have a quarter million in receipts per year?

While Obama is chastising McCain for not fighting for the little guy and destroying Joe the Plumber, Michelle was having herself an ordinary snack (http://www.nypost.com/seven/10172008/gossip/pagesix/obamas_fancy_snack_133922.htm):


THOUGH he's battling GOP accusations that he's an Ivy League elitist, Barack Obama has a lifestyle of the rich and famous, like TV show host Robin Leach, who always signed off, "Champagne wishes and caviar dreams!" While he was at a meeting at the Waldorf-Astoria at 4 p.m. Wednesday, Michelle Obama called room service and ordered lobster hors d'oeuvres, two whole steamed lobsters, Iranian caviar and champagne, a tipster told Page Six.

I guess we've moved on from those chili at Wendy's days of 2004.

Around here a plumber could easily make the $250 M . If he has a modest home and a couple of kids then he is not exactly living in Biden-land either .
Like I said; Joe the plumber represents the prototypical "middle class " worker that the Dems. Used to stand up for. But the Alinsky model says you need to play lip service to them even as you despise them. Sometimes Obama's contempt slips out.

"Our rebels have contemptuously rejected the values and the way of life of the middle class. They have stigmatized it as materialistic, decadent, bourgeois, degenerate, imperialistic, war-mongering, brutalized and corrupt. They are right; but we must begin from where we are if we are to build power for change, and the power and the people are in the middle class majority."
'Rules for Radicals'

I think the whole point is that we are going to have to get the money to pay for two wars and the social security for the baby boomers from somewhere... (since many baby boomers I know didn't start saving until their 40's-- which means they don't have a lot of money saved and prices are only going up)

We can't keep borrowing it from other countries as the republicans like to do. Someday we're going to have to pay the piper. The middle class can't pay for it all, because we're supposed to be the ones doing the shopping... right? So where do you think this money's going to come from? And I'm going to assume since you all are screaming for the rights of people making over 250K a year that you, yourselves make this much? You must to be dripping with so much sympathy.

Because I don't make that much I should display "class envy " ?

There are not enough rich to pay for all the entitlements that we have accumulated on our way to the nanny state so yes the "middle class" does need to pay the bulk of it if we continue along that path.

Let's say Joe the plumber gets hit heavy with taxes when he eventually achieves his dream of owning his own business. What are his choices ? Maybe he does the "patriotic" thing and emptys his pockets willingly as Joe Biden suggests . Maybe he just doesn't work as hard so he can control his income. Perhaps instead he decides he could shut down ;lay off his staff ;go solo in an underground economy . That happens a lot in socialist states .

I can't control what has already been plundered . Had they not lied to us about social security insurance and instead of adding it to the general revenue ,put it aside for it's intended use the system most likely would be solvent. Ask me how to fix it now and I would argue that a mandatory investment by the individual in TIPS would create a secure retirement for most folks .

So Obama is going to raise the rate on adjusted gross income over 250000 from

33 %

» 2008 Federal Income Tax Brackets: Official IRS Figures on Blueprint for Financial Prosperity (http://www.bargaineering.com/articles/2008-federal-income-tax-brackets-official-irs-figures.html)

To 39%.

Here is another large group that will be affected

Physicians [ solo, small groups ]
Oh, you think, they make a lot of money - they should pay more. But think about the unintended consequences.
1] fees - especially to the uninsured / self pay
Will rise. - so much for increasing healthcare affordability.
2] These SB will hire less employees if not cut number of employees and reduce benefits.
3] They will scale back or not see any new Medicare or Medicaid folks because their lower reimbursement won't cover the cost of overhead.
4] Many older physicians that can retire, will rather than having to work harder for less.
5] You think your doctor does not have time now to address more than one issue? When he / she has to see more people to make the same amount - guess what - shorter visits.
6] your doctor will use more " extenders " such as Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants - not necessarily a bad thing, but you are paying to see the doctor.

The same can be said for other high income professionals, such as lawyers, dentists, veternarians etc...

It is the law of unintended consequences:






A TIGER OF A TAX - New York Post (http://www.nypost.com/seven/07022008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/a_tiger_of_a_tax_118143.htm)

Taxes don't occur in a vacuum. Wealthy taxpayers and large businesses don't simply continue along as if tax-rate hikes of 30-plus percent are just another day at the office.

* Businesses will raise prices to try to recoup the extra costs - a cause of inflation.

* Entrepreneurs will adjust their expectations with respect to investing their risk capital - souring the economy.

* Enterprises will visit more carefully the advantages of moving business overseas.

* Generally, all such individuals and businesses will take all possible legal steps to reduce the impact of confiscatory tax rates.. .

Only once since 1917 has there been a tax-rate increase equal to or greater than the two twin tax proposals being made by Obama. That tax increase, the Revenue Act of 1932, was proposed by Herbert Hoover. The result was an even greater budget deficit, plummeting tax revenue and a longer Great Depression.




--------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is an interesting poll that points out the difference between Obama and McCain



Rasmussen Reports™: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/state_toplines/tennessee/toplines_tennessee_presidential_election_september _29_2008)


7*What is more important, creating economic growth or reducing the income gap between rich and poor?

65% Creating economic growth **
27% Reducing the gap between rich and poor
8% Not sure

8* Which is more important to John McCain, creating economic growth or reducing the income gap between rich and poor?

67% Creating economic growth **
12% Reducing the gap between rich and poor
21% Not sure

9* Which is more important to Barack Obama, creating economic growth or reducing the income gap between rich and poor?

20% Creating economic growth
62% Reducing the gap between rich and poor
18% Not sure


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Obama would leave the top corporate tax rate at 35 percent. McCain would cut it to 25 percent.


The Tax Foundation - Do Corporate Taxes Impede Economic Growth? (http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/539.html)


The Tax Foundation - U.S. Corporate Taxes Now 50 Percent Higher than OECD Average | Twine (http://www.twine.com/item/11wjlmkyz-df4/the-tax-foundation-u-s-corporate-taxes-now-50-percent-higher-than-oecd-average)





if countries want to enhance their economic growth they would do well to move away from income taxes—especially corporate income taxes —toward less distortive taxes such as consumption-based taxes. The key to creating a growth-oriented corporate income tax system is to impose a reasonably low tax rate with few exemptions.







Now I know this sounds counterintuitive to the Obama's populist mantra that the rich, and the big rich corporations are evil and they need to pay more, but think about it...

If Big Corp can make more money by moving US HQ and using non-American labor force
Because Iceland or Ireland or South Korea has a corp tax rate < 20 % - they will.
And who loses - Your average American.



News N Economics: High corporate tax rates are stunting economic growth (http://www.newsneconomics.com/2008/09/high-corporate-tax-rates-in-us-are.html)

because I don't make that much I should display "class envy " ?


Class envy? Let's try National Reality. If I am taxed anymore I'll have a hard time paying my bills. If Exxon is taxed more their profit goes from 40 billion for 2007 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/01/AR2007020100714.html) to 25 billion. I'm glad you are a champion there, fighting for their cause. I was being nice about the baby boomers but I think your idea is better. Let's just tell them all... gee we don't want to be your nanny. Let's just give them exactly what they paid and not adjust for inflation. The rest? Pay for it yourself and work till your 80-- I'm sure Wal-mart will pay you handsomely as their store greeter while giving you GREAT health benefits! So we can ditch medicare too. Two problems solved!

don't put words in my mouth .there was a social contract implied in the SS agreement . The people have lived up to their end of the bargain.. the government hasn't... duh... word to those who think they should empty their wallets for more government guarantees.

You do realize of course that corporations do not pay taxes... they pass along that expense to their customers. The US has the second highest corporate tax rate in the industrial world .When jobs get outsourced oversees you ask why ?

And who owns that EXXON stock you would devalue ? Uhhh citizens mostly.. in mutual funds... 401Ks ,even municiple retirements funds. So trash corporate profits.
Clearly you would consign us as wards of the state from cradel to grave.

Class envy? Let's try National Reality. If I am taxed anymore I'll have a hard time paying my bills. If Exxon is taxed more their profit goes from 40 billion for 2007 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/01/AR2007020100714.html) to 25 billion. I'm glad you are a champion there, fighting for their cause. I was being nice about the baby boomers but I think your idea is better. Let's just tell them all... gee we don't want to be your nanny. Let's just give them exactly what they paid and not adjust for inflation. The rest? Pay for it yourself and work till your 80-- I'm sure Wal-mart will pay you handsomely as their store greeter while giving you GREAT health benefits! So we can ditch medicare too. Two problems solved!

You know if you expect Exxon to take a hit to the tune of 15 billion or 37.5% hit, why don't you take an equal percent pay/ 'profit' cut. For example if you make 40 k per year make 25 k instead. You are only sacrificing 15 k "for the greater good" while Exxon is sacrificing 15 billion.

And with your paycheck being 37.5% less, expect to pay more for gas because companies like Exxon can't reinvest into maintaining what they have or researching and developiing new sources of oil. Meanwhile imports from foreign sources will go up.

You have a great theory there ;)

You know if you expect Exxon to take a hit to the tune of 15 billion or 37.5% hit, why don't you take an equal percent pay/ 'profit' cut. For example if you make 40 k per year make 25 k instead. You are only sacrificing 15 k "for the greater good" while Exxon is sacrificing 15 billion.

And with your paycheck being 37.5% less, expect to pay more for gas because companies like Exxon can't reinvest into maintaining what they have or researching and developiing new sources of oil. Meanwhile imports from foreign sources will go up.

You have a great theory there ;)

When you only make 40K a year 15K is a huge difference. If I had to take that much of a pay cut I would be selling my car and buying a huffy. Either way Exxon is going to lose money.

In all the discussions of the big bad companies there is something that gets lost.
Have any of you ever gotten a job from a poor man? I didn't think so!
Are multi- million dollar bonusus justified? I don't think so.
But my mom used to say, "Don't cut your nose off to spite your face".

The middle class can't pay for it all, because we're supposed to be the ones doing the shopping... right? So where do you think this money's going to come from? And I'm going to go ahead and assume since you all are screaming for the rights of people making over 250K a year that you, yourselves make this much? You must to be dripping with so much sympathy.

Um... no, but as Galveston suggested, do you want to work for a poor person? I'm a firm believer that I can't make more money unless my boss makes more money. That's the point isn't it? If corporations don't profit how do you profit? If corporations don't profit, how does my retirement account grow? And as tom said these companies pass their expenses off on the consumer, so why should we make it more expensive for them to do business so they can make it more expensive for us to buy goods? Fact is we need rich people for us to make a living, we need profitable companies to afford retirement, we need less burden on corporations to make goods affordable.

Um...no, but as Galveston suggested, do you want to work for a poor person? I'm a firm believer that I can't make more money unless my boss makes more money. That's the point isn't it? If corporations don't profit how do you profit? If corporations don't profit, how does my retirement account grow? And as tom said these companies pass their expenses off on the consumer, so why should we make it more expensive for them to do business so they can make it more expensive for us to buy goods? Fact is we need rich people for us to make a living, we need profitable companies to afford retirement, we need less burden on corporations to make goods affordable.


So how do we pay off the deficit? How do we fund the Iraq war? How do we fund the war in Afghanistan? How do we compete with China in manufacturing when they don't play by the same rules and their people aren't free? How do we stop global warming or pollution?

What exactly is your solution? Think we can do it without raising any taxes at all?

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/obamas-small-business-nonsense-270414.html#post1326483

last third.


---------------------------------------------------


CUT GOVERNMENT SPENDING

Think about your own budget.
If you are in debt, one part of the equation is cut spending.

Cut the pork. Some sites that have good ideas.

Americans for Tax Reform (http://www.atr.org/index.html)


Citizens Against Government Waste: Homepage (http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=homePage)


-------------------------------------------------------------------------


INCREASE REVENUE

You Can't Soak the Rich - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121124460502305693.html?mod=todays_us_opinion)




What happens if we instead raise tax rates? Economists of all persuasions accept that a tax rate hike will reduce GDP, in which case Hauser's Law says it will also lower tax revenue. That's a highly inconvenient truth for redistributive tax policy, and it flies in the face of deeply felt beliefs about social justice. It would surely be unpopular today with those presidential candidates who plan to raise tax rates on the rich – if they knew about it.



Hoover Institution - Hoover Digest - The Coming Tax Hike (http://www.hoover.org/publications/digest/22716719.html)



The current economic slowdown will increase the federal budget deficit this year and, in all likelihood, next year as well. But as the economy enters its recovery phase, rising taxes would choke off the recovery. The right policy, for both the economy and the budget, would be to make current tax rates permanent well before the scheduled increase. Giving investors greater certainty that current tax rates will be maintained will spur investment and aid the economic recovery, as it did in 2003. Federal budget balance will be achieved once the economy is again operating normally.

How do we stop global warming or pollution?

Alaska state's glaciers, after two centuries of shrinkage (a trend that began before the advent of the internal combustion engine and smokestack economy), actually grew during the winter of 2007-08.
The International Arctic Research Center reports 29% more Arctic sea ice this year than last.Temperatures in Oregon hit record lows, and on Oct. 10 Boise, Idaho, got its earliest snow ever.South Africa, had its coldest September night in history a month ago, and had an unusual late-winter snow.August in New Zealand, officials at Mount Ruapehu reported the largest snow base ever.

What do these events mean ? Absolutely nothing... much like the stats that are forever used to justify the global warming theory. Especially the premise that it's root cause is human activity.

Physicians [ solo, small groups ]
Oh, you think, they make alot of money - they should pay more. But think about the unintended consequences.
1] fees - especially to the uninsured / self pay
will rise. - so much for increasing healthcare affordability.
2] These SB will hire less employees if not cut number of employees and reduce benefits.
3] They will scale back or not see any new Medicare or Medicaid folks because their lower reimbursement won't cover the cost of overhead.
4] Many older physicians that can retire, will rather than having to work harder for less.
5] You think your doctor does not have time now to adress more than one issue? When he / she has to see more people to make the same amount - guess what - shorter visits.
6] your doctor will use more " extenders " such as Nurse Practitioners and Physician Assistants - not necessarily a bad thing, but you are paying to see the doctor.


What's really killing physicians is the cost of medical malpractice insurance due to an overly litigious society and rising student loan costs for medical school and the interest on those loans, and the uninsured who can't pay their medical bills... not taxes. I never said I was for raising taxes for physicians but you can't act like the system is perfect and everything's going great. Health care is unaffordable and because insurance is tied to your job there are real problems for people with pre-existing conditions, college students who are working part time and elderly people who are retired. We can't continue to ignore these problems. Not to even mention the fact that many people who use emergency rooms lack basic routine care which is often what catches life threatening progressive diseases that would be much less expensive to treat if caught early.

Edited to add: I read the last third of the post you linked to and I have always been interested in a national sales tax based on consumption and I'm not opposed to this idea at all. I think in many ways it would work well because people who have more income buy more luxury goods and would therefore pay more taxes. It would also curb consumption BUT it wouldn't solve the problem of Americans not paying the real value for goods-- manufacturing would still go to China, and I'm still for government environmental regulation. Getting rid of income tax and having a very simplified corporate tax would drastically reduce the need for accountants... (eureka!) not to mention save people a heck of a lot of time and paper. Alas accountants are probably the people lobbying against such a change. I owned a small corporation and my accountant made a LOT of money on me.

Alaska state's glaciers, after two centuries of shrinkage (a trend that began before the advent of the internal combustion engine and smokestack economy), actually grew during the winter of 2007-08.
The International Arctic Research Center reports 29% more Arctic sea ice this year than last.Temperatures in Oregon hit record lows, and on Oct. 10 Boise, Idaho, got its earliest snow ever.South Africa, had its coldest September night in history a month ago, and had an unusual late-winter snow.August in New Zealand, officials at Mount Ruapehu reported the largest snow base ever.

What do these events mean ? Absolutely nothing ...much like the stats that are forever used to justify the global warming theory. Especially the premise that it's root cause is human activity.

Wow... we disagree on just about everything.

You would do well to read Scientific American, Discover, or any scientific journal. You scoff and say that college students are "generally stupid people" when many of them are doing vital research. And then you ignore the scientific community in favor of big business, profit, and the random soundbites which is not just stupid, it's dangerous for the human race. I wonder, Tom... did you ever get a degree, yourself? You say I have class envy because I'm not sympathizing with the ultra wealthy... yet your college kid remark makes me wonder...

The simple fact is that Obama's tax plan will increase the unemployment rate. That's not good! More unemployed people=less goods and serveces purchased=more jobs lost. You should get the picture.
I have no idea how we will ever pay off the national debt, but Obama's way will just dig this hole deeper.

You did not see the sarcasm in my comments about college students being too stupid to handle the responsibilities of having credit cards ?

I read Discover and do peruse other scientific journals from time to time. They represent an orthodoxy bordering on religious regarding climate.

But some scientists are beginning to realize this and many are breaking from the gospel of the Goracle. Perhaps when sufficient numbers break rank there can be real scientific debate on climate change .
If you ask me I say "climate change happens" .
I continue to read evidence from both sides and think that ultimately solar activity has the greatest role . This year sun spot activity was the lowest it has been in a long time.
VANISHING SUNSPOTS PRELUDE TO GLOBAL COOLING? (http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=31:vanishing-sunspots-prelude-to-global-cooling&catid=1:latest)


Sunspots and climate (http://www-das.uwyo.edu/~geerts/cwx/notes/chap02/sunspots.html)

Suddenly the evidence I cited about temperatures dropping and glaciers on a rebound have some related non-human activity as a possible cause. Do I think this is good news ? No.

During the Little Ice Age, global temperatures dropped sharply. New York Harbor froze hard enough to allow people to walk from Manhattan to Staten Island, and in Britain, people reported sighting Eskimos paddling canoes off the coast. Glaciers in Norway grew up to 100 meters a year, destroying farms and villages.

You did not see the sarcasm in my comments about college students being too stupid to handle the responsibilities of having credit cards ?



No... sorry. I dated a republican who didn't have a degree and he said things like this all the time. :p

The latest article and talk about a mini-ice age was covered in Discover magazine over a two years ago. I read both Discover and Scientific American from front to back and have been for many years. The mini-ice age is expected because once glaciers start melting from global warming largely attributed human activity, the influx of icy water into the ocean will have a significant, but temporary cooling effect on the planet. Once the water warms up and there is no more ice our planet will then really start to heat up... much more significantly than it is now.

Keeping up with science (and not finding a random article to suit my purposes) I see that the most brilliant scientists in the world community by and large are not just saying here or there... "You know we think humans might be causing the planet to warm up..." No, Tom. They are screaming it. Cover story after cover story after cover story after cover story. And people like you who bought the republicans talk that we should go on business as usual are being convinced by politicians who were bought by CORPORATIONS making too much money to lose it. Do you not get it? Are you ever, for the sake of humans, going get this?

And this is the problem with money and greed and the business schools who espouse these principles. The bottom line or money is what matters to corporations. Should the amount of money they make or don't make determine... everything? Because that's what libertarianism leaves us with.

The corporate goal of profit and growth leads to consolidation and if you think the government is big, bad and bureacratic, having a few ultra-large, elite corporations who own everything isn't any better and that's pretty much the destination of the free market if left unchecked. For me, big corporation isn't any better than big government. A purist free market disciple is no better than a communist. Both philosophies are too extreme and it leaves people at large vulnerable.

The whole point of libertarianism is privatization with little government oversight (if I understand it correctly?) Well when your only voice of dissent against the corporation is your shopping habits, you can't afford not to pay attention to where your goods are coming from and this means looking at what's going on in other parts of the world as a moral obligation. This personally seems like a lot of work for a mother with a family to raise, which is why I'm for government regulation-- especially when it comes to environmental impact and fair trade. And I'm sorry... I'm not about to get rid of the FDA after seeing thousands of infants sickened in China because corporations lacked oversight and wanted to make a quick buck. A completely unregulated market left to its own devices leaves people very vulnerable. Not buying that product isn't going to give those mothers their babies back.

The simple fact is that Obama's tax plan will increase the unemployment rate. That's not good! More unemployed people=less goods and serveces purchased=more jobs lost. You should get the picture.
I have no idea how we will ever pay off the national debt, but Obama's way will just dig this hole deeper.

Gal--- I understand your points and I do understand your apprehension. I don't think that anyone believes taxing people to death is going to solve everything. I'm certainly not for this long term. But I do think we are so off track right now we have to do something for the short term and becoming anymore indebted to China is just downright dangerous for us. I know that Obama doesn't believe endless taxation is the answer and any liberal I talk to doesn't believe it either. I think the issue right now is getting back on track. John McCain wants a spending freeze on domestic spending (which is a tiny amount compared to war spending) and he cares about only one segment of the population. Veterans. That means people like you and me and our kids have to give up things like national park maintenance and protecting endangered species and help with education (even though America has never needed more skilled workers to compete in the global economy as it does now) It means infants born into poverty dying. It means doing NOTHING about the fact that the U.S. has the one of the highest infant mortality rates for an industrialized nation (so much for having the best healthcare system in the world). On the flipside we have Obama who wants to start thinking about ending a war that we aren't and can't win and who is asking huge corporations like Exxon who had record profits to the tune of 40 billion dollars to chip in some more to help the country in a time of crisis. Hmm... infants dying, grizzly bears going extinct, students not going to college or Exxon and companies like them paying some more in taxes.

I have to go with investing in the people on this one. If the people's needs are neglected things start to fall apart, education levels plummet, the crime rate goes up and we'll never be able to compete again in the global economy.

I know that Obama doesn't believe endless taxation is the answer and any liberal I talk to doesn't believe it either. ... That means people like you and me and our kids have to give up things like national park maintenance and protecting endangered species and help with education (even though America has never needed more skilled workers to compete in the global economy as it does now) It means infants born into poverty dying. It means doing NOTHING about the fact that the U.S. has the one of the highest infant mortality rates for an industrialized nation (so much for having the best healthcare system in the world).. .

On the flipside we have Obama who wants to start thinking about ending a war that we aren't and can't win and who is asking huge corporations like Exxon who had record profits to the tune of 40 billion dollars to chip in some more to help the country in a time of crisis. Hmm... infants dying, grizzly bears going extinct, students not going to college or Exxon and companies like them paying some more in taxes.

I have to go with investing in the people on this one. If the people's needs are neglected things start to fall apart, education levels plummet, the crime rate goes up and we'll never be able to compete again in the global economy.

What dose Obama believe in?


Don't be mesmorized by his rhetoric - ANY POLITICIAN CAN PANDER WITH MORE ENTITLEMENTS.




Thomas Sowell : Record Versus Rhetoric - Townhall.com (http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2008/10/17/record_versus_rhetoric)

We don't know what Barack Obama will actually do because he has actually done very little for which he was personally accountable. Even as a state legislator, he voted "present" innumerable times instead of taking a stand one way or the other on tough issues.

"Clean up the mess in Washington"? He was part of the mess in Chicago and lined up with the Daley machine against reformers.

He is also part of the mess in Washington, not only with numerous earmarks, but also as the Senate's second largest recipient of money from Fannie Mae, and someone whose campaign has this year sought the advice of disgraced former Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines, who was at the heart of the subprime crisis



What do we know of Obama:

Despite his association with known terrorist Bill Ayers, and spreading the Annenburgs money around ;) - he/ they wasted the money and had no effect on improving academic performance. Obama was an adult, not 8 years old when he began this relationship.




Capital Research Center: (http://www.capitalresearch.org/blog/?p=258)


A 2003 CAC final report on the effectiveness of the Annenberg grant compared test scores in so-called Annenberg schools, which had received the benefit of some $150 million in outside grant money, to test scores in comparable schools. It concluded:

“There were no statistically significant differences in student achievement between Annenberg schools and demographically similar non-Annenberg schools. This indicates that there was no Annenberg effect on achievement.”



He flip flops for political gain;

Weapons of Mass Discussion: Collection of Obama Flip-Flops (http://massdiscussion.blogspot.com/2008/06/collection-of-obama-flip-flops.html)


He spent 20 years at Rev Wright's church yet did not know of Rev Wright's anti American rhetoric?

He won't cross party lines even if it for the good of the country




Obama Voted 'Present' on Mortgage Reform - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122403045717834693.html)

Instead, by his own account, Mr. Obama wrote a letter to the Treasury Secretary, allegedly putting himself on record that subprime loans were dangerous and had to be dealt with. This is revealing; if true, it indicates Sen. Obama knew there was a problem with subprime lending -- but was unwilling to confront his own party by pressing for legislation to control it.




Obama, despite being a father, does not know when life begins :( because it is "above my paygrade." Obama is NARAL endorsed.



For one who wants to be our next commander and chief, he had not visited Iraq or our troops till this year and then in Germany canceled visiting the sick at the last minute.

No Troop Visits for Obama in Germany | The Trail | washingtonpost.com (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/07/25/no_troop_visits_for_obama_in_g.html)

Check out the fifth comment using Obama's own "factcheck"



"It's a fact that Obama canceled a visit to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center at the last minute after planning it for weeks. And it's a fact that reporters and their cameras would not have been allowed to accompany him. Furthermore, Obama probably did go to the gym that day, as he does practically every day. So the bare facts stated in the ad are true, but they don't support McCain's insinuation.

We can't read minds and so are in no position to know Obama's motives" ;)



SO, how can you truly say that Obama does not believe in endless taxation:confused:



The endangered species you have to worry about is hardworking, ordinary, taxpaying citizens of the US.

How many plumbing contractors do you think DON'T have a quarter million in receipts per year?Hello Steve:

Well, you got your plumbers - you know the guys who's a$$ crack you see when he's working on your pipes...

And then you got your plumbing CONTRACTORS who OWN their business's and sit in their offices wearing suits and ties... THOSE guys make BIG BREAD, like you said.

But, I think Joe was the shlub plumber employee. He has great dreams, and that's good, but he, LIKE ALL THE SCHLUB WORKING STIFF'S OUT THERE, doesn't make any where NEAR a quarter of a million.

Obama's tax policies will help HIM better than McCains.

excon

My youngest son is a tool & die maker working for a small family owned business. I'm certain that their gross income is in 250,000+. Now if they are taxed at the rate Obama is calling for, they won't be able to expand or modernize or hire new employees. Maybe they will even have to lay someone off. If so, I hope it is the dope who works there that intends to vote for Obama, if he gets elected!

I'm not about to get rid of the FDA after seeing thousands of infants sickened in China because corporations lacked oversight and wanted to make a quick buck.


Lol you don't deal with the same FDA I do . All their oversight doesn't guarantee that dangerous drugs will not get on the market ,and some of the regs make it impossible for benifical products to get to the market. If aspirin were a new drug today it would not be on the market... or if it were it would be an over-priced perscription.


And people like you who bought the republicans talk that we should go on business as usual are being convinced by politicians who were bought by CORPORATIONS making too much money to lose it.
Don't make assuptions. Cleaning the air is a good thing on it's own . We don't need phony science to justify it. Right now, being green is cheap and easy. Consumers are willing to pay a premium for “green” products.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1840562,00.html?imw=Y (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1840562,00.html?imw=Y)
When true costs start getting added to consumer prices - in the midst of a recession,we'll see more investigation into the science and, more importantly, its economic effect. And if they're indeed wrong, we'll likely see a complete repudiation of the scaremongers and hucksters.

A purist free market disciple is no better than a communist. Both philosophies are too extreme and it leaves people at large vulnerable.

And you have NEVER heard me argue for pure unregulated capitalism

Obama's tax policies will help HIM better than McCains.

That's what "SOME analyses" say, at least according to the AP in my paper today though they didn't mention who did the analyzing, but that isn't my point. The point is Obama wants everyone to think he's not going to hammer small business when he's not being forthright about small businesses in America. Plus he's playing on class envy with that arbitrary quarter million figure he keeps repeating and it's all a distraction. The small businesses he's going to hammer are the ones that hire Joe the Plumber... or at least used to.

Hello again:

Well, ifin it was me, and it is, and ifin I didn't like to pay taxes and I don't, who do you think is going to pay for the dufus in chief's spending spree?

Should we just pretend that it's play money and doesn't really count??

excon

Merris,

There are a lot of topics being covered in this post. I want to try to touch on all of them.

Perhaps you have heard of the Laffer curve. The Laffer curve illustrates that increases in tax rates does not equate to increased income, and it has been proven correct over and over again in our history. Every time we have had a tax rate increase in this country, it has resulted in increased unemployment and decreased revenues for the government. If you want to cover the budget deficit, increasing taxes is NOT the way to do it. Lowering taxes, on the other hand, has the result of increasing employment rates and salaries, and thus increasing tax revenues.

Second, what is the sense of taxing oil companies like Exxon-Mobile? Corporations do not pay taxes. They increase the prices of their products so that WE pay the added taxes. So a tax increase to Exxon-Mobile is really a tax on us at the pump and on our home heating bills. In this economy, can you truly say that the guy making $40K a year is able to deal with an increase in his personal energy costs? And yet he is the one who will bear that tax burden, not Exxon-Mobile.

Third, as for whether a plumber can make more that $250K per year: As a banker and commercial lender I have financed the construction of building projects that were in the hundred million dollar range. I can guarantee you that the plumbers, electricians and other construction companies who sub-contracted the jobs were all making more than $250K per year. They were making more than that on one job alone, and that was not their only job of the year. But they are still small businesses. And increasing tax rates above $250K will directly and adversely affect them. With construction, which is a major economic driver in the USA, being down significantly as a result of the economy, do we really want to make construction MORE prohibitive by increasing taxes? Do we really want to slow construction down even more than it is?

Next item: the national debt. I keep hearing people talking about the national debt as if it were a bad thing. Debt is neither bad nor good. It is simply a financial tool, and a useful one when used properly. Talking about debt without talking about what that debt has gained us and whether we can service that debt is ridiculous. It misses the entire picture. It's like looking at a financial statement but only looking at the liabilities, without seeing the assets, the income or the cash flow of the financial statement.

The United states has debt. But it also has assets (military, roads, real estate, natural resources, the debt of other countries, organizations that provide services and products, and lots of cash). The assets offset the debt. The United States has income (tax revenue, interest earned on debt from other countries, various fees for services rendered, etc.), and that income is sufficient to cover the debt service requirements (interest and principal payments on debt) and expenses of the United States. Furthermore, the US government has NEVER failed to pay one of its debts, throughout it's entire history... even during the Great Depression. Taken as a whole, the picture is not a grim one. It is, in fact, quite good. We have good cash flow, a strong asset base, and a sufficient level of leverage. That's not to say that we can't trim a lot of fat in the US government's spending, because we can and should. But the debt picture is not the grim tale you have heard.

Besides, in order to pay off the national debt, what would we have to give up? What assets would have to be liquidated to cover that debt repayment? Have you thought about that part of lowering the national debt? What are you willing to sacrifice for that purpose?

Now on to the question (or should I say myth) of global warming. Having done the research, I can state for a fact that over the last 60 years of recorded weather history, there has been no clear pattern of temperature change, aither as an increase or a decrease.

I looked as several major cities throughout the world, and took the average temperature for a specific month for every year. I plotted them on a graph, showing a 60-year history of average temperatures for that particular month in that particular city. Do you know what I found? NOTHING. There was no pattern of any sort. No global warming and no global cooling.

Interestingly enough, for all the talk of the polar ice caps melting, there is a corresponding increase in the Alaskan glaciers and others. The net effect globally is ZERO.

Here's another little tidbit for you... did you know that global temperatures on Mars and Pluto are rising? Did you know that the temperature of the sun is also rising? I had no idea that there was human industry on Mars, Pluto and the surface of the sun.

Here's another theory that might explain global warming, if such is occuring: since the sun is getting hotter, the planets that rotate around the sun are getting hotter too. The sun increases and decreases in temperature over long periods, and that effects the planets, including Earth.

The most common theory of global warming is that it is caused by certain chemicals that pollute the air and break down the ozone layer, known as "greenhouse gasses". The proof of this is that there is apparently a hole in the ozone layer somewhere above the North Pole. (I find it interesting that this hole in the ozone is located in the one place on Earth where there is no industry of any kind.) The theory states that these elements bind with the oxygen atoms of the ozone layer, preventing it from forming ozone. The most commonly discussed gasses that are supposed to cause this problem are carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4).

There are just a few problems with this theory. First of all, CO2 and CH4 are produced by other sources than human industry, and in MUCH greater quantity. CO2 is produced by plants and algae (apparently something like 95% of CO2 is produced under water by sea algae and underwater plant life). CH4 is produced by the natural biological functions of animals (the single largest source for methane in the world is cow farts... yes, this is true, you can look it up yourself. It is also produced by decomposition of dead plant and animal life). Human industry accounts for less than 2% of all CO2 and CH4 emmissions. So unless we are prepared to get rid of all plantlife and all cows without killing them and letting them decompose, there is nothing we can do to significantly change CO2 and CH4 emmissions. Of course if we do that we will starve and suffocate to death. But hey, no big deal.

The other basic problem is that the chemical process doesn't work the way the global warming theorists (myth-makers) claim it does. They claim that the carbon of the CO2 and the CH4 bind with the oxygen molecules of the ozone. Heat energy from the sun is supposed to break up the CO2 and CH4 into sepparate atoms, which then combine with the O of the ozone layer, thus breaking up the ozone, forming carbon monoxide (CO).

The way that the natural process works is that O2 is hit by the sun, breaking it into sepparate O atoms, which is ozone. As more ozone is created, less heat and light reach the atmosphere, which means that fewer O2 molecules are broken down to ozone. When the ozone layer becomes too thin, more sunlight gets through to the atmosphere, and more O2 molecules are broken down to form ozone. The process is a self-correcting equilibrium process.

The argument is that when the ozone combines with the carbon atoms, the process of creating ozone from 02 is interrupted, causing the ozone layer to become depleted. The only problem with this theory is that the sun's energy is equally capable of breaking CO2 and CO down into ozone just as well as it can break up O2. In fact, if my understanding is correct, CO is much less stable than O2, which means that it breaks down more easily into ozone than O2 would.

So the science doesn't bear out the theory put forward by the global warming con artists... er, scientists. And more and more experts in the field of meteorology are comeing to the same conclusions.

Finally, did you know that the majority of "scientists" who have signed on to the global warming con game have no expertise or expereince in meteorolgy? Many of them are MDs, physicists, biologists, mathematicians and statisticians. They are NOT meteorologists. Most meteorologists have NOT signed on to the theory of global warming, and more and more of them are speaking out against global warming theory. Til now, they have been afraid to do so because of the public outcry they have received for not signing on to the "accepted wisdom" of global warming. But as more and more of them speak out, more and more of them are "coming out of the closet" to state their true beliefs.

Some thoughts to ponder.

Elliot

Elliot,

Thanks for you well thought out response. I'm sure having some national debt is a good thing like you said, but it seems to be growing... exponentially. If we can borrow and not worry about it, wouldn't it be nice if they'd borrow a trillion and split it up for every person in the country. Talk about economic upswing! :)

It's obvious you have given things a lot of thought and I appreciate the fact that you plotted temperatures on your own, but there is pretty much a consensus in the scientific community that global warming is caused by humans (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=final-report-humans-cause). Now for the sake of argument that we are being hyper-focused on the issue (I can be open minded) is prudence not the better course along with cleaner air and less kids with asthma and allergies? Sure it is. The quality of life only goes up if we can clean up our air.

With that said, global warming is only one issue. You see, McCain and especially his VP choice, Palin are the antithesis of everything I stand for when it comes to the environment whether it's pollution or saving the grizzly bear (http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=mccains-beef-with-bears) or drilling in the ocean. The republicans are bought by big oil. They are fighting what the scientists are saying because they ARE BOUGHT. It ain't hard to do... you have companies making billions of dollars and they pay politicians to have it their way. This is why I'm against corporations having too much power.

You spoke at length about taxes and I hear you. I think I am probably different from many of the people here... maybe even from others voting for Obama. While Tax rates are on the radar, they are low on my priority list. There is wisdom in the fact that the government is going to tax you to death no matter what. If they are, you should be seeing some of the benefits. Otherwise they will tax you the same and spend it how they damned well please. You see, I'd rather have a clean ocean and a good school for my kids. I don't mind giving extra to help someone go to college because I know it helps our nation. I am originally from the mid-west and it's rotting from high school drop-outs and meth and Oxycontin addiction. We have some serious problems on the home front that the republicans are ignoring because their only concentration is on defense. We need defense, but we can't let things fall apart at home and that's what the republicans have done. It hurts the basic structure of our society when you do this... It hurts the family.

We are not one nation of individuals but communities made of families. I am for changes that I feel will help us as a nation, I'm for changes that help families and I am willing to try something new when the old is obviously not working. Maybe that's the true difference between democrats and republicans. We know that it isn't money that makes you happy and we also know that you don't know what you've got till it's gone.

Have you ever read the story, "The Lorax" by Dr. Seuss? If you haven't, stop at a bookshop get a cup a coffee and read it. I read it for the first time to my two-year-old daughter the other night. By the time I was finished I thought, wow, the Onceler sounds a lot like... a Republican. I became interested in Dr. Seuss and looked him up. He was indeed a democrat. My codeword for republican now is Onceler. Do republicans even know that they appear this way?

You sound like a reasonable guy. With all this said, I know there is probably no way I can convince you to give the other side a shot... but could I ask that you to do a little soul searching? :o

P.S. Wolverine is my favorite X-men character, by the way... ;)

You spoke at length about taxes and I hear you. I think I am probably different from many of the people here... maybe even from others voting for Obama. While Tax rates are on the radar, they are low on my priority list. There is wisdom in the fact that the government is going to tax you to death no matter what. If they are, you should be seeing some of the benefits. Otherwise they will tax you the same and spend it how they damned well please.


You see, I'd rather have a clean ocean and a good school for my kids. I don't mind giving extra to help someone go to college because I know it helps our nation.


I am originally from the mid-west and it's rotting from high school drop-outs and meth and Oxycontin addiction.

We have some serious problems on the home front that the republicans are ignoring because their only concentration is on defense. We need defense, but we can't let things fall apart at home and that's what the republicans have done. It hurts the basic structure of our society when you do this... It hurts the family.





How did you fit all these ideas in one paragraph and then tie it to the Republicans?

If you want to donate your own money to whatever cause you sit fit - I applaud you.
I think we as a society should do it on an individual basis.
However, do you feel that government should MANDATE IT? Especially since Biden And Obama [ not till 2006 ] do not even give to charity in the same percentage of income as your average American?

What does INDIVIDUAL abuse of drugs / meth / oxycontin have to do with either party?

Speaking of hurting families, isn't unfettered right to abortion the ultimate in hurting families? Is either candidate pushing stricter rules for divorce? Or 100% child support payments [ currently at 50% ] ? Or "free" college / technical school education?
Census statistics point to the fact that the traditional nuclear family is the best way to combat poverty.

I don't see bigger government as a solution to society's ills. I think the solution is in individuals doing the right things, the charitable thing with their family, their neighborhood, their town/ city and so forth.

You are correct, these politicians are all bought or influenced by big money.

I can't help that. I can help my own family, neighborhood etc..





ET:

As usual, a great post on a number of topics.

People say they don't want 4 more years of "Bush" but they are going to vote for 4 more years of "Carter".

How did you fit all these ideas in one paragraph and then tie it to the Republicans?



John McCain wants a complete domestic spending freeze with the exception of the wars and veterans... that 7% of the population he actually cares about.

Coming from a wife, mother, friend, and a worried lady...
I seriously do not want money from some "rich" guy/gal ("rich" until he pays for all the gropers) I can make my own money. The more they "give" us, the more we rely on the government. THAT is my take on the whole bit...

Coming from a wife, mother, friend, and a worried lady.....
I seriously do not want money from some "rich" guy/gal ("rich" until he pays for all the gropers) I can make my own money. The more they "give" us, the more we rely on the government. THAT is my take on the whole bit....


You know the spending I care most about is federal funding for research for the preservation of the environment, alternative energy, and other species (humans aren't the only creatures on the planet, you know). I think we need a better education system in the U.S. and we lag behind other industrialized countries in not only education but our infant mortality is one of the highest of any industrialized nation.

You seem to be referring to welfare, which is pretty small sliver of what I'm talking about.

Merris, I should have quoted speechless from the opening post, I was referring to the OP's first remark and question.
As far as funding for research and the preservation of the environment... welp, I agree we need to do a better job of taking care of our earth, every one knows it! (I do know that humans aren't the only creatures that are on this planet):)
The education system... well, lets start with the parents that think it's all right for their kids to say and do what ever they want when they are in school... IT MAY MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE TEACHERS TO DO THEIR JOBS, and maybe the kids would learn something! Teachers of course should have guide lines to follow and so should the students.
Infant mortality? I am not sure I understand what you are saying... we have to many kids? Or do I just not get your statement?

I am not only referring to welfare... people all around me seem to think everyone owes them something. I work with a guy his girlfriend was abused in a past relationship, she is able to work, but they are trying to find a way to make it a good excuse to get on social security. All sorts of stories like that around. I am not nor have I been on welfare. I have always worked two or three jobs to deal with things. FINALLY I only have to have one full time and man it feels good. I worked hard to get where I am, I can only imagine how hard the people that made over $250,000 a year. I can only imagine only getting 2/3 of a paycheck, when I earned a full one;) THAT would sincerely suck.

Don't get me wrong, McCain isn't perfect. But I still like him better than Obama. Either way, I have a feeling we are in big trouble there is no quick fix to what has happened in our country. Before I was even born it has all been the same, never changing. Obama doesn't and will not have that kind of power that people seem to think a president has. People voted for what the last administration has done. The one person that everyone hates got advice from others, he got votes from others.

I think that if we as people would just stop and take a serious and honest look at ourselves, we would see that it isn't just the government that is the problem.

Ohhh, I just can't stand politics, but I am trying hard to keep up here.

Hello:

Hmm. If there's going to be a freeze, what did Sarah Palin mean when she said that disabled children will have a friend in the White House?

I don't know about you, but a friend in the White House who doesn't FUND her friends, ain't no friend at all.

We got plenty of people who are "friendly" towards the disabled, but they need more than "friendly". They need FUNDING. What's she going to do, wink at them? That'll make their lives better.

excon

Hello:

Hmm. If there's gonna be a freeze, what did Sarah Palin mean when she said that disabled children will have a friend in the White House?

I dunno about you, but a friend in the White House who doesn't FUND her friends, ain't no friend at all.

We got plenty of people who are "friendly" towards the disabled, but they need more than "friendly". They need FUNDING. What's she gonna do, wink at them? That'll make their lives better.

Just a question first, how much do you suppose communities, states and the Fed have spent on meeting ADA mandates already? Regardless of what she might or might not spend, I think the first step in being "friendly" toward the disabled is promoting their right to be born.

Oh now I get what you were saying Excon. Hmm, we need to put our spending in the right places. I don't need a new bridge over I-5 to walk over, I would rather walk the five blocks around, than spend whatever it cost to build the beautiful thing. You see? Every pretty 50 dollar bush in front of the farkin BRAND new court house here in Eugene, well, I see a few packs of paper for the teachers in our schools that are spending their own money to make copies for their students. I just don't get it. The extra roof on top of that new one (just for looks) on that new strip mall... WHAT? LOL Sorry I get really pissy about these things.

Just a question first, how much do you suppose communities, states and the Fed have spent Hello again, Steve:

Nahhhh. I don't care about that... All I'm trying to figure out is what the hell she's saying, by telling people that they have a friend in the White House.

Is that rightwing code for something? Does it mean Obama is blacker than we thought?

Come, on Steve. You can tell me. I promise I won't tell any other liberal.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

Nahhhh. I don't care about that... All I'm trying to figure out is what the hell she's saying, by telling people that they have a friend in the White House.

Is that rightwing code for something? Does it mean Obama is blacker than we thought?

Come, on Steve. You can tell me. I promise I won't tell any other liberal.

Excon

Why do you keep bringing up skin color, are you trying to goad one of us into showing our racism? I think I gave you my “code” for what she meant but I know it goes further than that. I’m sure she meant more money as well, her record reflects that, but I think this article (http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_Palin_Promises_to_Be_A_Friend_An_Advocate_of_ Families_with_Disabled_Kids_23829.html) explains more of the “code.”


Families with children with Down syndrome say they often feel the social pressure when they decide to have a child with a disability. Parents of children with disabilities hope Palin’s personal example will convince more parents that they can handle the challenge of a child with special needs.

They want to show the world that children with Down syndrome can lead lives just like other children.

Isn’t that what a friend does more than give money - encourage, support, sympathize, etc.

Isn’t that what a friend does more than give money - encourage, support, sympathize, etc.?Hello Steve:

Not my friends.

excon

Hey Start. I agree that talking politics stinks. I know how you feel--- hang in there! :)



Merris, I should have quoted speechless from the opening post, I was referring to the OP's first remark and question.
As far as funding for research and the preservation of the environment....welp, I agree we need to do a better job of taking care of our earth, every one knows it!

I so wish this were true! I had a chat with my neighbor the other day who is unfortunately the most enthusiastic McCain supporter this side of the Mississippi, and the conversation started about values but ended up with her telling me that more or less people who think about the environment are... worshiping the Earth. Wow. This was the last thing I expected to hear and the thought that immediately came to my head was... There is no hope! She went on to say that some people care more about animals and the Earth than people. I'm astounded and all I could say is that it's all ONE thing. By taking care of the habitat you take care of the animals and the people eat the animals and you take care of the people. Duh. She even claimed Sesame Street was pushing some liberal environmentalist agenda. God help us all.


The education system...well, lets start out with the parents that think it's alright for their kids to say and do what ever they want when they are in school...IT MAY MAKE IT EASIER FOR THE TEACHERS TO DO THEIR JOBS, and maybe the kids would learn something!? Teachers of course should have guide lines to follow and so should the students.

If by this you mean beat their little butts... that's not hard for me to disagree with. Kids should be respectful and no teacher should have to put up with abuse. :p In all seriousness I remember we were hit on the back with the dreaded yard stick and had to stand in front of the class holding a pile of dictionaries. These techniques worked for centuries I'm not so sure why they were abandoned. I think punishment with guidelines is a good thing.


I am not only referring to welfare....people all around me seem to think everyone owes them something. I work with a guy his girlfriend was abused in a past relationship, she is able to work, but they are trying to find a way to make it a good excuse to get on social security.

I agree with this too. I really don't mind, though, paying taxes for community enrichment, or for projects that I feel make a better environment for families. I'm not for more free handouts and I don't think most liberals are. For instance, I really think Obama's plan of community service for teens in exchange for a college tuition credit is great. It helps education, it gives teens more responsibility in the community and the community also gets something back. McCain is offering nothing like this. I feel that Liberals are more thinkers when it comes to social problems whereas republicans either throw a scant amount of money toward the problem with no thought at all OR say what they want to happen like No Child Left Behind and then leave the funding behind. Either way they are not solving any of the problems nor is it really a priority for them.

As for people wanting a free ride I wonder, myself, if this is born of apathy? People are apathetic about the government because many feel like it doesn't represent them, like they don't have a voice. I myself as a woman have joked that life under republicans is like being the wife of a patriarchal gun collector! :p I think inclusion will give people more pride and less apathy. When you are proud of something you tend to take better care of it, too.

I have given thought to this entitlement attitude and it bothers me too. I wonder if there's a connection with the fact that Americans are getting a LOT for free (http://www.storyofstuff.com/index.html) which further spawns feelings of entitlement.

You know I really connect with you on many levels and I agree with you. I do think, though, that having a leader who inspires our young people and whose umbrella covers everyone is what we need as a nation now. I was more of a Hillary supporter truth be told and then I saw this video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9IldaegAB0). It just touched me... these children need Obama. I watched this and I felt this hope and I felt like I didn't want to let these young people down. We all go back and forth about the taxes but when it boils down to it I don't think it's about the money. There are other qualities about Obama that would be sooo good for our nation. I hope anyone reading this if you are on the fence, please please please consider this. I'm pretty moderate when it comes to taxes and have voiced before that I'd be interested in the fair tax. I think this is more about giving people hope and about bringing our country together. It's about connecting with a younger generation and yes, happiness... and I think we can all agree that money doesn't buy you that.

Please America... Vote Obama 08.

Hello Steve:

Not my friends.

Maybe you need some better friends.

You know the spending I care most about is federal funding for research for the preservation of the environment, alternative energy, and other species (humans aren't the only creatures on the planet, you know). I think we need a better education system in the U.S. and we lag behind other industrialized countries in not only education but our infant mortality is one of the highest of any industrialized nation.

You seem to be referring to welfare, which is pretty small sliver of what I'm talking about.

You may not be old enough to remember when public education started down the toilet, but I do. It was when the F(ederal) A(id) T(o) E(ducation) began. The federals in effect took the schools away from the sates and local authorities and we now have a disaster.

If pro is the opposite of con, then what is the opposite of progress? Why, CONGRESS, of course!

I have a theory. It is mine alone! Ancient Egypt had both a written language and a pictorial language. My theory says that Egypt was doing well with their written language UNTIL it turned education over to the central government, and after some years, so many people couldn't read that they had to develop a pictorial language. (Have you noticed the road signs going from written to pictorial in the last 25 years or so?)

John McCain wants a complete domestic spending freeze with the exception of the wars and veterans... that 7% of the population he actually cares about.


Links?

The POTUS has to have the courage to say the right thing, although that may not be the popular thing.

How do you think debt is paid if spending is not cut or frozen?

The 94 "Contract with America" was successful in creating a surplus because it forced fiscal responsibility. Welfare reform was undertaken, though not popular by some points of views, but in the end it was the successful and right thing to do. Reagan tax cuts in the 80s were not popular among some, but it got the economy going compared to the Carter years. The same thing can be said of JFK's tax cuts.




And the question is why not veterans and the military.
1] We are fighting wars, and they keep us safe. A constitutional mandate.
2] For those who gave life and or limb in service to our country is it too much to ask to give back to those who give/ gave us so much?

Links?

The POTUS has to have the courage to say the right thing, although that may not be the popular thing.

How do you think debt is paid if spending is not cut or frozen?

The 94 "Contract with America" was sucessful in creating a surplus because it forced fiscal responsibility.
And the question is why not veterans and the military.
1] We are fighting wars, and they keep us safe. A constitutional mandate.
2] For those who gave life and or limb in service to our country is it to much to ask to give back to those who give/ gave us so much?


You need links? LOL. This is what the man has been saying in every debate. Have you not watched the debates? And while I honor veterans, (my dad is one and I grew up on a military base) I think McCain's emphasis is so narrow and so ridiculous that people are angry. He's just out of touch... After hearing about many republicans including friends and relatives that I personally know, voting for Obama because they are actually EXCITED about his ideas (he actually is the one who has some in this contest after all). I honestly don't think McCain has a chance.

Maybe we should change the subject to sports and leisure? Heheh...

Merris, I wish I could do what you guys do to quote separately, but I don't know how, so bear with me;)
First I would like to say out loud what I was thinking. Regarding how much I dislike politics, and how hard it is to gather all this info from ALL sides. To me it is like a football game (any game really but I love football) Anyway, pretend your team was playing and mine were playing against you, just because you start to win, I don't suddenly start to root for your team, I get pissed at my own team or I turn off the game if I know you are going to win. (not saying I don't give credit where credit is due, I just don't root for your team) I hope that makes sense to you in some respect.

I know how frustrating it can be talking to ignorant people. Your neighbor and the guy I work with to be correct. BUT we can't label our republican and democrats in that sense.
Each person is different and I have come to value that and try my hardest not to be so damn judgmental;)


No, I don't trust anyone beating my kids butt. I have given a little whoopin or two in between my 14 years of being a mother and after having four kids, I realize this is not the best tactic with all kids. I just think teaching your child from an early age between right and wrong is imparitive. I also think that if a kid gets in trouble at school, well, you should deal with it at home as well, I mean for goodness sakes, try and teach a class of over 30 kids with a few that disrupt the class on a daily basis. It is hard I am sure.

As far as the tax thing goes, people that do not pay taxes should not get a free ride. I don't see any argument that makes this reasonable. I can't fathom it at all.

For about two months I caught hell here at home and with my friends and other family because I was trying hard to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. In my heart I just knew I was uncomfortable, but I wanted to prove to myself that I could go and actually understand where he is coming from. I was mostly doing it so I could hear others reasonable counter act what I was TRYING to believe, because like any other American I want change. But not "just because!!" We don't always get what we want. I want to change if the change is absolute, and with Obama it just isn't in my eyes.

Sorry to offend if I have, every man for his own. Charities are for people to give if they WANT to. I have and will continue to help where I can, money and time.

Abortion is another seriously strong subject for me with Obama. I am pro-choice... but he takes pro-choice way way too far for me to understand.

Good luck to both parties, and a good four years to come no matter who is in office;)

Startover, see that little icon at the top that looks like a cartoon bubble? Hold your left mouse button and drag over a section to highlight what you want to quote then click that icon.

I do think, though, that having a leader who inspires our young people and whose umbrella covers everyone is what we need as a nation now....We all go back and forth about the taxes but when it boils down to it I don't think it's about the money. There are other qualities about Obama that would be sooo good for our nation. I hope anyone reading this if you are on the fence, please please please consider this. I'm pretty moderate when it comes to taxes and have voiced before that I'd be interested in the fair tax. I think this is more about giving people hope and about bringing our country together. It's about connecting with a younger generation and yes, happiness... and I think we can all agree that money doesn't buy you that.

Please America... Vote Obama 08.
I have been a caller in Obama's campaign, calling undecideds and women in particular. A week or so ago, I called what turned out to be list of black women in NC; I am white and living in Chicago. By the end of each call, we were trading recipes, sharing favorite book titles, and swapping stories about our kids. The women I talked with were excited about Obama's becoming president and uniting the country--and even helping unite the world--just like we were inspired to do in our own way by phone. (An Obama campaign caller in California had done the same thing with me and others several months ago.)

The Obama campaign has totally amazed me. I have never seen so many individuals so energized and so willing to donate money, so eager to make a few phone calls, and so happy to do whatever they can to bring people together. I have great hopes for his presidency. And I am a (and have always voted) Republican.

Yes, America. Vote Obama 08.

I can guarantee you that Obama will NOT unite this country.

I can guarantee you that Obama will NOT unite this country.
He already has. And we're going to include you in our lovefest whether you like it or not!

He already has.

Yes, and this board is an indication of that. Trust me, if Obama wins unity will not be the word that comes to mind.

Yes, and this board is an indication of that. Trust me, if Obama wins unity will not be the word that comes to mind.
Let's finish eating our toasted marshmallows and hold hands around the campfire and sing "Kum Ba Yah."

Let's finish eating our toasted marshmallows and hold hands around the campfire and sing "Kum Ba Yah."

LOL, I never liked that song.

From Investor's Business Daily (http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=309565448930564):


Small Business Not Safe From Obama Tax

By RALPH R. REILAND | Posted Wednesday, October 22, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Small businesses create nearly 80% of the new jobs in the American economy, and Barack Obama is proposing that the bulk of their job-creating profits should be sent to Washington.

Since the mid-1990s, the small business sector has created 78.9% of the net new jobs in the United States, reports the Office of Advocacy at the Small Business Administration. Sen. Obama is claiming his proposed tax hike on incomes over $250,000 will hardly stifle job creation in this key job-producing sector because "98% of small businesses make less than $250,000."

The 98% figure may be correct, but it conceals more than it reveals, just as Obama's description of Weatherman bomber Bill Ayers as "a guy who lives in my neighborhood who's a professor of English" was accurate but deceiving.

Obama gets to his reassuring 98% figure by lumping firms with no employees, the majority of small businesses, with small businesses that have 50 or 100 employees. Census data show that 79% of all American companies, counting both large and small firms, have no employees.

Similarly, the SBA's Office of Advocacy reports that 52% of small businesses in the U.S. economy are home-based — that is, not exactly the heavy-hitters when it comes to job creation.

As the New York Times reported regarding the makeup of the nation's 27 million small businesses: "According to figures compiled by the Small Business Administration, there are fewer than six million small businesses that actually have employees. The rest are so-called non-employer firms that report income from hobbies or freelance work done by their registered owners, earning as little as $1,000 a year."

By treating a lemonade stand the same as a home builder with 100 employees, Obama can get away with saying that 98% of small businesses in America won't be hit by his proposed increases in income taxes.

He's telling the 59 million employees in the small-business sector there's almost no chance, specifically a 2% chance, that their jobs or incomes will be negatively affected by his proposed tax hikes and policies to "spread the wealth around." In fact, Obama's proposed tax hike on incomes over $250,000 is precisely aimed at the small businesses that are generating the highest revenues and hiring the most workers.

"Two-thirds of small business profits are earned in households making more than $250,000 per year," reports Americans for Tax Reform. "In 2006, $473 billion of the $706 billion of small business profits was earned in households Obama has said he would raise taxes on."

Obama's proposed increases in income taxes and Social Security taxes would shift the bulk of the profits in the small-business sector to the federal coffers, reports Americans for Tax Reform:

"The tax rate on the lion's share of small business income could reach 54.9% under a President Obama. The individual top rate will climb from 35% to 39.6% and the Social Security/Medicare tax rate could climb from 2.9% to 15.3%. Put those together and you get 54.9%."

By increasing costs, Obama's higher business taxes would have the direct effect of increasing layoffs and raising prices. His proposed 54.9% tax rate would be the highest since the Carter administration, when the nation's unemployment and inflation rates peaked, respectively, at 7.6% and 13.5%.

"Obama's tax increases will only affect you if you have a 401(k) (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/dems-obama-nationalize-401-k-plans-272806.html), have any savings, buy things from small businesses or are looking for a job," explains Grover Norquist, president of the Americans for Tax Reform. "If you fall into one of these categories, his policies will take money out your pocket. Otherwise, you're fine."

With federal income taxes, Obama additionally says that "95% of working families will get a cut." That, in fact, is not possible because over a third of these households don't pay federal income taxes.

Rather than being permitted to keep more of their own earnings via a tax cut, Obama is actually proposing that they'll get to pocket someone else's money as part of his "spread the wealth around" agenda.

Similarly, Obama is saying that those making less than $250,000 a year "will not see one dime's worth of tax increases." Once again, what he's not saying is that his tax hikes on businesses will be passed on to consumers by way of higher prices.

Haven't any of you Obama supporters noticed how much Obama's not saying about a lot of things?

small businesses
Heck, he might just adjust that figure upwards to $500K or even $1M. So what? Once he gets the job, he will consult with the best minds and make decisions accordingly. I trust him.


what he's not saying is that his tax hikes on businesses will be passed on to consumers by way of higher prices.
You think he hasn't thought of that, hasn't realized that would happen? There will be adjustments made as needed.

I'm having brunch tomorrow with Ayers. Want to come?

Heck, he might just adjust that figure upwards to $500K or even $1M. So what? Once he gets the job, he will consult with the best minds and make decisions accordingly.

I thought he WAS the best mind.


I trust him.

LOL, I don't trust any of them, especially someone that promises to spread the wealth around.


You think he hasn't thought of that, hasn't realized that would happen? There will be adjustments made as needed.

Just what adjustments can he make? Seriously, give us some examples.


I'm having brunch tomorrow with Ayers. Want to come?

Nah, you can have fun with the unrepentant terrorist.

Sitting around the coffee table taking turns reading 'Praire Fire The Politics of Revolutionary anti-Imperialism'
Amazon.com: Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-Imperialism: Political Statement of the Weather Underground: Bernardine; Jones, Jeff; Ayers, Billy; Sojourn, Celia dohrn: Books (http://www.amazon.com/Prairie-Fire-Revolutionary-Anti-Imperialism-Underground/dp/B00185OAWU)

And perhaps watching this video by Larry Grathwohl a former undercover FBI agent who infiltrated the Weathermen.
YouTube - Ayers' Weathermen planned "re-education", genocide (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJn5b8_weUY)

Just like watching home movies for Ayers and Dohrn.

Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-Imperialism: Political Statement of the Weather Underground
Hmmm, copyright 1974 and it's out of print. Gess we'uns got to trundle off to a library to fine that 'un.

I'm trying to find a copy myself. Amazon has some used copies. I have read some parts of it posted on blogs .

I'm trying to find a copy myself. Amazon has some used copies. I have read some parts of it posted on blogs .
One on Amazon for $125. Want me to find an owning library somewhere in the world so you can do an interlibrary loan through your home library? Let me know.

Sorry. You're about 34 years too late, Tom. There is only one owning library in the world at Cornell University. Stop in and read it if you're anywhere near Ithaca. But, they may not let you touch it...

From WorldCat --
Library US,NY CORNELL UNIV

# Availability: Libraries worldwide that own item: 1
Title: Prairie fire: the politics of revolutionary anti-imperialism, 1974.
Corp Author(s): Weather Underground Organization.
Year: 1974
Description: 1 volume.
Language: English
Abstract: Publication was written by Bernardine Dohrn, Billy Ayers, Jeff Jones, and Celia Sojourn, May 9, 1974.
SUBJECT(S)
Descriptor: Radicalism.
Student movements.
Students -- Political activity.
Named Person: Ayers, William, 1944-
Dohrn, Bernardine.
Jones, Jeff.
Sojourn, Celia.
Note(s): Reproduction: is a photocopy.
General Info: Preferred citation: Weather Underground. Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-Imperialism, #3468. Department of Manuscripts and University Archives, Cornell University Libraries.
Entry: 19840423
Update: 20080901
Document Type: Archival Material
Accession No: OCLC: 64072060
Database: WorldCat

Cornell ? Excellent school!! I was there once. It would take me about a 5 hr. Drive to get there but if they won't let me get my hands on it ;why bother??

Except that it is peak season for leaf change this week... HMMMM maybe I'll expand my carbon footprint this weekend and go sight seeing!!

Cornell ? Excellent school !!!! I was there once. It would take me about a 5 hr. Drive to get there but if they won't let me get my hands on it ;why bother ????

Except that it is peak season for leaf change this week...... HMMMM maybe I'll expand my carbon footprint this weekend and go sight seeing !!!!
Call before you go --

CUL Gateway: Contacting the Library (http://www.library.cornell.edu/about/contact.html)

Wave to my mom NW of Rochester.