PDA

View Full Version : Obama and McCain debate: Who did better?



Pages : [1] 2

Lan
09-26-2008, 08:14 PM
Who answered the questions more directly? Who do you think did better overall?

kengs
09-26-2008, 08:29 PM
Political views notwithstanding, there is no contest who is the better speaker.

harry
09-26-2008, 08:29 PM
<IMG SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/new/1/report.gif" BORDER="0"><p>wrong forum. <p>- 1%

kengs
09-26-2008, 08:30 PM
^ <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/fv-green-bat.gif" BORDER="0">

Lan
09-26-2008, 08:33 PM
I'm trying to get more people's watched topics outside of GDD <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/1018.gif" BORDER="0">

SupraDoom
09-26-2008, 10:20 PM
McCain.

CybeRise
09-27-2008, 01:07 AM
From the little I saw McCain sounded more polished.

Major
09-27-2008, 08:04 AM
I think that Obama "sounds" like the better speaker...but then again the announcer for the Braves is a good speaker but we arent going to let him run the country<p>McCain was clearly getting under Obamas skin...obama kept smirking over and over, which came off kind of childish<p>Not to mention he said "fundamental" about 3 billinon times (thats an actual figure btw, i counted <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">)<p>Everything considered they both did make some pretty good points....however it affects how much trust i have for what someone in this position says when theyve got waves of people behind them giving them these facts and telling them what to say.<p>Who has the better record? McCain<br>Who has been doing it longer? McCain<br>Which candidate is most like me in all aspects? McCain (former military, etc)<p>Really, other than being a smooth talker and being able to get his own race on his side, I havent heard of one actual thing that Obama has done that would make him deserving of being President<p>Thats my outlook, so im not trying to start an argument here.

Club_MN
09-27-2008, 10:40 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>MajorPayne</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I think that Obama "sounds" like the better speaker...but then again the announcer for the Braves is a good speaker but we arent going to let him run the country<p>McCain was clearly getting under Obamas skin...obama kept smirking over and over, which came off kind of childish<p>Not to mention he said "fundamental" about 3 billinon times (thats an actual figure btw, i counted <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">)<p>Everything considered they both did make some pretty good points....however it affects how much trust i have for what someone in this position says when theyve got waves of people behind them giving them these facts and telling them what to say.<p>Who has the better record? McCain<br>Who has been doing it longer? McCain<br>Which candidate is most like me in all aspects? McCain (former military, etc)<p>Really, other than being a smooth talker and being able to get his own race on his side, I havent heard of one actual thing that Obama has done that would make him deserving of being President<p>Thats my outlook, so im not trying to start an argument here.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>In response to Obama's smirking, McCain didn't make eye contact with Obama, grimace when he spoke, and when it was a time for a response, he came off with a sarcastic remark. Speak about childish....<p>Fundamental was used because they were both trying to point out the 'fundamental' differences between each other because they agreed on several points, just disagreed on some of the details or strategies.<p>McCain would revert back to his 'cut spending' warpath when he ran out of anything constructive to say, while Obama pointed out the fallacies of this method and outlined his own policies in detail when it came to economics. McCain generalized and built up hype about government waste, while Obama used finer details to pick apart the faults of hte current system.<p>McCain also didn't have a leg to stand on when it came to taxes.<p>When it came to foreign policy, McCain tried to show his 'experience'. McCain argued that he visited Iraq, etc. as a way of proving his knowledge. Sure, you learn things, but you learn things people want you to see. I went to London, and saw the Parliament building. That doesn't mean I am ready to serve in politics, or that i'm an expert in the British political system.<p>What a conservative pundit said, and I think it says it well, is that Obama is inexperienced, and that can be fixed with experience, and his caution will prove an asset to his performance. McCain is judgmental and quick to react with emotions, and that's something that's not easily repaired. A quick, emotional judgment may not be the correct one.

Lan
09-27-2008, 12:18 PM
Interesting article. <p><A HREF="http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/gradingthefirstpresidentialdebate" TARGET="_blank">http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/g...ebate</A>

Obu
09-27-2008, 12:21 PM
I'm going to have to agree with Dan Balz:<p>"Each rose to the challenge here Friday night, forcefully scoring points on one another, sparkling at times, but neither emerged as the obvious winner except perhaps to their partisans. There were good exchanges but few big moments of the kind that can change a presidential race."<p>

Lan
09-27-2008, 12:27 PM
This is my take on it. <p>Neither one of them answered questions as directly as I would have liked.

PistolStarta
09-27-2008, 01:44 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Lan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">This is my take on it. <p>Neither one of them answered questions as directly as I would have liked.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Thanks for the poll and I completely agree. Though Obama is a smooth talker, neither of them have great "debate skills" regardless

FRANK
09-27-2008, 01:52 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PistolStarta</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Thanks for the poll and I completely agree. Though Obama is a smooth talker, neither of them have great "debate skills" regardless</TD></TR></TABLE><p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>

kengs
09-27-2008, 04:13 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Lan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">This is my take on it. <p>Neither one of them answered questions as directly as I would have liked.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>nobody in politics is going to give an unfiltered response, not when they have this much at stake <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emdgust.gif" BORDER="0">

PistolStarta
09-28-2008, 09:17 AM
I rememeber last election they said Kerry was terrified to respond to press and questions without first talking to people. I dont remember what decision it was regarding but they said he called 12 different advisors at midnight to form an answer.

EGwhat!!!
09-28-2008, 12:21 PM
<IMG SRC="http://i524.photobucket.com/albums/cc330/LuisEGWhat/1222483969083.jpg" BORDER="0"><br>

IS'D YA
09-28-2008, 12:48 PM
I think Obama did better...<p>what I'm really interested in seeing is <p>Biden/Palin....that chick is about to get murdered!

PistolStarta
09-28-2008, 01:05 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>HAVNSX</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I think Obama did better...<p>what I'm really interested in seeing is <p>Biden/Palin....that chick is about to get murdered!</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Really, compared with his Hoorah speechs you think he did better? Its obvious without a writer he's much more realistic as a politician and not a hope machine

El Payne
09-28-2008, 01:51 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>accordselux</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>What a conservative pundit said, and I think it says it well, is that Obama is inexperienced, and that can be fixed with experience, and his caution will prove an asset to his performance. McCain is judgmental and quick to react with emotions, and that's something that's not easily repaired. A quick, emotional judgment may not be the correct one.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>The key in that assumption would be if he can gain enough experience to grow a brain before our country burns to the ground first.<br>And McCain, emotional? That's not something I've seen a ton of from him at all, so I'm not sure where that comes from.

El Payne
09-28-2008, 01:52 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>EGwhat!!!</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><IMG SRC="http://i524.photobucket.com/albums/cc330/LuisEGWhat/1222483969083.jpg" BORDER="0"><br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Haha. That's pretty funny.<br>McCain does say "my friends" a whole lot. It's like..."Dang it, John, I've never even met you before. Are we really friends?"<p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

IS'D YA
09-28-2008, 02:41 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PistolStarta</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Really, compared with his Hoorah speechs you think he did better? Its obvious without a writer he's much more realistic as a politician and not a hope machine</TD></TR></TABLE><p>He keeps it real! which Mccain seems to be on crackbaby street

El Payne
09-28-2008, 03:32 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>HAVNSX</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>He keeps it real!</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yep.<p><br>...real pathetic.<p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

Club_MN
09-28-2008, 03:59 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>The key in that assumption would be if he can gain enough experience to grow a brain before our country burns to the ground first.<br>And McCain, emotional? That's not something I've seen a ton of from him at all, so I'm not sure where that comes from.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>He doesn't SHOW emotion, he makes gut instinct reactions. The argument is that McCain is quick to action using his emotional responses, and Obama's inexperience will allow him to be more careful in judgment.

El Payne
09-28-2008, 04:57 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>accordselux</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>He doesn't SHOW emotion, he makes gut instinct reactions. The argument is that McCain is quick to action using his emotional responses, and Obama's inexperience will allow him to be more careful in judgment.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Well that's one way I haven't heard of before to contort experience into a bad thing...

FUCATYPR
09-29-2008, 10:55 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Well that's one way I haven't heard of before to contort experience into a bad thing...</TD></TR></TABLE><p><IMG SRC="http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k291/egokilr/motivator2979075.jpg" BORDER="0"><br>

IT GUY
09-29-2008, 12:28 PM
<IMG SRC="http://media.abcnews.edgesuite.net/Thumbnailer.ashx?w=400&h=300&u=http%3a%2f%2fmedia.dave.tv%2fStore10%2f0%2f1%2f1 225%2f1254635.dat&m=r&lbc=Black&nt=http://ugv.abcnews.go.com/images/channelthumb.jpg&fmt=image/jpeg" BORDER="0"> <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emdgust.gif" BORDER="0">

FRANK
09-29-2008, 12:32 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>IT GUY</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> <IMG SRC="http://media.abcnews.edgesuite.net/Thumbnailer.ashx?w=400&h=300&u=http%3a%2f%2fmedia.dave.tv%2fStore10%2f0%2f1%2f1 225%2f1254635.dat&m=r&lbc=Black&nt=http://ugv.abcnews.go.com/images/channelthumb.jpg&fmt=image/jpeg" BORDER="0"> <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emdgust.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p><br>lol <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

El Payne
09-29-2008, 01:09 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>FUCATYPR</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p><IMG SRC="http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k291/egokilr/motivator2979075.jpg" BORDER="0"><br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Well experience isn't everything. Like if Obama had been in the senate for 20 years, he'd have a lot of experience, but he'd still be a moron. So that's something to think about.

Obu
09-29-2008, 01:13 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Well experience isn't everything. Like if Obama had been in the senate for 20 years, he'd have a lot of experience, but he'd still be a moron. So that's something to think about.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Lol, much like McCain...<p>Too bad they both suck...sigh.

Major
09-29-2008, 01:30 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Obu</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Lol, much like McCain...<p>Too bad they both suck...sigh.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yeah this election for me is gonna be like going to a wedding reception...the options for dinner are shitty fish and shitty chicken...neither one is good<p>But I HATE shitty fish, so I go with the chicken <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

El Payne
09-29-2008, 01:40 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Obu</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Lol, much like McCain...<p>Too bad they both suck...sigh.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yeah, like I said, he isn't my ideal candidate by any means.<br>But I like some of the experience he has in areas that I think matter.<br>

Obu
09-29-2008, 01:46 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Yeah, like I said, he isn't my ideal candidate by any means.<br>But I like some of the experience he has in areas that I think matter.<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>I can definitely respect that <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0"> <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>MajorPayne</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Yeah this election for me is gonna be like going to a wedding reception...the options for dinner are shitty fish and shitty chicken...neither one is good<p>But I HATE shitty fish, so I go with the chicken </TD></TR></TABLE><p>LOL, haha, good call...

El Payne
09-29-2008, 01:54 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Obu</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I can definitely respect that <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0"> <p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>You and me being more economic-minded (when it comes to politics, I'd guess anyway), I see it as there are a lot of individuals who are going to contribute and have influence on the way the economy functions that aren't related to which presidential candidate gets elected. Congress and others carry a lot of that weight.<p>So I turn my attention to taxes. If you look at the tax brackets, figure in AMT (plus the effect high state taxes have, in places such as NY, etc), and understand the entire picture, I honestly can't see how one would think tax increases would be better for everyone.<p>If the government needs more money, maybe they should support greater spending and monetary turnover by lowering taxes and...umm...STOP SPENDING SO MUCH ON COMPLETE HORSE MANURE.<p>On social issues, it's not even a contest for who I would support. But just seeing one of the presidential candidates proposal for income tax returns and changes in the IRS is enough to make you say to yourself..."Seriously? Does he know how bad it is already? Does he even understand taxes?"<p>

92LSVTEC
09-29-2008, 02:33 PM
/\ first, your sig makes no sense to me. No God, No Peace? No Ala, No jihad?<p>second, i think obama did better than mccain. i agree with lan in the fact that no one seemed to directly answer questions the way anyone wanted them to. to have to change the lead questions, because no answers came was pretty shitty.<p>third, i see obama (and this is just how i see it), as wanting to become president to fix washington, more so for the good of the contry than mccain. i see mccain wanting it more for the power involved.<p>fourth, about OIF, OEF (Operation Iraqi Freedom, Op. Enduring Freedom) i think i liked what obama said more. more about sending a few more brigades to afghanistan, and he damn near said, going into pakistan. (who seems to be harboring terrorists), which i kind of agree with.<p>fifth, i liked obamas ideas for the finance crisis going on right now about the pork barrell spending. when mccain said he will veto everything that comes accross his desk? thats for SURE not the answer. some of that shit is 100% necessary, to NOT veto. and to let it pass.<p>in all, <br>mccain- he strikes me more as a power hungry, money hungry, mean old man.<p>obama- like i think his campaign is intending, strikes me as a for the better, more level headed approach, to turning this country around.<p>for now, obama has my vote<p>*note* i am generally non-partisan, but more twoard republican, and a memeber of the national guard, gearing up for a mission in afghanistan in late 09 early 2010.

El Payne
09-29-2008, 03:39 PM
Obama's "agenda", like so many liberals, seems good on the surface. The general ideas (which is all that he really has, mostly fluff, no substance) sound pretty good. But get down to the details of a lot of his ideas, if there are many, and you'll see where he falters again and again.<p>i.e. "Changing" Washington and reducing the deficit are the general, unsubstantiated statements he makes. He doesn't tell you that the taxes will screw you, as if they don't already, the oil companies will pay astronomical taxes compared to their profit (likely leading to foreign corporate supremacy), and more handouts to his constituents.<p>The first sentence, which is the epitome of BHO's type comments, sounds just fanciful. His implementation on the other hand is either ignorant and pathetic, or his backhandedly blowing the proverbial smoke all up in your backside.<p>Many great orators have lead the multitude astray throughout history.<br>He isn't even the best I've ever heard.<br>Don't let good presentation skills and feel-good sentiment take you hook, line, and sinker. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0">

El Payne
09-29-2008, 03:41 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>92LSVTEC</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">/\ first, your sig makes no sense to me. No God, No Peace? No Ala, No jihad?</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Oh, and I'm failing to see where the lack of connection is here. <br>And yes, if there was no Allah, there would be no jihad for those extremists.<br>Not even a symmetrical analogy. But feel free to explain yourself.

Club_MN
09-29-2008, 04:25 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Obama's "agenda", like so many liberals, seems good on the surface. The general ideas (which is all that he really has, mostly fluff, no substance) sound pretty good. But get down to the details of a lot of his ideas, if there are many, and you'll see where he falters again and again.<p>i.e. "Changing" Washington and reducing the deficit are the general, unsubstantiated statements he makes. He doesn't tell you that the taxes will screw you, as if they don't already, the oil companies will pay astronomical taxes compared to their profit (likely leading to foreign corporate supremacy), and more handouts to his constituents.<p>The first sentence, which is the epitome of BHO's type comments, sounds just fanciful. His implementation on the other hand is either ignorant and pathetic, or his backhandedly blowing the proverbial smoke all up in your backside.<p>Many great orators have lead the multitude astray throughout history.<br>He isn't even the best I've ever heard.<br>Don't let good presentation skills and feel-good sentiment take you hook, line, and sinker. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>What you can say about Obama you can say about McCain.<p>8 years ago, I would have voted for him, even though I am a democrat. His opinions and positions were great, and he was a fresh face for conservativism, at least on his positions, not for his age, lol.<p>Then over the last few years he's totally changed. He's voted with Bush 90% of the time and has been changing his positions on things to fall more in line with the conservative mainstream. He's a joke more than a 'maverick' nowadays. I'll give him credit in the past, but he's just a damn lackey for the GOP now.<p>What about this record doesn't scream 'pandering votes' and what guarantees do we have that any of the crap spewing out of his mouth to capture votes will actually come true? God, you can even take the Palin thing out of it, because that's an obvious cheap ploy to capture votes, and the woman has no experience and no substance.<p>I don't understand your avatar either, really. The chart that always floats around proves he'll tax 95% of America LESS, but you're saying he'll tax more, simply because he's a democrat?<p>I think he's got the right idea, of closing a lot of the loopholes in corporate taxes and punishing corporations that use overseas labor to avoid American labor laws and taxes. I can understand a trickle down in product cost, but I fail to see how that means Obama's got his hands in our pockets more.<p><br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>92LSVTEC</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">/<p>fifth, i liked obamas ideas for the finance crisis going on right now about the pork barrell spending. when mccain said he will veto everything that comes accross his desk? thats for SURE not the answer. some of that shit is 100% necessary, to NOT veto. and to let it pass.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>And this is exactly what I feel is right too. Obama said it eloquently, along the lines of McCain wants to use a hatchet where i will use a scalpel."<p>Every time federal budgets get cut we cut things like spending on our infrastructure, education, social services, health care, etc.<p>Why would we want to hack up things that keep this country together, and hamper the educational progress of our youth? <p>Cut the fat, but don't 'freeze' spending, as McCain said.<p>Our debt is too big to try and just whisk it away like that. It's a symbolic gesture to show how 'hard nosed' he is, but it can wind up doing far more harm than good.

El Payne
09-29-2008, 05:03 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>accordselux</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Then over the last few years he's totally changed. He's voted with Bush 90% of the time and has been changing his positions on things to fall more in line with the conservative mainstream. He's a joke more than a 'maverick' nowadays. I'll give him credit in the past, but he's just a damn lackey for the GOP now.<p>I don't understand your avatar either, really. The chart that always floats around proves he'll tax 95% of America LESS, but you're saying he'll tax more, simply because he's a democrat?<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yes, individuals in the same party tend to vote with each other on a significant number of ideas.<p>It is apparent you do not understand taxes, nor now about the plans he wants to implement, other than simply the side of the issue he wants you to hear. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics, and that 95% you give is all but the latter. <br>

EGwhat!!!
09-29-2008, 09:05 PM
<IMG SRC="http://i524.photobucket.com/albums/cc330/LuisEGWhat/obama-badass.jpg" BORDER="0">

El Payne
09-29-2008, 09:56 PM
<IMG SRC="http://www.theodoresworld.net/pics/0408/Obama08NOTImage1.jpg" BORDER="0">

FUCATYPR
09-30-2008, 05:31 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Obama's "agenda", like so many liberals, seems good on the surface......</TD></TR></TABLE><p><I>divide et impera</I><p>As soon as the people understand that, we can take our damn country back. I'm so sick of most Americans falling for the old good cop/bad cop routine. It's about time people wake up and realize that neither the democrats (socialist) nor the republicans (fascist) have your best interest in mind.

IT GUY
09-30-2008, 05:55 AM
<br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>accordselux</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>And this is exactly what I feel is right too. Obama said it eloquently, along the lines of <b>McCain wants to use a hatchet where i will use a scalpel."</b><p>Every time federal budgets get cut we cut things like spending on our infrastructure, education, social services, health care, etc.<p>Why would we want to hack up things that keep this country together, and hamper the educational progress of our youth? <p>Cut the fat, but don't 'freeze' spending, as McCain said.<p>Our debt is too big to try and just whisk it away like that. <b> It's a symbolic gesture to show how 'hard nosed' he is, but it can wind up doing far more harm than good.</b></TD></TR></TABLE><p>I'll admit that Obama's writers did a fantastic job. When he was able to deliver those written lines, he looked great. Obama has a good memory and it serves him well in these situations. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>You're reading a little too far in to the budget freeze comments. The transcript read like this.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b> </b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">MCCAIN: How about a spending freeze on everything but defense, veteran affairs and entitlement programs.<p>LEHRER: Spending freeze?<p>MCCAIN: I think we ought to seriously consider with the exceptions the caring of veterans national defense and <b>several other vital issues.</b><p>LEHRER: Would you go for that?<p>OBAMA: The problem with a spending freeze is you're using a hatchet where you need a scalpel. There are some programs that are very important that are under funded. 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.<p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>It could be said that 'other vital issues' are the things that <i>you</i> used as examples: <p>'Every time federal budgets get cut we cut things like spending on our infrastructure, education, social services, health care, etc.' <p>Maybe I missed it, but McCain didn't say we should cut those things and Obama didn't defend those things. Obama brought up spending more money on early childhood education, while admirable, doesn't really address the suggested spending freeze. In fact it suggests that Obama wants to spend <i>more</i> despite our current financial situation. He then proceeded to try and lead the debate away from that question by bringing up Iraq. I think Lehrer recognized that and that's why he asked the question about finance and the budget a second time. I'm probably reading in to Obama's comments here by saying he wants to spend 'more' overall, but you're reading into statement McCain made as well. <p>McCain tried being 'hard nosed' on spending, like you said, and it didn't work out for him. He wasn't the only one to make that mistake.<p>Obama did the same 'hard nosed' act when speaking about foreign policy and Pakistan. You could make the same 'wind up doing more harm than good' statement about Obama's foreign policy. I'm not going to go into the exact wording, but the transcript is in the links I posted below.<p>What I thought was funny was this:<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b> </b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>the most oft-repeated phrase by Senator McCain was “I don’t think Sen Obama understands”, while Obama repeated “I agree with John” more often than any other phrase. Just these two phrases capture the essence of the tone of the debate on foreign policy</TD></TR></TABLE><p><A HREF="http://www.riazhaq.com/2008/09/mccain-and-obama-debate-pakistan-policy.html" TARGET="_blank">http://www.riazhaq.com/2008/09....html</A><p><A HREF="http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/26/debate.mississippi.transcript/" TARGET="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITI...ript/</A><p>Bottom line is; they both kinda screwed up in areas where they've received alot of criticism. McCain on finance and being one of the good ol' boys of washington, and Obama on foreign policy and inexperience. They both tried to prove something by being 'hard nosed' and both failed. <br>

PistolStarta
09-30-2008, 07:27 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>FUCATYPR</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><I>divide et impera</I><p>As soon as the people understand that, we can take our damn country back. I'm so sick of most Americans falling for the old good cop/bad cop routine. It's about time people wake up and realize that neither the democrats (socialist) nor the republicans (fascist) have your best interest in mind. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Try reading the book liberal fascist and you'll find where facism is traced and originally came from (socialism/communism). Has nothing to do with conservativism, and many of the laws enacted in countries under formerly socialist rule are ones that were enacted here by democratic run congresses.

Club_MN
09-30-2008, 09:11 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Yes, individuals in the same party tend to vote with each other on a significant number of ideas.<p>It is apparent you do not understand taxes, nor now about the plans he wants to implement, other than simply the side of the issue he wants you to hear. There are lies, damn lies, and statistics, and that 95% you give is all but the latter. <br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>OOhh...big words. Way to defend McCain's shifty positions and turn it into an attack on me, and providing sources to back up your claim that the policy Obama outlined is a lie!<p>Let me know when you have real information to back that up and I'll change my mind. Which i'm not opposed to doing.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>IT GUY</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p><br>I'll admit that Obama's writers did a fantastic job. When he was able to deliver those written lines, he looked great. Obama has a good memory and it serves him well in these situations. <p>You're reading a little too far in to the budget freeze comments. The transcript read like this.<p>It could be said that 'other vital issues' are the things that <i>you</i> used as examples: <p>'Every time federal budgets get cut we cut things like spending on our infrastructure, education, social services, health care, etc.' <p>Maybe I missed it, but McCain didn't say we should cut those things and Obama didn't defend those things. Obama brought up spending more money on early childhood education, while admirable, doesn't really address the suggested spending freeze. In fact it suggests that Obama wants to spend <i>more</i> despite our current financial situation. He then proceeded to try and lead the debate away from that question by bringing up Iraq. I think Lehrer recognized that and that's why he asked the question about finance and the budget a second time. I'm probably reading in to Obama's comments here by saying he wants to spend 'more' overall, but you're reading into statement McCain made as well. <p>McCain tried being 'hard nosed' on spending, like you said, and it didn't work out for him. He wasn't the only one to make that mistake.<p>Obama did the same 'hard nosed' act when speaking about foreign policy and Pakistan. You could make the same 'wind up doing more harm than good' statement about Obama's foreign policy. I'm not going to go into the exact wording, but the transcript is in the links I posted below.<p>What I thought was funny was this:<p><A HREF="http://www.riazhaq.com/2008/09/mccain-and-obama-debate-pakistan-policy.html" TARGET="_blank">http://www.riazhaq.com/2008/09....html</A><p><A HREF="http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/26/debate.mississippi.transcript/" TARGET="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITI...ript/</A><p>Bottom line is; they both kinda screwed up in areas where they've received alot of criticism. McCain on finance and being one of the good ol' boys of washington, and Obama on foreign policy and inexperience. They both tried to prove something by being 'hard nosed' and both failed. <br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>See this is more constructive.<p>I agree that it seems that Obama wants to spend more within the country, but I'm not sure if this means he's not going to trim down current spending and like he said, cut out what doesn't work and put more funding into things that do work and need the money. McCain stated he wants to freeze spending and then kill any pork barrel spending that comes across his desk. Stopping pork is good, but I don't think 'freezing' a budget until it can be sorted out is going to be the best method, I think some things will need budget increases while others decreases, and freezing budgets may mean wasted money.<p>I work in education, which always gets hit hardest when federal funding starts to weaken. The idea of freezing budgets does not sit well with me, especially because it will probably mean that NCLB will continue to get funding even though it's a nightmare of a program.<p>As for foreign policy, yes, Obama tried to put down a firm position because he doesn't have that experience. But I think out of all people, McCain would have said he would attack Osama if he was sure of his whereabouts. I think Obama's hard nosed policy towards Pakistan harboring terrorists was used to throw McCain off. Obama used that to his advantage and either forced McCain to agree or basically admit he'd let Bin Laden go, which would be a bad move. I think that was a lot of talk and little real meaning. Positioning, IMO. What I saw in Obama was a more careful candidate. He wasn't going to play around diplomatically with a country, and he was willing to talk face to face with leaders of countries that are anti-American. He seemed to be more objective than McCain, offering to work with anyone to help international politics and use America's position as a superpower more delicately. I think that Iran and NK are building their nuclear programs simply because they aren't getting recognition through more diplomatic channels. I think nations resort to power struggles when the diplomatic strings have snapped, and reopening communication may be more fruitful than sanctions. Iraq survived with sanctions for over a decade, because other nations smuggled in goods.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><IMG SRC="http://www.theodoresworld.net/pics/0408/Obama08NOTImage1.jpg" BORDER="0"></TD></TR></TABLE><p>And I hope you realize how dumb this is. If you're as knowledgeable as you say you are, and i'll trust your judgment until I see otherwise, this is just a right wing tactic to make a connection with a vote for a democrat means the terrorists win, a sad ploy from the last election. You're not falling for that, right?<BR><BR>
<i>Modified by accordselux at 9:34 AM 9/30/2008</i>

IT GUY
09-30-2008, 09:53 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>accordselux</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>See this is more constructive.<p>I agree that it seems that Obama wants to spend more within the country, but I'm not sure if this means he's not going to trim down current spending and like he said, cut out what doesn't work and put more funding into things that do work and need the money. McCain stated he wants to freeze spending and then kill any pork barrel spending that comes across his desk. Stopping pork is good, but I don't think 'freezing' a budget until it can be sorted out is going to be the best method, I think some things will need budget increases while others decreases, and freezing budgets may mean wasted money.<p>I work in education, which always gets hit hardest when federal funding starts to weaken. The idea of freezing budgets does not sit well with me, especially because it will probably mean that NCLB will continue to get funding even though it's a nightmare of a program.<p>As for foreign policy, yes, Obama tried to put down a firm position because he doesn't have that experience. But I think out of all people, McCain would have said he would attack Osama if he was sure of his whereabouts. I think Obama's hard nosed policy towards Pakistan harboring terrorists was used to throw McCain off. Obama used that to his advantage and either forced McCain to agree or basically admit he'd let Bin Laden go, which would be a bad move. I think that was a lot of talk and little real meaning. Positioning, IMO.<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>You should read the transcript. It interesting to see what was actually said vs. what we believe was said. Perception is everything. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emwink.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>McCain never mentioned freezing spending on education, but Obama's comment following that statement has a beautifully written line about a 'hatchet and a scalpel' and 'early childhood education' thrown in for get your attention. Obama suggested that McCain suggested cutting spending on education. He in fact did not. <p>I see how this particular section of the debate would grab your attention as you work in education. You hear 'spending freeze' and think that means education cuts. You believe that things have gone that way historically in previous budget cuts. Unfortunately, there's no data on a national spending freeze to reference because it's never happened before to my knowledge. You're just going on the <u>assumption</u> that education spending would be frozen because it's had budget cuts in the past. <p>I'm all for early childhood education. My GF works in an Emory University early childhood program for autistic kids. I think it's a wonderful program and believe early childhood education is extremely important and should be generously funded. That being said; it has nothing to do with a spending freeze and even less to do with the original question of:<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>LEHRER</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> What I'm trying to get at this is this. Excuse me if I may, senator. Trying to get at that you all -- one of you is going to be the president of the United States come January. At the -- <b>in the middle of a huge financial crisis that is yet to be </b>. And what I'm trying to get at is <b>how this is going to affect you not in very specific -- small ways but in major ways and the approach to take as to the presidency.</b> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>At least McCain offered up an answer to the question. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>...and as far as Obama forcing McCain to believe something or admit something during the foreign policy discussion see my post above about the two most common phrases from each candidate during that portion of the debate. <p>You edited your post! <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

Major
09-30-2008, 10:17 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>accordselux</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>And I hope you realize how dumb this is. If you're as knowledgeable as you say you are, and i'll trust your judgment until I see otherwise, this is just a right wing tactic to make a connection with a vote for a democrat means the terrorists win, a sad ploy from the last election. You're not falling for that, right?<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>holy shit, its a political cartoon...they are all far-fetched....relax scooter<p>but the same thing holds true for this election as last: if you were a terrorist living in the United States, or the ME for that matter, and for the sake of argument COULD vote in our election, who would you vote for? <p>It was pretty obvious last time, and it doesnt seem to be any less evident this go-round.<p>But damn, its a fcking cartoon thats meant to be a joke <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/sad0071.gif" BORDER="0">

92LSVTEC
09-30-2008, 11:02 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Oh, and I'm failing to see where the lack of connection is here. <br>And yes, if there was no Allah, there would be no jihad for those extremists.<br>Not even a symmetrical analogy. But feel free to explain yourself.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>i forgot the <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

FUCATYPR
09-30-2008, 01:15 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PistolStarta</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Try reading the book liberal fascist and you'll find where facism is traced and originally came from (socialism/communism). Has nothing to do with conservativism, and many of the laws enacted in countries under formerly socialist rule are ones that were enacted here by democratic run congresses.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>but you are under the false assumption that republicans are conservatives

El Payne
09-30-2008, 01:20 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>92LSVTEC</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>i forgot the <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0"></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Dang you. I was wondering why I was so confused.<br>Screw the internet and its lack of sarcastic manifestation. <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/sad0071.gif" BORDER="0">

El Payne
09-30-2008, 01:24 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>accordselux</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>OOhh...big words. Way to defend McCain's shifty positions and turn it into an attack on me, and providing sources to back up your claim that the policy Obama outlined is a lie!<p>Let me know when you have real information to back that up and I'll change my mind. Which i'm not opposed to doing.<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>I don't have to prove anything. Taxes are my realm.<br>You're just misinformed. Go do some real research, from articles not on CNN, etc. and come back with what you've found.<p>If you still can't come to a different conclusion, I assume I'll have to throw out the probably baker's dozen worth of sources to help explain to you where you are WRONG.<p>And just to give you some credit, it isn't completely obvious to the average person by any stretch of the imagination, so I'm not assuming you should know. I'm just saying be careful to stand up for a statement or a position before you know the "other side" of things.

El Payne
09-30-2008, 01:28 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>accordselux</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>And I hope you realize how dumb this is. If you're as knowledgeable as you say you are, and i'll trust your judgment until I see otherwise, this is just a right wing tactic to make a connection with a vote for a democrat means the terrorists win, a sad ploy from the last election. You're not falling for that, right?<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>I am, more or less, stirring the pot. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>But I do feel the terrorists will enjoy themselves quite a bit more with Obama at the helm. No, I'm not saying per se that Obama would hypothetically ally with the terrorists.<br>But I do think he lacks the judgment and fortitude to take care of business when it needs to be.<br>Not to mention, with as liberal as he is and some of his cohorts in the Dem party, look at their policy on those type issues. "Pull out and leave the world alone." More or less.

El Payne
09-30-2008, 01:32 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>FUCATYPR</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>but you are under the false assumption that republicans are conservatives</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Don't play too much lawyer ball here.<br>More conservatives are in the Republican party, of course, than any other. <br>It's called a generalization for the purpose of making an all-encompassing remark.<br>

92LSVTEC
09-30-2008, 02:11 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Dang you. I was wondering why I was so confused.<br>Screw the internet and its lack of sarcastic manifestation. <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/sad0071.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>for real... im out too<p>:e-door slam:

PistolStarta
09-30-2008, 03:19 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>FUCATYPR</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">but you are under the false assumption that republicans are conservatives</TD></TR></TABLE><p>No im not, Im under the assumption there is no such thing and we all spawned from classical liberalism. The doesnt change fascist = republican is far from historically accurate

Club_MN
09-30-2008, 04:45 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>MajorPayne</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>holy shit, its a political cartoon...they are all far-fetched....relax scooter<p>but the same thing holds true for this election as last: if you were a terrorist living in the United States, or the ME for that matter, and for the sake of argument COULD vote in our election, who would you vote for? <p>It was pretty obvious last time, and it doesnt seem to be any less evident this go-round.<p>But damn, its a fcking cartoon thats meant to be a joke <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/sad0071.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Well, if you think about it this way, i'd vote Republican.<p>Social issues for fundamentalists are more in line with the right wing opinions.<p>However, if you take economic/political aspects, then Democrat.<p>Republicans usually are hands off big business and offer kickbacks- expansion of economic imperialism= more hate America.<p>Foreign policy- The Bush administration has invaded two Muslim countries= more hate America.<p>Military spending- Conservatives will spend more on the military= hate America.<p>So it depends which is the more important issue, social aspects or political ones. <br> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0"> <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I don't have to prove anything. Taxes are my realm.<br>You're just misinformed. Go do some real research, from articles not on CNN, etc. and come back with what you've found.<p>If you still can't come to a different conclusion, I assume I'll have to throw out the probably baker's dozen worth of sources to help explain to you where you are WRONG.<p>And just to give you some credit, it isn't completely obvious to the average person by any stretch of the imagination, so I'm not assuming you should know. I'm just saying be careful to stand up for a statement or a position before you know the "other side" of things.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Like I said, i'm more than happy to read something that has some good info on it. I've taken my share of domestic and international politics courses but am just now taking econ classes. I just like Obama's plan better than McCain's if we're just going on the promises and not what will become reality.

Major
09-30-2008, 04:57 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>accordselux</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Well, if you think about it this way, i'd vote Republican.<p>Social issues for fundamentalists are more in line with the right wing opinions.<p>However, if you take economic/political aspects, then Democrat.<p>Republicans usually are hands off big business and offer kickbacks- expansion of economic imperialism= more hate America.<p>Foreign policy- The Bush administration has invaded two Muslim countries= more hate America.<p>Military spending- Conservatives will spend more on the military= hate America.<p>So it depends which is the more important issue, social aspects or political ones. <br> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0"> <br></TD></TR></TABLE><p><IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

El Payne
09-30-2008, 06:38 PM
I don't personally care who hates America. That is no reason, in my mind, to change the way we do something.<br>Most countries who don't like us have less wealth, are less powerful, haven't had a government that has survived as long, and/or have pathetic societies, etc. etc.<br>

El Payne
10-01-2008, 10:05 AM
accordselux, I'll get to putting up the information I said I would in the next couple days. <br>It's a lot of info and I have an undergrad accounting exam to proctor tonight and an exam of my own to study for tomorrow.

malix
10-01-2008, 11:04 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I don't personally care who hates America. That is no reason, in my mind, to change the way we do something.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>So you dont think that being hated by the rest of the world will increase the likelihood of more attacks on American civilians in the future?<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Most countries who don't like us have less wealth, are less powerful, haven't had a government that has survived as long, and/or have pathetic societies, etc. etc.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>What makes a society "pathetic"?

El Payne
10-01-2008, 11:30 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>malix</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>So you dont think that being hated by the rest of the world will increase the likelihood of more attacks on American civilians in the future?<p>What makes a society "pathetic"? </TD></TR></TABLE><p>I don't see going out of our way and/or changing things we value to make countries like France happy, no. Not to mention that short of converting to Islam and giving them free reign, the governments of many of the Middle Eastern countries aren't ever going to like us, for obvious reasons.<p>And I deem a society "pathetic" when no one has much respect for them, they have no backbone to stand up for anything, they are ridden with criminals, they are cumulatively very unproductive, they hand out money while taxing the piss out of everyone, etc. etc. Those are just a few characteristics that would make me call a country that. Godless may also apply, but maybe that's more of a derivative, I'm not sure yet.<br>Some countries may have one or more of these characteristics and cannot help it (third world status, etc.) but there are others who can help it.

mrdeadman
10-07-2008, 09:10 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>accordselux</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>And I hope you realize how dumb this is. If you're as knowledgeable as you say you are, and i'll trust your judgment until I see otherwise, this is just a right wing tactic to make a connection with a vote for a democrat means the terrorists win, a sad ploy from the last election. You're not falling for that, right?<br><i>Modified by accordselux at 9:34 AM 9/30/2008</i></TD></TR></TABLE><p>I think the cartoon goes more along the lines of the middle east supporting obama, because obama is a muslim. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/sad0071.gif" BORDER="0">

malix
10-07-2008, 09:23 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>mrdeadman</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> obama is a muslim </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Fail.

flesh!ight
10-07-2008, 12:47 PM
i dont think race plays a any role with the candidates themselves. however, their constituents and loyal voting enclaves will definitely make it racial.<p>Obama doesnt want race drawn into this and he has successfully deflected from this. i think it'll be the white capital hill staff that surrounds him will turn a lotta things into racism. pariticularly, those infected with "white mans' guilt"<p>read: Hillary Clinton staffer who was forced to quite for tellin a bunch of kids playin in her front yard to stop monekying around.

El Payne
10-07-2008, 06:13 PM
Warren Buffett for Secretary of Treasury. Hah.<br>And tax cuts for 95% of folks, BHO? Keep telling that lie...<p>"When George Bush came into office we had surpluses..."<br>FAIL.

El Payne
10-07-2008, 06:40 PM
Annnnnd.... now he is expanding on the bold face lie that if you make under $250,000 you won't see a cent in your taxes go up.<p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthdown.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>BHO also loves saying that giving tax cuts to the highest taxed individuals in America aren't fair. How aren't they fair?<br>How is making the top 10% of Americans paying 75%+ of taxes fair?<br>If you think they simply get taxed on the 35% rate and that's it, you don't know much about taxes.

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-07-2008, 06:40 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Annnnnd.... now he is expanding on the bold face lie that if you make under $250,000 you won't see a cent in your taxes go up.<p> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>THIS IS SOME BULLSHIT.<p><br>

El Payne
10-07-2008, 06:57 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Mr. Simon, Esq.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>THIS IS SOME BULLSHIT.<p><br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>He twists stuff so much I don't trust the guy as far as I can see him.<br>Not completely blown away by McCain, but I don't think he is doing terrible.<p>His economic and social policies just contradict themselves SOOO much. It's the slow creeping hand of communism in the "we're just helping you, that's all" cloak.

El Payne
10-07-2008, 07:01 PM
And just within the past year or two, all you heard was "Look how Bush is expanding the government!"<p>Now this recent banking event comes up, and Obama and all the loonies are holler "Look at those 8 years of de-regulation; it's all their fault!"<p>Make up your mind...

El Payne
10-07-2008, 07:02 PM
And now Obama's going to play the "We went to war in Iraq...all the Al-Qaeda is in Afghanistan!"<p>O RLY?

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-07-2008, 07:16 PM
I hate both of these candidates so damn much <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthdown.gif" BORDER="0">

EGlovr
10-07-2008, 07:18 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Mr. Simon, Esq.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I hate both of these candidates so damn much <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthdown.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE>seriously. one more than the other, but i dont feel 'good' about this election either<p>we need another clinton/reagan/nixon/ford

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-07-2008, 07:22 PM
It is so funny reading facebook "status" updates of my friends regarding the debates.<p>The line is very divisive. The liberal expletive-sticks up here in DC are bashing McCain and the intelligent people of the south are bashing Obama.<p><br>I love the south <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmile.gif" BORDER="0"> <p><br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>EGlovr</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">seriously. one more than the other, but i dont feel 'good' about this election either<p>we need another clinton/reagan/nixon/ford</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I'm sayin though.<p>My God. And you know what, regardless of who wins, I really hope that the next President can make good on all of these promises that they are making to the American people. Both candidates have written some VERY large checks with their mouth.<p><br>

Moemers
10-07-2008, 07:23 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Mr. Simon, Esq.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It is so funny reading facebook "status" updates of my friends regarding the debates.<p>The line is very divisive. The liberal expletive-sticks up here in DC are bashing McCain and the intelligent people of the south are bashing Obama.<p><br>I love the south <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmile.gif" BORDER="0"> <p><br>I'm sayin though.<p>My God. And you know what, regardless of who wins, I really hope that the next President can make good on all of these promises that they are making to the American people. Both candidates have written some VERY large checks with their mouth.<p><br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>We don't stand a chance.

Moemers
10-07-2008, 07:24 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Mr. Simon, Esq.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I hate both of these candidates so damn much <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthdown.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Ron Paul 2008.

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-07-2008, 07:26 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Moemers</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>We don't stand a chance.</TD></TR></TABLE><p><br> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/scared0010.gif" BORDER="0"> <p><br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Moemers</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Ron Paul 2008.</TD></TR></TABLE><p><br> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/scared0010.gif" BORDER="0">

Moemers
10-07-2008, 07:28 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Mr. Simon, Esq.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p><br> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/scared0010.gif" BORDER="0"> <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/scared0010.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>who would you want?

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-07-2008, 07:32 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Moemers</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>who would you want?</TD></TR></TABLE><p>To be honest, none.<p>Im just so disappointed in all of the candidates.<p>I've been yearning for a true conservative to come and rescue the Republican party from the moderate nightmare that presently consumes it.

El Payne
10-07-2008, 07:49 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Mr. Simon, Esq.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>To be honest, none.<p>Im just so disappointed in all of the candidates.<p>I've been yearning for a true conservative to come and rescue the Republican party from the moderate nightmare that presently consumes it.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I feel you there, broseph.<p>I just don't trust a guy who has such terrible views on taxes and lies about them so blatantly to others, not to mention the multitude of voters who will cast their ballot not even knowing or being concerned about the single most directly related issue that Americans as a whole face on an individual basis.

CodeMan
10-07-2008, 08:46 PM
Why aren't we talking about the fact that McCain announced a policy change in which he would spend an additional $300B for a bailout on top of the existing bailout? Buying back mortgages and renegotiating them? As a conservative I would be outraged.

Moemers
10-07-2008, 08:51 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Why aren't we talking about the fact that McCain announced a policy change in which he would spend an additional $300B for a bailout on top of the existing bailout? Buying back mortgages and renegotiating them? As a conservative I would be outraged.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>He said it about 80 times too.

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-07-2008, 08:52 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Why aren't we talking about the fact that McCain announced a policy change in which he would spend an additional $300B for a bailout on top of the existing bailout? Buying back mortgages and renegotiating them? As a conservative I would be outraged.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I am <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/1018.gif" BORDER="0">

El Payne
10-07-2008, 08:54 PM
I understand his point of view on it, but don't agree with it.

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-08-2008, 04:47 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I understand his point of view on it, but don't agree with it.</TD></TR></TABLE><p><br> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0">

ANTonio
10-08-2008, 05:44 AM
I can't even watch these guys talk anymore....<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Obama</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Healthcare, healthcare, war in Iraq, americans are paying too much at the pump</TD></TR></TABLE><br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>John Mccain</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">fundimental difference between me and senator Obama, is that I'm a maverick, Obama lacks experience, General Patton once told me...</TD></TR></TABLE><p>

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-08-2008, 06:01 AM
lol @ Patton

Nasty Nate
10-08-2008, 07:45 AM
To be honest i dont know who I'm going to vote for anymore. i thought i knew...but now... <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/scared0010.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>And anyone notice the Palin ads stating "She is a proven maverick". How does one prove that they are a maverick? It's such a subjective term...

ANTonio
10-08-2008, 07:51 AM
<IMG SRC="http://www.solarnavigator.net/films_movies_actors/actors_films_images/top_gun_maverick_tom_cruise_suited.jpg" BORDER="0">

Obu
10-08-2008, 10:43 AM
This has got to be the shittiest time to be an American in a long time. Sigh....

PistolStarta
10-08-2008, 10:44 AM
lol we say that every election you know right? Bush/Gore everyone hated it, Bush/Kerry, McCain/Obama, its just a cycle

Obu
10-08-2008, 11:02 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PistolStarta</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">lol we say that every election you know right? Bush/Gore everyone hated it, Bush/Kerry, McCain/Obama, its just a cycle</TD></TR></TABLE><p>This is a very important year, especially from my perspective as a trader and someone that wants to work in finance for the rest of his life.<p>I get what your saying but I really think this is one of the most important elections in a long time.

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-08-2008, 11:07 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Obu</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I get what your saying but I really think this is one of the most important elections in a long time. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Agreed

PistolStarta
10-08-2008, 11:12 AM
Im not saying it isnt important at all, Im just saying every American hates every election

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-08-2008, 11:14 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PistolStarta</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Im not saying it isnt important at all, Im just saying every American hates every election</TD></TR></TABLE><p>*raises both hands*<p>

PistolStarta
10-08-2008, 11:17 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Mr. Simon, Esq.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">*raises both hands*</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Doesnt count, youre a Texan before an American <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

malix
10-08-2008, 11:31 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PistolStarta</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">lol we say that every election you know right? Bush/Gore everyone hated it, Bush/Kerry, McCain/Obama, its just a cycle</TD></TR></TABLE><p>and that is never going to change as long as people think of third parties as a "wasted vote"

PistolStarta
10-08-2008, 11:42 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>malix</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">and that is never going to change as long as people think of third parties as a "wasted vote" </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Look if RP was meant to be the next president he would have gained support during the Repub debates as opposed to slowly dwindling, sure he had a strong base, but its the candidates job to get support, not the American people. I agree a 2 party system is wrong, but its not the fault of Americans

El Payne
10-08-2008, 11:53 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>malix</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>and that is never going to change as long as people think of third parties as a "wasted vote" </TD></TR></TABLE><p>I think the problem isn't in the fact that there is a literal 3rd party choice but the fact that there is so much median ground covered by the two existing parties that there really isn't likely much chance for the general population to agree with anything otherwise. Now having a third party that even covers some of the same opinions and views just as the Dems and Reps do would be understandable....but at that point you may as well just allow more than 1 candidate from each party run, because there wouldn't be much difference.<p>Not to mention a lot of elections like that would run into someone winning the plurality...and that's doesn't seem very desirable when it comes to your president.

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-08-2008, 12:00 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PistolStarta</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Doesnt count, youre a Texan before an American </TD></TR></TABLE><p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/1180.gif" BORDER="0"> <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

EGlovr
10-08-2008, 12:16 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Obu</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I get what your saying but I really think this is one of the most important elections in a long time. </TD></TR></TABLE> why?

FRANK
10-08-2008, 12:20 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>EGlovr</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> why?</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Because they both suck but forced to choose the the <I>better</I> one <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emdgust.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>

mrdeadman
10-08-2008, 04:54 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>malix</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Fail.</TD></TR></TABLE><p><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xABGNdiomtg&feature=related" TARGET="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...lated</A> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/fv-green-bat.gif" BORDER="0">

leeroi
10-08-2008, 05:14 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Lan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">This is my take on it. <p>Neither one of them answered questions as directly as I would have liked.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>i thought so myself

FUCATYPR
10-09-2008, 08:05 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>mrdeadman</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xABGNdiomtg&feature=related" TARGET="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...lated</A> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/fv-green-bat.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>context<p><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVn59TC2QqM&feature=related" TARGET="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...lated</A><p>"If I were dictator, which I always aspire to be"<br>-John McCain <p><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvqAYW3AV0g" TARGET="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvqAYW3AV0g</A><p>I bet that can be twisted too<p>

PistolStarta
10-09-2008, 08:54 AM
how old is the McCain vid

CARTER
10-09-2008, 09:19 AM
Obama gives me chills when he speaks, Mccain makes me wanna drop kick him. <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/ninja.png" BORDER="0">

IT GUY
10-09-2008, 01:29 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Obama gives me chills when he speaks, Mccain makes me wanna drop kick him. <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/ninja.png" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p><br>'nothing' never sounded better than when it's coming out of Obama's mouth, right? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

FRANK
10-09-2008, 01:31 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Obama gives me chills when he speaks, Mccain makes me wanna drop kick him. <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/ninja.png" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>chills is all your gonna get when he speaks cuz that's all he does.<p>

CARTER
10-09-2008, 01:57 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>FRANK</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>chills is all your gonna get when he speaks cuz that's all he does.<p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>well see <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/fv-green-bat.gif" BORDER="0">

Fat Mike
10-09-2008, 02:24 PM
just look at my avitar

FRANK
10-09-2008, 02:37 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>fat mike</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">just look at my avitar </TD></TR></TABLE><p><br>Oh nice <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0"> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

IT GUY
10-16-2008, 05:04 AM
Thought I'd bring this back since the last debate happened yesterday. What did you guys think?<p>I thought the 'Senator Government' thing was pretty funny <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

ANTonio
10-16-2008, 05:16 AM
I didn't bother to watch this one...I think both of these guys are clowns at this point

IT GUY
10-16-2008, 05:21 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>ANTonio</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I didn't bother to watch this one...I think both of these guys are clowns at this point</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I DVR'd it. I've only seen the highlights so far. It's why I didn't really comment more.<p>but yes, they are both clowns <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

FUCATYPR
10-16-2008, 05:40 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PistolStarta</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">how old is the McCain vid</TD></TR></TABLE><p>about 16 days old

FRANK
10-16-2008, 06:35 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>IT GUY</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Thought I'd bring this back since the last debate happened yesterday. What did you guys think?<p>I thought the 'Senator Government' thing was pretty funny <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p><br>I thought it was better than the previous debates I saw. <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>ANTonio</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I didn't bother to watch this one...I think both of these guys are clowns at this point</TD></TR></TABLE><p>no doubt.<p>

Jomo
10-16-2008, 07:22 AM
I thought it was the best of the three personally. Which still isn't saying much.

EGlovr
10-16-2008, 07:25 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>ANTonio</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I didn't bother to watch this one...I think both of these guys are clowns at this point</TD></TR></TABLE> the entire thing is on cnn.com<p>/cheap plug

FRANK
10-16-2008, 07:32 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Jomo</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I thought it was the best of the three personally. Which still isn't saying much.</TD></TR></TABLE><p><br>lol QFT

PrinceAli132
10-16-2008, 07:49 AM
I liked how McCain stepped up and finally mentioned something along the lines of that he is not G.W.B. and that he should ran 4 years ago if he wanted to run against him.<p>Otherwise, I can't compare to the others because I haven't seen them.<p>Ali

Jomo
10-16-2008, 07:55 AM
I know he's been waiting to say that for a LONG time.

CodeMan
10-16-2008, 08:14 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PrinceAli132</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I liked how McCain stepped up and finally mentioned something along the lines of that he is not G.W.B. and that he should ran 4 years ago if he wanted to run against him.<p>Otherwise, I can't compare to the others because I haven't seen them.<p>Ali</TD></TR></TABLE><p>That was the quip of the debate for sure. Still doesn't matter though because the word association is there. Even if McCain says "I'm not George Bush" he's still being mentioned in the same sentence with him and that's damning.

FRANK
10-16-2008, 08:18 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>That was the quip of the debate for sure. Still doesn't matter though because the word association is there. Even if McCain says "I'm not George Bush" he's still being mentioned in the same sentence with him and that's damning.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>HHH<p>Like Rev Wright and Obama?<p>

El Payne
10-16-2008, 08:20 AM
I just still don't understand why having policies that may be close to some of GWB's is a bad thing in every case. I guess that's the plan: lead the gullible into believing that and then associate McCain to Bush every chance. <br>The intelligent can get past that pretty easy though.

PrinceAli132
10-16-2008, 08:21 AM
I was watching a pre-debate show. I think it was O'Riley, and he had some guests on and few mentioned that McCain really needed to stand up which I would of enjoyed watching.<br>From Rove:<br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>karl rove</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>If I were McCain, I'd look at Obama and say, 'if you're elected you're not going to go after Barney Frank or Chris Dodd, and I will.' That would be a very bold move, and that is the only thing I see that will resonate."<br></TD></TR></TABLE><br>From others on the show last night<br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>cnn</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Political strategist Dick Morris took his turn at bat in the No Spin Zone. "McCain can outflank Obama on the anger front," Morris opined, "because the most fundamental thing about Obama is his decision to remain calm, that he's not an 'angry black guy.' McCain should give a list of names of Wall Street executives that he will get arrested and indicted. And if I were coaching McCain, I'd tell him to bring up Obama's unholy quadrangle - his spiritual adviser Reverend Wright, his financial guru Tony Rezko, the guy who gave him his first job William Ayers, and his ties to ACORN." The Factor argued that Morris' suggestion carries an inherent danger: "If McCain does that, Obama will look into the camera and tell people that McCain has no solutions, all he can do is attack me on things that don't matter to you."<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Taken from <A HREF="http://www.billoreilly.com/show;jsessionid=C12AB8E5233BC8F6AF5A81468A2E8102?a ction=latestTVShow#3" TARGET="_blank">http://www.billoreilly.com/sho...how#3</A><p>Ali

CodeMan
10-16-2008, 08:23 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>FRANK</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>HHH<p>Like Rev Wright and Obama?<p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Didn't come up in the debate. Not to mention every conceivable poll indicates people don't care. What people DO care about is the current economic state and true or not McCain is being linked to Bush's policies in the public eye. I'm sorry to say but GW fucked the party and it's going to be an uphill climb.

El Payne
10-16-2008, 08:25 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> I'm sorry to say but GW fucked the party and it's going to be an uphill climb.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>If you're talking about what the media, CNN, ABC, NBC, etc. want people to believe, then yes, you would be correct.

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-16-2008, 08:25 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PrinceAli132</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I liked how McCain stepped up and finally mentioned something along the lines of that he is not G.W.B. and that he should ran 4 years ago if he wanted to run against him.<p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>I thought that was the line of the night. It was very important for McCain to finally say that.<p><br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I just still don't understand why having policies that may be close to some of GWB's is a bad thing in every case. I guess that's the plan: lead the gullible into believing that and then associate McCain to Bush every chance. <br>The intelligent can get past that pretty easy though.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Sad to say, the intelligent make up a minority in this country <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthdown.gif" BORDER="0">

El Payne
10-16-2008, 08:26 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Mr. Simon, Esq.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Sad to say, the intelligent make up a minority in this country <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthdown.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>QFT

CodeMan
10-16-2008, 08:29 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>If you're talking about what the media, CNN, ABC, NBC, etc. want people to believe, then yes, you would be correct. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>I'm not saying there's anything there or not. The public perception of him is terrible, his approval rating is at 16%, and all but the hardest core Republicans have lost faith and/or jumped ship. When Christopher Buckley resigns from The National Review and endorses Obama your party has issues.

FRANK
10-16-2008, 08:32 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Didn't come up in the debate. Not to mention every conceivable poll indicates people don't care.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>What a CNN pole? lol<p>Debate or not I'm talking facts here and this is something that will effect votes. <p><br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">What people DO care about is the current economic state and true or not McCain is being linked to Bush's policies <B>in the public eye</B>.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>right, in the public eye......: obama hype:<p><br>

CodeMan
10-16-2008, 08:39 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>FRANK</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>What a CNN pole? lol<p>Debate or not I'm talking facts here and this is something that will effect votes. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Not a CNN poll, every single poll. Seriously, people don't care about character in this election, they care about issues. It's refreshing actually. This is the one election where smears and character associations simply aren't working. If anything they're making the smearer look worse. It's turning people off in the worst possible way.<p><br>

FRANK
10-16-2008, 08:42 AM
<br>Explain this one Obama lovers<p>Raise employer taxes<br>Increase wages<br>Impose an employer based healthcare system (employer expense)<p>Put this all on top of our current economical state.<p><br>End result?<p><br>

PistolStarta
10-16-2008, 08:42 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Not a CNN poll, every single poll. Seriously, people don't care about character in this election, they care about issues. It's refreshing actually. This is the one election where smears and character associations simply aren't working. If anything they're making the smearer look worse. It's turning people off in the worst possible way.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I hope youre shitting me, I have yet to talk to 1 person that has given me a piece of legislative paperwork Obama passed that made them want him. Up until he wrote his plans like a month ago AND actually talked about implementing them it was all character

El Payne
10-16-2008, 08:43 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I'm not saying there's anything there or not. The public perception of him is terrible, his approval rating is at 16%, and all but the hardest core Republicans have lost faith and/or jumped ship. When Christopher Buckley resigns from The National Review and endorses Obama your party has issues.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yet the Democratic-led Senate has had worse approval ratings.<br>But no, the media wouldn't dare focus on that.<p>And I don't care who jumps ship on Bush and endorses Obama.<br>That's cognitive dissidence for you.<br>If your moral compass is so skewed that you can go from being a Bush supporter to being a Obama supporter, there isn't a snowflakes chance in hell that you are a true conservative.<p>My .02

El Payne
10-16-2008, 08:47 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>FRANK</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Explain this one Obama lovers<p>Raise employer taxes<br>Increase wages<br>Impose an employer based healthcare system (employer expense)<p>Put this all on top of our current economical state.<p><br>End result?<p><br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>It's just like all his economic policies. They sound good, or decent at least, and he presents them well. But you boil it down and he is just going to raise taxes, take more money from the hardworking individuals making America function, redistribute wealth more than there is already under the name of "tax cuts", and screw even more of our industry and corporations over.<p>He whines that Bush is responsible for jobs going over seas...<br>Keep raising minimum wage and implementing greater employer costs. <br>YOU are the root cause and problem with jobs shipping out.<br>But yes, please, continue to boldface lie to all of us.<p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthdown.gif" BORDER="0">

FRANK
10-16-2008, 08:57 AM
yep, just like McCain said last night, those tax implementations will just lead to more business over seas and less jobs in the us, less tax revenue in the end for the State and Federal Govt. We need to promote new business and support the existing business so they can continue to keep jobs here in the US.

IT GUY
10-16-2008, 09:00 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>FRANK</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Explain this one Obama lovers<p>Raise employer taxes<br>Increase wages<br>Impose an employer based healthcare system (employer expense)<p>Put this all on top of our current economical state.<p><br>End result?<p><br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>I don't think Joe the Plumber would approve <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

FRANK
10-16-2008, 09:01 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>IT GUY</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I don't think Joe the Plumber would approve <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p><br>BUWAHAHAHA <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/fing21.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>

El Payne
10-16-2008, 09:04 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>FRANK</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">yep, just like McCain said last night, those tax implementations will just lead to more business over seas and less jobs in the us, less tax revenue in the end for the State and Federal Govt. We need to promote new business and support the existing business so they can continue to keep jobs here in the US. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>But nooooo. That would be awful to give corporations tax breaks, since they are already paying 34% marginal rates or higher (for the vast majority) before any other taxation. <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthdown.gif" BORDER="0">

FRANK
10-16-2008, 09:07 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>But nooooo. That would be awful to give corporations tax breaks, since they are already paying 34% marginal rates or higher (for the vast majority) before any other taxation. <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthdown.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Some people just don't grasp this........<p>

PrinceAli132
10-16-2008, 09:11 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>FRANK</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Some people just don't grasp this........<p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Can someone elaborate on this a bit more on both the issue and McCain's perspective on what to do. (Hopefully that makes sense).<p>I can honestly say I don't know anything, I prolly just see the tip of the iceberg. But im trying to slowly learn my way and get with whats "actually" going on. TIA<p>Edit - you don't have to write a thesis or anything crazy like that.<p><br>Ali

CodeMan
10-16-2008, 09:11 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>FRANK</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Explain this one Obama lovers<p>Raise employer taxes<br>Increase wages<br>Impose an employer based healthcare system (employer expense)<p>Put this all on top of our current economical state.<p><br>End result?<p><br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>I'm not an Economist and I don't claim to be. You might be interested to see how working Economists feel about the subject though. Several hundred were polled, some with a party affiliation and some independents. The ones with a party affiliation aren't linked because obviously their views are skewed. Check it out...<p> <A HREF="http://media.economist.com/media/pdf/IndependentRespondents.pdf" TARGET="_blank">http://media.economist.com/med...s.pdf</A>

CodeMan
10-16-2008, 09:14 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PistolStarta</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I hope youre shitting me, I have yet to talk to 1 person that has given me a piece of legislative paperwork Obama passed that made them want him. Up until he wrote his plans like a month ago AND actually talked about implementing them it was all character</TD></TR></TABLE><p>You missed the point, I was saying smear campaigns aren't working this go-round. And up until a moth ago this election was close.

El Payne
10-16-2008, 09:25 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PrinceAli132</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Can someone elaborate on this a bit more on both the issue and McCain's perspective on what to do. (Hopefully that makes sense).<p>I can honestly say I don't know anything, I prolly just see the tip of the iceberg. But im trying to slowly learn my way and get with whats "actually" going on. TIA<p>Edit - you don't have to write a thesis or anything crazy like that.<p><br>Ali</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Here is obviously the easiest and most brief explanation.<p><A HREF="http://www.johnmccain.com/Issues/JobsforAmerica/taxes.htm" TARGET="_blank">http://www.johnmccain.com/Issu...s.htm</A><p>This is more detailed...<p><A HREF="http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411693_CandidateTaxPlans.pdf" TARGET="_blank">http://www.taxpolicycenter.org...s.pdf</A><p>Noteworthy, Obama wants to raise capital gains taxes and dividend taxes.<br>Yayyy! Let's increase the taxes on dividends that ALREADY get DOUBLE TAXED!!!<p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/scared0010.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>EDIT: I'm probably going to be making a BIG thread on this tax aspect of the election. Just haven't decided whether it will go in politics or in money/investing yet....<p>TUNE IN THOUGH!

Jomo
10-16-2008, 09:28 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">II guess that's the plan: lead the gullible into believing that and then associate McCain to Bush every chance.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>That's not the majority of voters?

El Payne
10-16-2008, 09:29 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Jomo</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>That's not the majority of voters?</TD></TR></TABLE><p>The gullible? Unfortunately, they probably make up a good portion of the populus.

PrinceAli132
10-16-2008, 09:38 AM
Thanks for the links and I'll keep an eye out for your thread.<p>Ali

FRANK
10-16-2008, 09:50 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I'm not an Economist and I don't claim to be. You might be interested to see how working Economists feel about the subject though. Several hundred were polled, some with a party affiliation and some independents. The ones with a party affiliation aren't linked because obviously their views are skewed. Check it out...<p> <A HREF="http://media.economist.com/media/pdf/IndependentRespondents.pdf" TARGET="_blank">http://media.economist.com/med...s.pdf</A> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>I'm not an economist either and I really don't care what these alleged <I>non partisan</I> "academic economist" think is right. I like facts not opinions and don't believe everything read on the internet.<p>

CodeMan
10-16-2008, 10:01 AM
FWIW Mat I totally get why you're anti-Obama. People vote based on what a particular candidate's policy will do to their everyday ins and outs and you would undoubtedly be negatively affected. I can, at the very least, respect where you're coming from personally.

mrdeadman
10-16-2008, 10:04 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I'm not saying there's anything there or not. The public perception of him is terrible, his approval rating is at 16%, and all but the hardest core Republicans have lost faith and/or jumped ship. When Christopher Buckley resigns from The National Review and endorses Obama your party has issues.</TD></TR></TABLE><br>I still &lt;3 Bush. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/embeer.gif" BORDER="0">

think one
10-16-2008, 10:08 AM
they both sucked yesterday.

IT GUY
10-16-2008, 10:09 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>aaron the terrible</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">they both suck. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>fixed. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

FRANK
10-16-2008, 10:11 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">FWIW Mat I totally get why you're anti-Obama. People vote based on what a particular candidate's policy will do to their everyday ins and outs and you would undoubtedly be negatively affected. I can, at the very least, respect where you're coming from personally.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>and likewise.<p>But honestly if Obama is in I'm very afraid of the outcome from a business/economy perspective <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emdgust.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>In the end I really don't feel like I have any control or influence over the situation especially being a republican voter in CA.

think one
10-16-2008, 10:13 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>IT GUY</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>fixed. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/embeer.gif" BORDER="0">

Jomo
10-16-2008, 10:22 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>FRANK</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">But honestly if Obama is in I'm very afraid of the outcome from a business/economy perspective <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emdgust.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>In the end I really don't feel like I have any control or influence over the situation especially being a republican voter in MD.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-16-2008, 11:28 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>FRANK</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p><br>But honestly if Obama is in I'm very afraid of the outcome from a business/economy perspective <p>In the end I really don't feel like I have any control or influence over the situation especially being a republican voter in DC.</TD></TR></TABLE>

malix
10-16-2008, 11:36 AM
The economy is already royally screwed for the next couple of years at least, and neither candidate is going to be able to change that. The challenge of the next administration will be damage control, not growth. <p>I just hope that everyone who defended Bush by saying its not all the President's fault will remember that when Obama is in the Oval Office. (and no, i will not be voting for him)<p><br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Glenn Beck</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Despite the best efforts of our politicians to convince us otherwise, there is no easy way out of the financial crisis we've created. <p>Gimmicks and Band-Aids won't solve the underlying problem; they just delay its impact until after the election. While that might help politicians keep their jobs, it won't help you and me keep ours.<p>A lot of us saw what was coming before the dam broke. We didn't need fancy graphs or prize-winning economists to warn us. We just used common sense. But now that same common sense is now telling us something else: Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. <p>We can't print billions of new dollars and expect there to never be a consequence for it down the road. We can't unwind a bubble built on historic levels of greed by simply writing a check or passing a law.<p>I'm sorry that I don't have any magic pills to offer, but for those who are ready to stop treating our gunshot wound with painkillers and start finding some real solutions, I have a few ideas.<p>No. 1: Preparation, not panic.<p>Things could get really bad before they get better. Really, really bad. But you'll never know what's coming by watching the Dow every day -- it's a terrible indicator. In fact, the four largest percentage gains in the Dow's history happened between 1929 and 1933, a period that wasn't exactly a great time to buy.<p>What we're experiencing right now are the outer bands of a hurricane with an eye that likely won't hit us for another year or two. In the meantime, there will be plenty of sunny days, but they'll just distract us from what's coming. Stay focused on what your gut tells you is still churning just offshore.<p>As you wait, do what those in the path of a real hurricane do: prepare. Build an emergency cash fund, store some extra food, learn a new skill, consult a financial adviser ... do anything that will get you and your family ready. Just don't panic.<p>No. 2: Early retirement.<p>Does anyone else find it odd that some of the same people who proved their financial incompetence during the S&L crisis, the dot-com bubble and the housing bubble are still in office to guide us through this economic crisis?<p>John McCain (first elected to Congress in 1982), Joe Biden (1972), Robert Byrd (1952), John Dingell (1955), Daniel Inouye (1962) and Ted Stevens (1968) are just a few examples of national politicians who were seemingly roaming Washington right alongside the dinosaurs.<p>How many of you have been in the same job since the '70s? Outside of politics (and "60 Minutes"), it just doesn't happen.<p>I understand the case against term limits. I know that some people believe it would force them to retire just as they begin to "master" (please, no laughter) the issues -- but is that really a bad thing? <p>Maybe having people who are curious enough to ask simple questions about seemingly routine issues is exactly what we need. For example, a great question circa 2004 might have been: "So what happens if housing prices ever start to decline?"<p>No. 3: Power isn't permanent. Take it back.<p>Giving our government more and more power every year has almost become routine. But when's the last time we've told our leaders that they're doing such a lousy job we want some of it back?<p>Massachusetts is now trying just that. On Election Day, their residents will vote on whether to eliminate their state income tax. If passed, each Massachusetts taxpayer would save an average of about $3,600 a year.<p>Of course, establishment politicians are sounding all kinds of dire warnings about what will happen to state programs without the tax, but I'd be willing to bet that they'll find a way to adapt and survive. After all, it's not called "Taxachusetts" for nothing.<p>Just remember our government has power only because We the People lend it to them. Maybe it's time to treat them like the subprime borrower they are and recall that loan.<p>No. 4: Live within your means and demand our leaders do the same.<p>In 1991, my home state of Connecticut (the Constitution State -- oh, the irony) was suffering from a budget deficit of nearly a billion dollars.<p>Instead of using those hard times as an opportunity to convince the state to start living within their means, the governor proposed an income tax. After a long stalemate, the General Assembly eventually agreed.<p>Now, 17 years later, that income tax (which, of course, has been raised over the years) is projected to bring in about $7.6 billion. Add in $350 million in revenue from Indian casinos that wasn't there in 1991, and Connecticut now has nearly $8 billion in new revenue to play with.<p>So, with all of that money, they must now have massive surpluses, right? Wrong. Connecticut's governor recently announced that this year's budget deficit has increased to $300 million, and she says it might still get worse.<p>How did it happen? Easy: out-of-control spending. In 1991, Connecticut's spending budget was $7.6 billion. Now? It's $17.5 billion -- an increase of 130 percent. Believe me, as someone who lives in Connecticut, there hasn't been a 130 percent improvement in roads, schools or hospitals over that time.<p>It's time to stop giving these clowns any more money (see No. 3, above) and force them to start living within their means.<p>No. 5: Goodnight Saigon<p>The chorus of Billy Joel's famous song about the Vietnam War still rings true today: We will all go down together.<p><B>When the eye of the storm finally comes ashore, nothing will be less relevant than whether you're a registered Democrat or Republican. It didn't matter during Pearl Harbor, the Cuban Missile Crisis or Oklahoma City, and I certainly don't remember anyone asking to see a voter ID card before they gave you a hug on 9/11.<p>If September 11 was the worst day in American history, then September 12 was one of the best. Do you remember what it was like? Lines at blood banks; filled-up churches; neighbors watching out for each other; families sitting around the dinner table and talking to each other.<p>It was the America we all long for -- and we can have it back. But if you're waiting for another historic crisis to convince you to put the donkeys and elephants aside and reconnect with each other, then open your eyes; we're in the middle of it</B>.<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>

Jomo
10-16-2008, 11:45 AM
I always enjoy reading Glenn Beck.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Glenn Beck</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Just remember our government has power only because We the People lend it to them. Maybe it's time to treat them like the subprime borrower they are and recall that loan.</TD></TR></TABLE><p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/143.gif" BORDER="0">

El Payne
10-16-2008, 11:47 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>malix</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The economy is already royally screwed for the next couple of years at least, and neither candidate is going to be able to change that. The challenge of the next administration will be damage control, not growth. <p>I just hope that everyone who defended Bush by saying its not all the President's fault will remember that when Obama is in the Oval Office. (and no, i will not be voting for him)<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Kinda like when Bush inherited the downward cyclical economy after Clinton's presidency huh? That was supposedly "all Bush's fault".

malix
10-16-2008, 12:00 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Kinda like when Bush inherited the downward cyclical economy after Clinton's presidency huh? That was supposedly "all Bush's fault".</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I think you missed the entire point of my post. <p>Partisan fingerpointing is futile, and i certainly never argued that the President was solely to blame for the economy. This situation is much worse than anything GWB inherited though, and we are in for a rough ride no matter who wins.

FRANK
10-16-2008, 12:01 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>malix</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br> we are in for a rough ride no matter who wins.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>yes we are...

PrinceAli132
10-16-2008, 01:11 PM
Joe's response<br><A HREF="http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=10233736&ch=4226716&src=news" TARGET="_blank">http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/u...=news</A><p>Ali

CodeMan
10-16-2008, 01:48 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PrinceAli132</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Joe's response<br><A HREF="http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=3906861&cl=10233736&ch=4226716&src=news" TARGET="_blank">http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/u...=news</A><p>Ali</TD></TR></TABLE><p>EDIT: Removed because it was later confirmed false.<p>The Joe the Plumber story did get interesting today though.<BR><BR>
<i>Modified by CodeMan at 9:24 PM 10/16/2008</i>

Obu
10-16-2008, 08:39 PM
Ah good ole' Joe the Tax Cheat?<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Bloomberg</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>Joe the Plumber,' Obama Tax-Plan Critic, Owes Taxes (Update2)<p>By Ryan J. Donmoyer<p>Oct. 16 (Bloomberg) -- ``Joe the plumber,'' the Toledo, Ohio, man whose complaints about Barack Obama's tax plan were highlighted by John McCain in the final presidential debate, owes the state of Ohio almost $1,200 in back income taxes.<p>According to records on file with the Lucas County Court of Common Pleas, the state filed a tax lien against Samuel J. Wurzelbacher for $1,182.98 on Jan. 26, 2007, that is still active.<p>Wurzelbacher was thrust into the national spotlight this week when he told Obama he worried that the Illinois senator's proposals to roll back Bush administration tax breaks for Americans earning more than $250,000 would prevent him from buying a plumbing business that would earn between $250,000 and $280,000 a year.<p>McCain, an Arizona Republican senator, pointed to the exchange during the debate last night when he turned to the camera and said, ``I will not stand for a tax increase on small- business income.'' Directly criticizing Obama, he added, ``what you want to do to `Joe the plumber' and millions more like him is have their taxes increased and not be able to realize the American dream of owning their own business.''<p>Today, at a rally in Downingtown, Pennsylvania, McCain said ``the real winner last night was `Joe the plumber.'''<p>On Oct. 12, as Obama was campaigning door-to-door in suburban Toledo, Wurzelbacher confronted the Democratic presidential nominee about his tax plan.<p>`American Dream'<p>``Do you believe in the American dream?'' Wurzelbacher asked before asking about the tax increase. ``I'm being taxed more and more for fulfilling the American dream.''<p>Wurzelbacher's home telephone number is unlisted, and efforts to reach him by calling his neighbors and family were unsuccessful. Attempts to reach Wurzelbacher at the plumbing company where he works were also unsuccessful. The address on the lien and other records for him matched the address published by the Toledo Blade, which also noted the lien.<p>Wurzelbacher told ABC's ``Good Morning America'' program today that high earners shouldn't be ``penalized for being successful.''<p>The state of Ohio places a lien on real property after several steps to try to collect a tax debt, according to John Kohlstrand, a spokesman for the Ohio Department of Taxation who said he couldn't discuss any specific case.<p>Delinquency Notice<p>If a delinquency notice goes unheeded, the Department of Taxation issues a billing notice, Kohlstrand said. If that is ignored, a more formal assessment notice is sent. Failing to appeal an assessment or losing an appeal puts the debt into the hands of the state attorney general for collection. The attorney general typically sends a collection notice and simultaneously files a lien.<p>``The taxpayers may not necessarily know about the lien,'' Kohlstrand said, although they would receive other notices.<p>In Wurzelbacher's case, the lien indicated that the notice was sent to a previous address in Toledo.<p>Ray Ann Estep, section chief for revenue-recovery services for the Ohio attorney general, said Wurzelbacher's lien was filed six months after the Department of Taxation certified the debt for collection.<p>``Unfortunately, sometimes people don't resolve their debts as quickly as we would like them to,'' she said.<p>Obama's Plan<p>In addition to tax credits and a proposal that would allow Wurzelbacher to avoid paying capital-gains taxes if he ever sold the business he wants to acquire for a profit, Obama has proposed allowing the top two tax rates of 33 percent and 35 percent to revert to what they were during the Clinton administration, or 36 percent and 39.6 percent, respectively.<p>In 2007, the 33 percent bracket applied to taxable income exceeding $195,851.<p>Under Obama's proposal, Wurzelbacher would face about $900 more in taxes if he netted $280,000 of income from his new business and had to pay an extra 3 percentage points on the amount over $195,851, said Gerald Prante, a senior economist at the Tax Foundation, a Washington research group that is examining both candidates' plans.<p>``His average tax burden, the final bill he pays to the IRS isn't going to go up much if he's just making $280,000 a year,'' Prante said. He would face higher marginal tax costs to expand the business beyond that, he said.<p>Not Taxable Income<p>It's far more likely that the $280,000 Wurzelbacher told Obama he'd earn would be in the form of gross receipts and not taxable income, said Steven Bankler, a certified public accountant in San Antonio, who counts plumbers and other trade professionals as his clients.<p>According to an analysis by Dun & Bradstreet on Wurzelbacher's employer, A. W. Newell Corp., the plumbing and heating contractor has annual sales of $510,000.<p>If Wurzelbacher bought the company, by the time he took proper business deductions, Bankler said, he'd be left with between $150,000 and $200,000 in taxable income and wouldn't be affected by Obama's proposed increase in the top rates.<p>Wurzelbacher might eventually have to pay more employment taxes under Obama's plan to impose a rate of between 2 percent and 4 percent on wages over $250,000, Bankler said, but Obama has said that change wouldn't take effect for a decade.<p>Wurzelbacher doesn't have a plumber's license and isn't registered as a plumber in Ohio, the Toledo Blade reported on its Web site today. His employer has a state plumbing license, the newspaper said.<p>Before living in Ohio, Wurzelbacher was a resident of Mesa, Arizona, in McCain's home state, according to property records.<p>To contact the reporter on this story: Ryan J. Donmoyer in Washington at rdonmoyer@bloomberg.net<br>Last Updated: October 16, 2008 18:17 EDT</TD></TR></TABLE>

El Payne
10-16-2008, 08:40 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>malix</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I think you missed the entire point of my post. <p>Partisan fingerpointing is futile, and i certainly never argued that the President was solely to blame for the economy. This situation is much worse than anything GWB inherited though, and we are in for a rough ride no matter who wins.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I didn't miss the entire point at all.<br>I can just visualize the liberal media giving the whole "It's not Obama's fault the economy was struggling a little when he came into office, it's GWBs!" if he weren't to be able to make something happen.<p>I know the liberal ways all too well. Conservatives will get the blame much more often than not, namely because of news outlets. So the "Messiah" better walk the walk and make a HUGE success out of a presidency...that is if he can even win the general election.

Obu
10-16-2008, 08:41 PM
Everybody's taxes are going up, doesn't matter whose elected.<p>

El Payne
10-16-2008, 08:43 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Obu</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Everybody's taxes are going up, doesn't matter whose elected.<p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>How are taxes going up if Republicans get the presidency/congress?

CodeMan
10-16-2008, 08:45 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Obu</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Ah good ole' Joe the Tax Cheat?<p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Well yeah, that's true. He also makes only $40k too, and is not in talks to buy his boss' business after all. Even if he was, his boss' business makes $100k per year, not $250k. He'd actually stand to benefit. There's also the twice-divorced spousal abuser thing, but whatever.<p>Nah, what I deleted was about him being related to Charles Keating's son-in-law (Robert Wurzelbacher). While that would have been incredibly ironic and fucking hilarious it hasn't been confirmed and probably isn't true.

Obu
10-16-2008, 08:53 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>How are taxes going up if Republicans get the presidency/congress?</TD></TR></TABLE><p>How else are we going to make up for the enormous amount of money we've spent this year? Especially if we keep the war going and god only knows the final amount of money we're going to spend trying our dearest to prolong a crash. <p>I don't see where the money is going to come from....<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Well yeah, that's true. He also makes only $40k too, and is not in talks to buy his boss' business after all. Even if he was, his boss' business makes $100k per year, not $250k. He'd actually stand to benefit. There's also the twice-divorced spousal abuser thing, but whatever.<p>Nah, what I deleted was about him being related to Charles Keating's son-in-law (Robert Wurzelbacher). While that would have been incredibly ironic and fucking hilarious it hasn't been confirmed and probably isn't true.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Makes you think what type of moral character does McCain support? Or is he really shitty at doing homework? Or, gasp, both?<p>It would have hilarious if the poor guy was tied to Keating on top of all this, lol.

El Payne
10-16-2008, 08:59 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Obu</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>How else are we going to make up for the enormous amount of money we've spent this year? Especially if we keep the war going and god only knows the final amount of money we're going to spend trying our dearest to prolong a crash. <p>I don't see where the money is going to come from....<br> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>I agree with you that we are spending way to much, and it seems logical that higher taxes is the answer. But I doubt the next 4 years is going to include any surpluses.<p>I vote for the suspension of about 50% of national and state-level social programs. Fund the necessities. Bring back responsibility and self-sustenance. <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0">

Obu
10-16-2008, 09:13 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I agree with you that we are spending way to much, and it seems logical that higher taxes is the answer. But I doubt the next 4 years is going to include any surpluses.<p>I vote for the suspension of about 50% of national and state-level social programs. Fund the necessities. Bring back responsibility and self-sustenance. <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>I don't think we'll see any surpluses in the next four years either but what I don't want to see if the national debt rising to higher levels and our deficit growing. <p>Here is really where I'm with Obama, we need to take a serious looking at those programs that are not functioning well and are not a necessity and cut them out of the picture, it's not wise to say your going to cut everything and not introduce any type of new spending. That kind of talk comes back to bit you in the ass. Of course, the other thing is putting at time line on ending this war and not being so quick to pull the trigger the next time around. <p>Cutting social programs won't be enough, not in an era when we're nationalizing our banks and thinking about bailing out bond insurers next. Tax hikes are going to be needed, that's just the sad reality of the situation. I'm not for paying more in taxes to increase spending on social programs that meet the needs of every single special interest group. However, I don't mind doing my part by paying a bit more, and spending a lot less on the governments end, to ensure we get ourselves out of this situation. <p>I am a financial conservative who hates to waste money (just the idea itself gets me) but we need to recognize the times we're in and the debts we will have to take care of.

Obu
10-16-2008, 09:14 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>EDIT: I'm probably going to be making a BIG thread on this tax aspect of the election. Just haven't decided whether it will go in politics or in money/investing yet....<p>TUNE IN THOUGH!<p> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Oh and I can't wait to read this!! Good stuff man <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0">

El Payne
10-16-2008, 09:31 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Obu</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I don't think we'll see any surpluses in the next four years either but what I don't want to see if the national debt rising to higher levels and our deficit growing. <p>Here is really where I'm with Obama, we need to take a serious looking at those programs that are not functioning well and are not a necessity and cut them out of the picture, it's not wise to say your going to cut everything and not introduce any type of new spending. That kind of talk comes back to bit you in the ass. Of course, the other thing is putting at time line on ending this war and not being so quick to pull the trigger the next time around. <p>Cutting social programs won't be enough, not in an era when we're nationalizing our banks and thinking about bailing out bond insurers next. Tax hikes are going to be needed, that's just the sad reality of the situation. I'm not for paying more in taxes to increase spending on social programs that meet the needs of every single special interest group. However, I don't mind doing my part by paying a bit more, and spending a lot less on the governments end, to ensure we get ourselves out of this situation. <p>I am a financial conservative who hates to waste money (just the idea itself gets me) but we need to recognize the times we're in and the debts we will have to take care of.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Check this out for a small taste. What Bush wanted to do in '05. Not sure how much he got reduced, but goes to show you just how much is wasted blindly. <p><A HREF="http://www.heritage.org/research/budget/bg1840.cfm" TARGET="_blank">http://www.heritage.org/research/budget/bg1840.cfm</A><p>I think working hard to cut a lot of these programs and not funding states as much for what ultimately gets wasted (see: CA drug needle hand-outs) can really make a difference. Plus, slimming down what already exists and removing the bureaucracy (the "red tape" part of it anyway) can get us very close, if you ask me.<p>Even if it wouldn't cover it all, it still needs to be done!

El Payne
10-16-2008, 09:33 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Obu</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Oh and I can't wait to read this!! Good stuff man <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>I hope so man. It will likely not be as much of an Obama vs. McCain thread, or partisan necessary, for that matter. But it will be approaching it from the fiscally conservative aspect, showing the truths, lies, possible effects, etc. of what has been proposed so far. <br>Definitely not all-inclusive of course, as there is a lot that is hard to determine the ultimate effects of.<p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0">

Obu
10-16-2008, 09:59 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Check this out for a small taste. What Bush wanted to do in '05. Not sure how much he got reduced, but goes to show you just how much is wasted blindly. <p><A HREF="http://www.heritage.org/research/budget/bg1840.cfm" TARGET="_blank">http://www.heritage.org/research/budget/bg1840.cfm</A><p>I think working hard to cut a lot of these programs and not funding states as much for what ultimately gets wasted (see: CA drug needle hand-outs) can really make a difference. Plus, slimming down what already exists and removing the bureaucracy (the "red tape" part of it anyway) can get us very close, if you ask me.<p>Even if it wouldn't cover it all, it still needs to be done!</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I agree we desperately need an efficient government at this time that is honest and cautious about the money it dispenses. I'm not buying that McCain is the man for this though, his approach seems a bit to extreme and that makes me think it's not well thought out. However, with Obama I'm scared we'll enter the world of empty promises and spending up the wahzoo. The culture of McCain's campaign doesn't scream efficient or cautious nor well thought out.<p>If Palin wasn't in the picture I would consider a vote for McCain. With her in though, it's not even a thought in my mind.<br>

malix
10-17-2008, 04:56 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I didn't miss the entire point at all.<br>I can just visualize the liberal media giving the whole "It's not Obama's fault the economy was struggling a little when he came into office, it's GWBs!" if he weren't to be able to make something happen.<p>I know the liberal ways all too well. Conservatives will get the blame much more often than not, namely because of news outlets. So the "Messiah" better walk the walk and make a HUGE success out of a presidency...that is if he can even win the general election.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>The liberal media is so mean. <IMG SRC="http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e35/malix12/cry.gif" BORDER="0">

CARTER
10-17-2008, 10:02 AM
someone explain this to me, a lot of people on here are complaing that OBama is gonna tax the rich more or whatever.<p>Question 1: Obama said he's only taxing you more if you make 250k or more a year, so is Mccain saying he's not going to tax anyone? if so whats the catch? <p>Question 2: Unless your making more than 250k which i doubt anyone on here does, why are you guys complaining if he's saying that he's not gonna tax you unless you make more than that? <p>

El Payne
10-17-2008, 10:05 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Obu</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>The culture of McCain's campaign doesn't scream efficient or cautious nor well thought out.<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>That's one of the things they need to be focusing on big time if they expect to do well. Citizen's Against Government Waste rate Obama and Biden two of the worst spenders. More of that needs to be pointed out to the constituents. <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0">

El Payne
10-17-2008, 10:07 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>malix</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>The liberal media is so mean. <IMG SRC="http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e35/malix12/cry.gif" BORDER="0"></TD></TR></TABLE><p>No, not mean at all.<br>Just stupid, ignorant, and unintelligent.<br>As a result, those who bite onto their preaching fall in the same category. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emwink.gif" BORDER="0">

CodeMan
10-17-2008, 10:11 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">someone explain this to me, a lot of people on here are complaing that OBama is gonna tax the rich more or whatever.<p>Question 1: Obama said he's only taxing you more if you make 250k or more a year, so is Mccain saying he's not going to tax anyone? if so whats the catch? <p>Question 2: Unless your making more than 250k which i doubt anyone on here does, why are you guys complaining if he's saying that he's not gonna tax you unless you make more than that? <p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>1. McCain isn't going to change the current tax plan as far as I know. If he is it would be minor tweaks. He's talking about an across the board spending freeze in lieu of that. Then he talks about programs that need advancement though so I don't know how that's possible.<p>2. People equate Obama's policy with Socialism, which is a bad word in this country. What we have currently though is Socialism for the rich and Capitalism for everyone else and it's not working in its current state. Good question.

CARTER
10-17-2008, 10:14 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>1. McCain isn't going to change the current tax plan as far as I know. If he is it would be minor tweaks. He's talking about an across the board spending freeze in lieu of that. Then he talks about programs that need advancement though so I don't know how that's possible.<p>2. People equate Obama's policy with Socialism, which is a bad word in this country. What we have currently though is Socialism for the rich and Capitalism for everyone else and it's not working in its current state. Good question.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>so if Mccain isn't gonna change it much, wont it still suck?

El Payne
10-17-2008, 10:14 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">someone explain this to me, a lot of people on here are complaing that OBama is gonna tax the rich more or whatever.<p>Question 1: Obama said he's only taxing you more if you make 250k or more a year, so is Mccain saying he's not going to tax anyone? if so whats the catch? <p>Question 2: Unless your making more than 250k which i doubt anyone on here does, why are you guys complaining if he's saying that he's not gonna tax you unless you make more than that? <p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>I should be making a tax thread on this stuff soon, so it will be much more comprehensive, hopefully.<p>In a nutshell, Obama's "95% of people will receive tax cuts" spew is essentially just a redistribution of wealth, more than needs to be.<br>How can a good portion of people who normally don't have any tax liability get tax cuts? Interesting...<p>The upper class, who already pays marginal taxes alone of 35% (e.g. doesn't include their total tax burden from deduction phase-outs and all the other increased tax implementations), doesn't need a big increase in taxes. <br>That hurts our economy. Big money folks tend to big money spenders. That's a good thing.<p>In short, Obama doesn't included AMT and his plan to let some of the Bush tax cuts die either.<p>Watch out for the tax thread I start, if you're interested.<p>

El Payne
10-17-2008, 10:17 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>1. McCain isn't going to change the current tax plan as far as I know. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>His plan is to reduce taxes across the board.

CARTER
10-17-2008, 10:17 AM
But like if Mccain wants to keep the taxes the same is there a catch? <p>And unless you make more than 250K your gonna get a tax cut? Shouldn't you be happy about this?

CARTER
10-17-2008, 10:18 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>His plan is to reduce taxes across the board.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>For everyone right? Is there a catch to this?

CodeMan
10-17-2008, 10:20 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><br>The upper class, who already pays marginal taxes alone of 35% (e.g. doesn't include their total tax burden from deduction phase-outs and all the other increased tax implementations), doesn't need a big increase in taxes. <br>That hurts our economy. Big money folks tend to big money spenders. That's a good thing.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>The only problem there is that big money folks rely on little money folks to drive their businesses. Take "Joe the Plumber" for example. Does Joe not prosper if little money folks have a little extra for a bathroom remodel that they otherwise couldn't afford? Supply side economics have been the policy in this country for 20 of the last 28 years and they're not working.

El Payne
10-17-2008, 10:21 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>For everyone right? Is there a catch to this? </TD></TR></TABLE><p>So far, not really. He is pretty set on a more conservative stance of reducing tax burden to increase spending and getting the housing market back in gear.

CodeMan
10-17-2008, 10:24 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>For everyone right? Is there a catch to this? </TD></TR></TABLE><p>The catch is that the cuts disproportionately favor the wealthy, as they have for quite some time. What's a $300 tax cut going to do for you, really? You'll still be broke and still won't be spending. Here...<p> <A HREF="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html" TARGET="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/....html</A> <p> <IMG SRC="http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/06/12/GR2008061200193.gif" BORDER="0">

CARTER
10-17-2008, 10:25 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>So far, not really. He is pretty set on a more conservative stance of reducing tax burden to increase spending and getting the housing market back in gear.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I just dont understand that if he's able to lower taxes for everyone and it seems to be the better alternative, why doesn't Obama do that also so he can get the Rich peoples votes also? <p>What is he trying to do by taxing the richer more?

malix
10-17-2008, 10:26 AM
<IMG SRC="http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e35/malix12/GR2008061200193.gif" BORDER="0"><p>It's also worth noting that if Barack Obama has his way, the upper 2% of this country will still be paying less in taxes than they did under Reagan. <p>Edit: Dammit, you beat me with the same chart. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

El Payne
10-17-2008, 10:28 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>The only problem there is that big money folks rely on little money folks to drive their businesses. Take "Joe the Plumber" for example. Does Joe not prosper if little money folks have a little extra for a bathroom remodel that they otherwise couldn't afford? Supply side economics have been the policy in this country for 20 of the last 28 years and they're not working.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I think they work plenty fine, but they haven't been 100% implemented either. Redistribution of wealth isn't the answer and never will be. <br>When the top 10% of the country pay 70% or so of the taxes and effectively dish out 40-50% of their income, something is wrong.<p> * Congo ... 55.7% avg. tax rates on business capital investments<br> * China ... 46.9%<br> * Argentina ... 44.3%<br> * Brazil ... 38.8%<br> * Germany ... 38.1%<br> * United States ... 38.0%<br> * Russia ... 37.6%<br> * Canada ... 36.6%<br> * Japan ... 32.2%<br> * France ... 32.1% <p>These are the top in the world, as of 2006.<br>Let's looks at the lowest...<p> * Mexico ... 13.8%<br> * Singapore ... 11.5%<br> * Ghana ... 9.9%<br> * Ecuador ... 8.2%<br> * Ukraine ... 7.7%<br> * Hong Kong ... 6.1% <p>Oh my, look at that. Some of the most productive countries have low average rates. Interesting...<p>"Countries with reduced tax rates show higher productivity. Those nations also benefit from greater investments, savings and entrepreneurial risk-taking. All these positive factors drive economic growth and strength in international trade.<p>That may be why Canada chopped its rate from 39.1% in 2005 to 36.6% (in 2006)."<p>If our corporate taxes were even slightly beneficial to our workforce here in the U.S. (and with the skewed minimum wage problems solved) this country would be so much more conducive to business it'd be incredible.

El Payne
10-17-2008, 10:30 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I just dont understand that if he's able to lower taxes for everyone and it seems to be the better alternative, why doesn't Obama do that also so he can get the Rich peoples votes also? <p>What is he trying to do by taxing the richer more? </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Because that isn't the liberal philosophy on taxation.<br>Taxing the upper class more is pretty much a by product of reducing taxes for others (most who don't pay any income tax to begin with), so more of the burden has to go somewhere, and why not get the lower class votes by showing you are going to tax the piss out of the upper class and hand out money to them?<br>

malix
10-17-2008, 10:31 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> * Congo ... 55.7% avg. tax rates on business capital investments<br> * China ... 46.9%<br> * Argentina ... 44.3%<br> * Brazil ... 38.8%<br> * Germany ... 38.1%<br> * United States ... 38.0%<br> * Russia ... 37.6%<br> * Canada ... 36.6%<br> * Japan ... 32.2%<br> * France ... 32.1% <p>These are the top in the world, as of 2006.<br>Let's looks at the lowest...<p> * Mexico ... 13.8%<br> * Singapore ... 11.5%<br> * Ghana ... 9.9%<br> * Ecuador ... 8.2%<br> * Ukraine ... 7.7%<br> * Hong Kong ... 6.1% <p>Oh my, look at that. Some of the most productive countries have low average rates. Interesting...</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Mexico, Ghana, & Ukraine are more productive than Germany, Japan, & France?

CARTER
10-17-2008, 10:31 AM
well according to that chart I'd rather go with Obama<p>I mean even if you make 600k your taxes will stay the same....and those that make 2mil are getting taxed a bit more, i mean srsly is thats like pocket change. <p>

CodeMan
10-17-2008, 10:33 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>malix</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Mexico, Ghana, & Ukraine are more productive than Germany, Japan, & France?</TD></TR></TABLE><p>That's what I was thinking, LOL.

CARTER
10-17-2008, 10:33 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Because that isn't the liberal philosophy on taxation.<br>Taxing the upper class more is pretty much a by product of reducing taxes for others (most who don't pay any income tax to begin with), so more of the burden has to go somewhere, and why not get the lower class votes by showing you are going to tax the piss out of the upper class and hand out money to them?<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Ok Jared but honestly do you make 600k a year? And hypothetically lets say you don't, shouldn't you be happy that your getting a tax cut?

Jomo
10-17-2008, 10:36 AM
Maybe not so much Ghana, but Mexico and Ukraine sure do pump out a lot of crap. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0">

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-17-2008, 10:37 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">well according to that chart I'd rather go with Obama<p>I mean even if you make 600k your taxes will stay the same....and those that make 2mil are getting taxed a bit more, i mean srsly is thats like pocket change. <p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>That's not the point. Being taxed more because you make more runs counter to the idea of capitalism. Where is the incentive to accumulate wealth if Robin Hood is going to give it to the poor?<p>There is NO social responsibility to redistribute wealth.

CARTER
10-17-2008, 10:40 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Mr. Simon, Esq.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>That's not the point. Being taxed more because you make more runs counter to the idea of capitalism. Where is the incentive to accumulate wealth if Robin Hood is going to give it to the poor?<p>There is NO social responsibility to redistribute wealth.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yeah maybe its not but are you that damn greedy knowing that other people less fortunate are struggling and that maybe that lil extra that your giving is going to help your fellow people? <p>And if middle or lower class people are given that extra tax break that maybe they will be buying more stuff? And less poverty and stuff. <p>I mean if i made 2mil a year i wouldn't mind giving that bit extra just to help out others, maybe thats just me and thats why people get the right to vote. <p><br>And look at the percentage of people that make up the middle class, thats a lot, and who's the one spending most of that money? Middle class right, so if they spend more wont that help the economy? <br>

El Payne
10-17-2008, 10:41 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>The catch is that the cuts disproportionately favor the wealthy, as they have for quite some time. What's a $300 tax cut going to do for you, really? You'll still be broke and still won't be spending. Here...<br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>I'd be very interested in seeing how those tax rates disproportionately favor the wealthy....<p>Like I said, when the top marginal bracket winds up being taxed nearly 50% and the bottom third or so of all tax payers have NO TAX LIABILITY, how is that disproportionate?<p>I think you must be confused on something.

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-17-2008, 10:42 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p><br>Like I said, when the top marginal bracket winds up being taxed nearly 50% and the bottom third or so of all tax payers have NO TAX LIABILITY, how is that disproportionate?<p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Infuriating <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/1018.gif" BORDER="0"> <p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Yeah maybe its not but are you that damn greedy knowing that other people less fortunate are struggling and that maybe that lil extra that your giving is going to help your fellow people? <p>And if middle or lower class people are given that extra tax break that maybe they will be buying more stuff? And less poverty and stuff. <p>I mean if i made 2mil a year i wouldn't mind giving that bit extra just to help out others, maybe thats just me and thats why people get the right to vote. <p></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Make redistribution a personal choice, not law.

El Payne
10-17-2008, 10:45 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>malix</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><IMG SRC="http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e35/malix12/GR2008061200193.gif" BORDER="0"><p>It's also worth noting that if Barack Obama has his way, the upper 2% of this country will still be paying less in taxes than they did under Reagan. <br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Is that a fact?<p><A HREF="http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php#fn-8" TARGET="_blank">http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php#fn-8</A><p>In Reagan's terms, he lowered the top marginal tax bracket from almost 70% down to 28%/33%.<p>If the top marginal bracket now is at 35% and Obama wants to increase their taxes, how will it be lower?<p>Hmmmm....

El Payne
10-17-2008, 10:46 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Mr. Simon, Esq.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Infuriating <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/1018.gif" BORDER="0"> <br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>You said that right, chief.

malix
10-17-2008, 10:50 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Yeah maybe its not but are you that damn greedy knowing that other people less fortunate are struggling and that maybe that lil extra that your giving is going to help your fellow people? <p>And if middle or lower class people are given that extra tax break that maybe they will be buying more stuff? And less poverty and stuff. <p>I mean if i made 2mil a year i wouldn't mind giving that bit extra just to help out others, maybe thats just me and thats why people get the right to vote. <p><br>And look at the percentage of people that make up the middle class, thats a lot, and who's the one spending most of that money? Middle class right, so if they spend more wont that help the economy? </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Republicans since the Reagan years have clung to the belief that if you let the rich keep more of their money, they will invest it and in the process create new jobs and the wealth will "trickle down".<p>But judging by the fact that we are seeing higher concentrations of wealth now than at any time since the Robber Baron days of the early 20th century, I would say that is not the case.

CodeMan
10-17-2008, 10:51 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>I'd be very interested in seeing how those tax rates disproportionately favor the wealthy....<p>Like I said, when the top marginal bracket winds up being taxed nearly 50% and the bottom third or so of all tax payers have NO TAX LIABILITY, how is that disproportionate?<p>I think you must be confused on something.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Not really. If you're a family unit that has a head of household who works full-time and makes $35k, which is the reality, you're hurting. If you're hurting you're not contributing. You're defaulting on loans (sound familiar?) and not putting money back in to the system because you don't have it. Private charities are a great idea, but it's not being put into practice. I wish that were the way of life but it's not. When the bottom struggles the top struggles.

El Payne
10-17-2008, 10:56 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>malix</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Republicans since the Reagan years have clung to the belief that if you let the rich keep more of their money, they will invest it and in the process create new jobs and the wealth will "trickle down".<p>But judging by the fact that we are seeing higher concentrations of wealth now than at any time since the Robber Baron days of the early 20th century, I would say that is not the case.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Historical fact #1 - Lower tax rates do not mean lower revenues<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>The Heritage Foundation</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>1) Lower tax rates do not mean less tax revenue.<p>The tax cuts of the 1920s<br>Tax rates were slashed dramatically during the 1920s, dropping from over 70 percent to less than 25 percent. What happened? Personal income tax revenues increased substantially during the 1920s, despite the reduction in rates. Revenues rose from $719 million in 1921 to $1164 million in 1928, an increase of more than 61 percent.<p>According to then-Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon:<p>The history of taxation shows that taxes which are inherently excessive are not paid. The high rates inevitably put pressure upon the taxpayer to withdraw his capital from productive business and invest it in tax-exempt securities or to find other lawful methods of avoiding the realization of taxable income. The result is that the sources of taxation are drying up; wealth is failing to carry its share of the tax burden; and capital is being diverted into channels which yield neither revenue to the Government nor profit to the people.<p>The Kennedy tax cuts<br>President Hoover dramatically increased tax rates in the 1930s and President Roosevelt compounded the damage by pushing marginal tax rates to more than 90 percent. Recognizing that high tax rates were hindering the economy, President Kennedy proposed across-the-board tax rate reductions that reduced the top tax rate from more than 90 percent down to 70 percent. What happened? Tax revenues climbed from $94 billion in 1961 to $153 billion in 1968, an increase of 62 percent (33 percent after adjusting for inflation).<p>According to President John F. Kennedy:<p>Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large Federal deficits on the other. It is increasingly clear that no matter what party is in power, so long as our national security needs keep rising, an economy hampered by restrictive tax rates will never produce enough revenues to balance our budget just as it will never produce enough jobs or enough profits… In short, it is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now.<p>The Reagan tax cuts<br>Thanks to “bracket creep,” the inflation of the 1970s pushed millions of taxpayers into higher tax brackets even though their inflation-adjusted incomes were not rising. To help offset this tax increase and also to improve incentives to work, save, and invest, President Reagan proposed sweeping tax rate reductions during the 1980s. What happened? Total tax revenues climbed by 99.4 percent during the 1980s, and the results are even more impressive when looking at what happened to personal income tax revenues. Once the economy received an unambiguous tax cut in January 1983, income tax revenues climbed dramatically, increasing by more than 54 percent by 1989 (28 percent after adjusting for inflation).<p>According to then-U.S. Representative Jack Kemp (R-NY), one of the chief architects of the Reagan tax cuts:<p>At some point, additional taxes so discourage the activity being taxed, such as working or investing, that they yield less revenue rather than more. There are, after all, two rates that yield the same amount of revenue: high tax rates on low production, or low rates on high production.</TD></TR></TABLE>

El Payne
10-17-2008, 11:01 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Not really. If you're a family unit that has a head of household who works full-time and makes $35k, which is the reality, you're hurting. If you're hurting you're not contributing. You're defaulting on loans (sound familiar?) and not putting money back in to the system because you don't have it. Private charities are a great idea, but it's not being put into practice. I wish that were the way of life but it's not. When the bottom struggles the top struggles.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>That individual being a head of household making 35k (take home) would have a tax liability of $4,677.50. With a personal exemption and a dependent exemption alone (no other deductions or exemptions) there tax liability would already be $0. Add-in the government credits and they are going to pocket money from the government every year.<p>So we should hand-out even more money is your suggestion?

malix
10-17-2008, 11:08 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Is that a fact?<p><A HREF="http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php#fn-8" TARGET="_blank">http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php#fn-8</A><p>In Reagan's terms, he lowered the top marginal tax bracket from almost 70% down to 28%/33%.<p>If the top marginal bracket now is at 35% and Obama wants to increase their taxes, how will it be lower?<p>Hmmmm.... </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Wait, what year did Reagan get elected again? Because according to your own link, the top marginal rate was 50% until 1987. Obama's proposal is what, 39.6%?

El Payne
10-17-2008, 11:11 AM
January 20, 1981 – January 20, 1989<p><IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emwink.gif" BORDER="0"><p>From the libertarian CATO Institute...<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CATO Institute</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">On 8 of the 10 key economic variables examined, the American economy performed better during the Reagan years than during the pre- and post-Reagan years.<p> * Real economic growth averaged 3.2 percent during the Reagan years versus 2.8 percent during the Ford-Carter years and 2.1 percent during the Bush-Clinton years.<p><br> * Real median family income grew by $4,000 during the Reagan period after experiencing no growth in the pre-Reagan years; it experienced a loss of almost $1,500 in the post-Reagan years.<p><br> * Interest rates, inflation, and unemployment fell faster under Reagan than they did immediately before or after his presidency.<p><br> * The only economic variable that was worse in the Reagan period than in both the pre- and post-Reagan years was the savings rate, which fell rapidly in the 1980s. The productivity rate was higher in the pre-Reagan years but much lower in the post-Reagan years. </TD></TR></TABLE>

malix
10-17-2008, 11:19 AM
Ok so maybe i should have been more specific?<p>What if i edit it to say - It's also worth noting that if Barack Obama has his way, the upper 2% of this country will still be paying less in taxes than they did under the first 6 years of Reagan's term. <p>Would that make you happy? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0"><p>The fact is that people call Obama a Marxist because of his tax proposals, but they really arent that bad at all compared to the 90% rate that we had in the 50's & 60s.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">The only economic variable that was worse in the Reagan period than in both the pre- and post-Reagan years was the savings rate, which fell rapidly in the 1980s. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yeah... and that pesky little thing called the national debt that exploded under his watch...

El Payne
10-17-2008, 11:21 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Free Republic</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> Combine [Obama's Social Security tax proposal] with a top income tax rate of 39.6 percent, the phase-out of itemized deductions—which Obama would like to revive and which amounts to an implicit 1.2 percent surtax—and state income taxes, which typically run around 6 percent, and the total tax on labor would be close to 60 percent. In high-tax states like California and New York, the top rate would be even higher. Such high rates would provide an enormous incentive to hide income from the IRS or make earnings look like capital gains (which Obama would continue to tax at far lower rates than other income) or business profits (which are subject to income tax but exempt from payroll tax).</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Obama's total taxes on labor could reach upwards of 60%, even deemed likely correct by the Tax Policy Center.<p>Wow, that really looks like it will help invigorate the economy...<p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthdown.gif" BORDER="0">

CodeMan
10-17-2008, 11:23 AM
I know that theory. The theory is that cutting taxes on the rich will make everyone feel wealthier, making them spend more money and actually increasing tax revenue. It sounds good on paper, but it doesn't work in practice when you compare against the GDP deflator. The reality is to increase revenue the POTUS should work to increase GDP, not stagnate or hurt the Middle Class, and the Middle Class are hurting right now. 90% for the very wealthy is obviously extreme. We're not talking 90% here.

El Payne
10-17-2008, 11:31 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>malix</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Ok so maybe i should have been more specific?<p>What if i edit it to say - It's also worth noting that if Barack Obama has his way, the upper 2% of this country will still be paying less in taxes than they did under the first 6 years of Reagan's term. <p>Would that make you happy? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0"><br></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Sure. I'm sorry Reagan couldn't make the top marginal tax rate go from 70% to 28% in a year's time, but it's kind of hard to yank that much funding away before you reallocate. By the end of his term's he put us where he wanted to be.

malix
10-17-2008, 11:47 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">By the end of his term's he put us where he wanted to be.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Under a crushing burden of debt? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0"><p><IMG SRC="http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e35/malix12/National-Debt-GDP-1.gif" BORDER="0">

PistolStarta
10-17-2008, 11:47 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I know that theory. The theory is that cutting taxes on the rich will make everyone feel wealthier, making them spend more money and actually increasing tax revenue. It sounds good on paper, but it doesn't work in practice when you compare against the GDP deflator. The reality is to increase revenue the POTUS should work to increase GDP, not stagnate or hurt the Middle Class, and the Middle Class are hurting right now. 90% for the very wealthy is obviously extreme. We're not talking 90% here.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>You have to remember in the same note when the income tax was created it was a mere 2% and only the top 2% of Americans payed it. BUT, the only reliable tax payers in the country are the middle class, and politicians know that. The richest people in America know how to work their finances and make taxes work for them, so thinking either party will lax on the middle class wont happen. <p>REMEMBER WHERE WE STAND<br>"The latest data show that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul*dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per*cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent—those below the median income level—now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes. These are proportions of the income tax alone and don’t include payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare."<p>Cutting taxes on the rich REALLY isnt that much of a help considering they're already getting ripped pretty hard.

El Payne
10-17-2008, 11:52 AM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>malix</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Under a crushing burden of debt? <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0"><p><IMG SRC="http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e35/malix12/National-Debt-GDP-1.gif" BORDER="0"></TD></TR></TABLE><p>Wars tend to increase spending, yes. Notably, those lines in red have included some of the best economic prosperity this country has ever seen.<p>I don't like the high spending as much as the next, but I also don't agree with hugely cutting military spending out of no where and stealing from Social Security as well, as Clinton did.

El Payne
10-17-2008, 12:14 PM
Fable 10: In the 1980s the Rich Got Richer and the Poor Got Poorer<p> During the 1980s the bucket of liberty and economic freedom rose, while the bucket of income equality fell. Upper-tier Americans significantly expanded their share of national wealth, while low-income citizens lost ground. Reagan policies were critical to the shift. [48]<p>During the Reagan years, the total share of national income tilted toward the wealthiest Americans. From 1980 to 1988 the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans increased their share of total income from 16.5 to 18.3 while the poorest fifth saw their share fall from 4.2 to 3.8 percent. [49]<p>Yet it is not true that the gains by the wealthiest Americans came at the expense of low-income Americans. From 1981 to 1989, every income quintile--from the richest to the poorest--gained income according to the Census Bureau economic data (see Figure 11). [50] The reason the wealthiest Americans saw their share of total income rise is that they gained income at a faster pace than did the middle class and the poor. But Reaganomics did create a rising tide that lifted nearly all boats.<p>Table 8 shows that by 1989 there were 5.9 million more Americans whose salaries exceeded $50,000 a year than there were in 1981 (adjusting for inflation). Similarly, there were 2.5 million more Americans earning more than $75,000 a year, an 83 percent increase. And the number of Americans earning less than $10,000 a year fell by 3.4 million workers.<p> <IMG SRC="http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-261/rrfig11.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>Table 8<br>Workers' Incomes in the 1980s (millions of workers and billions of 1981 dollars)<br>Year &lt; $10,000 &gt; $50,000 &gt; $75,000<br>1981 66.0 9.9 3.0<br>1989 62.6 15.8 5.5<br>Difference -3.4 5.9 2.5<br>% Change -5% 60% 83% <p>Source: Cato Institute calculations based on Bureau of the Census, U.S. Statistical Abstract, 1996, p. 478, Table 740.<br>Note: Earning levels are adjusted for inflation between 1981 and 1989.<p><br>The gains in incomes of all income groups is all the more impressive when we examine data on income mobility. Tens of millions of Americans moved up the income scale in the 1980s--an economic fact that is obscured when only the static income quintile data from the start of the decade to the end are examined. Figure 12 shows that 86 percent of households that were in the poorest income quintile in 1980 had moved up the economic ladder to a higher income quintile by 1990. Incredibly, a poor household in 1980 was more likely to have moved all the way up to the richest income quintile by 1990 (15 percent) than to still be in the poorest quintile (14 percent).<p> <IMG SRC="http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-261/rrfig12.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>

malix
10-17-2008, 12:17 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Historical fact #1 - Lower tax rates do not mean lower revenues</TD></TR></TABLE><p>There are times when that is true, but it is certainly not always true. This whole argument is based on the Laffer Curve, and any time you are on the left hand side of that curve a tax reduction <U>will</U> mean lower revenues.<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Wars tend to increase spending, yes. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>So there weren't any wars during the 50s, 60s & 70s?<p><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I don't like the high spending as much as the next, but I also don't agree with hugely cutting military spending out of no where and stealing from Social Security as well, as Clinton did.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>It was the end of the Cold War, the whole world was cutting military spending. We could use some of that today if you ask me.<BR><BR>
<i>Modified by malix at 5:42 PM 10/17/2008</i>

El Payne
10-21-2008, 02:22 PM
<A HREF="http://obamacrimes.com" TARGET="_blank">http://obamacrimes.com</A>/<p>Hmm. Interesting...<p><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6_k3NtXZs" TARGET="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6_k3NtXZs</A><p>^^^ Watch that please...<BR><BR>
<i>Modified by JSPayne86 at 5:38 PM 10/21/2008</i>

PistolStarta
10-21-2008, 02:57 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><A HREF="http://obamacrimes.com" TARGET="_blank">http://obamacrimes.com</A>/<p>Hmm. Interesting...<p><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6_k3NtXZs" TARGET="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6_k3NtXZs</A><p>^^^ Watch that please...<p><br><i>Modified by JSPayne86 at 5:38 PM 10/21/2008</i></TD></TR></TABLE><p>awesome, very awesome. The judge did order him to produce the proof

El Payne
10-21-2008, 02:59 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PistolStarta</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>awesome, very awesome. The judge did order him to produce the proof</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Considering the "shady-ness" of this, combined with all of the other filth he has been connected with, why do some of these people blindly put their full support behind him?<p>Amazing...

PistolStarta
10-21-2008, 03:00 PM
You seriously question that? The man was built and is built on charisma... thats it

El Payne
10-21-2008, 03:01 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PistolStarta</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">You seriously question that? The man was built and is built on charisma... thats it</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Oh no, I understand that part. So was Hitler. So were the dictators of the USSR. The people behind them just thought they were the greatest thing since sliced bread and never questioned them. <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/thud2.gif" BORDER="0">

CARTER
10-21-2008, 03:04 PM
heres a question<p>How could you vote for Mccain when he supports about 90% or is it 95? can remember..of what Bush stands for..?

PistolStarta
10-21-2008, 03:05 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">heres a question<p>How could you vote for Mccain when he supports about 90% or is it 95? can remember..of what Bush stands for..?</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Other than Iraq which was voted for by Congress and the fact that he didnt write the strategy alone, did he do horrible with?<p>Oh, and its also called party affiliation republicans vote republican, crazy world we live in

El Payne
10-21-2008, 03:05 PM
<A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ymy0Woaz81U" TARGET="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ymy0Woaz81U</A><p>And here is Biden saying to mark his words, that we will see an international crisis occur within 6 months if Obama gets elected...<p>Funny how the wind changes direction for the Democrats so quickly.<p>EDIT: transcript..<p>"And here's the point I want to make. Mark my words. Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We're about to elect a brilliant 47-year old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy. And he's gonna have to make some really tough - I don't know what the decision's gonna be, but I promise you it will occur. As a student of history and having served with seven presidents, I guarantee you it's gonna happen. I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate. And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you, not financially to help him, we're gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right. Because all these decisions, all these decisions, once they're made if they work, then they weren't viewed as a crisis. If they don't work, it's viewed as you didn't make the right decision, a little bit like how we hesitated so long dealing with Bosnia and dealing with Kosovo, and consequently 200,000 people lost their lives that maybe didn't have to lose lives. It's how we made a mistake in Iraq. We made a mistake in Somalia. So there's gonna be some tough decisions. They may emanate from the Middle East. They may emanate from the sub-continent. They may emanate from Russia's newly-emboldened position because they're floating in a sea of oil."<p><A HREF="http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/10/joe_biden_seattle_fund_raiser.html" TARGET="_blank">http://blogs.suntimes.com/swee....html</A><p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthdown.gif" BORDER="0">

Major
10-21-2008, 03:08 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">heres a question<p>How could you vote for Mccain when he supports about 90% or is it 95? can remember..of what Bush stands for..?</TD></TR></TABLE><p>and??<p>i hate every other commercial that says "insert name here voted with Bush 9x% of the time"<p>what does that have to do with anything?<p>if i was in congress right now id vote against Pelosi 100% of the time....which would probably be at least 90% WITH Bush....so yeah it doesnt bother me at all

Jomo
10-21-2008, 03:11 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Oh no, I understand that part. So was Hitler. So were the dictators of the USSR. The people behind them just thought they were the greatest thing since sliced bread and never questioned them. <p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://i126.photobucket.com/albums/p108/volk_37/thud2.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Exactly. See I knew you would understand. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmile.gif" BORDER="0">

El Payne
10-21-2008, 03:12 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>MajorPayne</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>and??<p>i hate every other commercial that says "insert name here voted with Bush 9x% of the time"<p>what does that have to do with anything?<p>if i was in congress right now id vote against Pelosi 100% of the time....which would probably be at least 90% WITH Bush....so yeah it doesnt bother me at all</TD></TR></TABLE><p>I don't see how the misconception that voting along the lines of President Bush is/would be such a terrible thing. <p>There's some sort of idea in the Democratic political machine that wants people to believe that if you agree with or have similar policies to any of Bush's, that its a failure.<p>That's laughable.

El Payne
10-21-2008, 03:12 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Jomo</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Exactly. See I knew you would understand. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmile.gif" BORDER="0"></TD></TR></TABLE><p> <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0"> Yeah boy.

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-21-2008, 03:15 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p><br>There's some sort of idea in the Democratic political machine that wants people to believe that if you agree with or have similar policies to any of Bush's, that its a failure.<p>That's laughable.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Idiots <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthdown.gif" BORDER="0">

Jomo
10-21-2008, 03:19 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I don't see how the misconception that voting along the lines of President Bush is/would be such a terrible thing.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Wait a second. Are you really trying to say that Bush is NOT the cause of not only every crisis going on in the States right now, but also the abismail Global economy as well?

CARTER
10-21-2008, 03:19 PM
i dont know this shit is too confusing that im not even gonna vote.<p>Dems say this Reps say this, they call each other idiots, but at the end of the day who's really gonnd so shit about it.<p>At least whoever wins presidency and if they do fail, at least i know im not gonna feel responsible for voting for them.<p>look where Bush has gotten us nowhere, maybe Gore woulda done worse or better who knows. <p>i can really care less who wins, just do the fuckin job right. All i know is Mccain supports the rich people and isn't going to help the middle class in any way. <p>Then Reps say that thats just what the media wants to you to believe, but the charts are there and he even says it in his speeches...so how is that a lie? <p>

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-21-2008, 03:23 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i dont know this shit is too confusing that im not even gonna vote.<p>Dems say this Reps say this, they call each other idiots, but at the end of the day who's really gonnd so shit about it.<p>At least whoever wins presidency and if they do fail, at least i know im not gonna feel responsible for voting for them.<p>look where Bush has gotten us nowhere, maybe Gore woulda done worse or better who knows. <p>i can really care less who wins, just do the fuckin job right. All i know is Mccain supports the rich people and isn't going to help the middle class in any way. <p>Then Reps say that thats just what the media wants to you to believe, but the charts are there and he even says it in his speeches...so how is that a lie? </TD></TR></TABLE><p> <IMG SRC="http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/jj261/filipeestacio/facepalm.gif" BORDER="0">

CARTER
10-21-2008, 03:25 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Mr. Simon, Esq.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p> <IMG SRC="http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/jj261/filipeestacio/facepalm.gif" BORDER="0"> </TD></TR></TABLE><p>instead of doing that face, care to explain? srsly pass on the knowledge thats what this thread is for right? <p>or is it just to bash on Dems all day long and not provide any good info

PistolStarta
10-21-2008, 03:26 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i dont know this shit is too confusing that im not even gonna vote.<p>Dems say this Reps say this, they call each other idiots, but at the end of the day who's really gonnd so shit about it.<p>At least whoever wins presidency and if they do fail, at least i know im not gonna feel responsible for voting for them.<p>look where Bush has gotten us nowhere, maybe Gore woulda done worse or better who knows. <p>i can really care less who wins, just do the fuckin job right. All i know is Mccain supports the rich people and isn't going to help the middle class in any way. <p>Then Reps say that thats just what the media wants to you to believe, but the charts are there and he even says it in his speeches...so how is that a lie? </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Did you know the rich pay more under the bush tax cuts than under clinton? Maybe the fact that McCain is giving all classes tax cuts not just people who make xamount-xamount, everyone

El Payne
10-21-2008, 03:26 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Jomo</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Wait a second. Are you really trying to say that Bush is NOT the cause of not only every crisis going on in the States right now, but also the abismail Global economy as well?</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Yes, I am. There may be some things he could have done differently, but he made some effort towards it. I don't think the banking issue should have been a presidential issue to begin with though, as I think government in general shouldn't be exercising much influence on it in general.

Jomo
10-21-2008, 03:27 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Yes, I am. There may be some things he could have done differently, but he made some effort towards it. I don't think the banking issue should have been a presidential issue to begin with though, as I think government in general shouldn't be exercising much influence on it in general.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Too thick?

CodeMan
10-21-2008, 03:27 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><A HREF="http://obamacrimes.com" TARGET="_blank">http://obamacrimes.com</A>/<p>Hmm. Interesting...<p><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6_k3NtXZs" TARGET="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6_k3NtXZs</A><p>^^^ Watch that please...<p><br><i>Modified by JSPayne86 at 5:38 PM 10/21/2008</i></TD></TR></TABLE><p>You can't be serious man. First, the entire video was thrown out the window when the producer stated that "Obama supported infanticide", which is an outright lie that we can argue if that's what you're looking for. Second, do you know anything about Philip Berg? He's a known nutcase. He sued the 9/11 commission, he sued Bush, he sues everybody. He's threatening to get himself disbarred for fucks sake. Not to mention...<p> <A HREF="http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html" TARGET="_blank">http://www.factcheck.org/elect....html</A> <p>This is the kind of shit that contributes to us being in the position we're in. If you want to talk about issues, talk about issues. This wingnut talk has got to stop though. It's not helping (or hurting) any one individual and does nothing but harm the collective in the grand scheme of things. This country needs forward progress right now, from any candidate, not this crap.

CARTER
10-21-2008, 03:29 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>JSPayne86</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><A HREF="http://obamacrimes.com" TARGET="_blank">http://obamacrimes.com</A>/<p>Hmm. Interesting...<p><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6_k3NtXZs" TARGET="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6_k3NtXZs</A><p>^^^ Watch that please...<p><br><i>Modified by JSPayne86 at 5:38 PM 10/21/2008</i></TD></TR></TABLE><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>You can't be serious man. First, the entire video was thrown out the window when the producer stated that "Obama supported infanticide", which is an outright lie that we can argue if that's what you're looking for. Second, do you know anything about Philip Berg? He's a known nutcase. He sued the 9/11 commission, he sued Bush, he sues everybody. He's threatening to get himself disbarred for fucks sake. Not to mention...<p> <A HREF="http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html" TARGET="_blank">http://www.factcheck.org/elect....html</A> <p>This is the kind of shit that contributes to us being in the position we're in. If you want to talk about issues, talk about issues. This wingnut talk has got to stop though. It's not helping (or hurting) any one individual and does nothing but harm the collective.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>see & its that type of stuff that makes people stir away from this, it seems like both parties all take shit out of context or dont put the full story in just to get a vote.<p>shits all fucked up, both parties are all fucked in the head, just leave it up to god and pray all goes well for this country.

Jomo
10-21-2008, 03:30 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>instead of doing that face, care to explain? srsly pass on the knowledge thats what this thread is for right? <p>or is it just to bash on Dems all day long and not provide any good info</TD></TR></TABLE><p>To be honest the middle class isn't really getting shit either way. 60% of the nations population who fall in that 30K-60K are getting a break under both plans. Not much of one either way, but it could be worse. However McCain is choosing to help out everyone in tax cuts regardless of income. So to say he supports only the rich would be inaccurate.

PistolStarta
10-21-2008, 03:31 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">You can't be serious man. First, the entire video was thrown out the window when the producer stated that "Obama supported infanticide", which is an outright lie that we can argue if that's what you're looking for. Second, do you know anything about Philip Berg? He's a known nutcase. He sued the 9/11 commission, he sued Bush, he sues everybody. He's threatening to get himself disbarred for fucks sake. Not to mention...<p> <A HREF="http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html" TARGET="_blank">http://www.factcheck.org/elect....html</A> <p>This is the kind of shit that contributes to us being in the position we're in. If you want to talk about issues, talk about issues. This wingnut talk has got to stop though. It's not helping (or hurting) any one individual and does nothing but harm the collective in the grand scheme of things. This country needs forward progress right now, from any candidate, not this crap.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>So I guess you missed the second half where he pointed out Obama was on the board of factcheck when you cited them ey? Or, that this doesnt touch on the Indonesia issue

Carlton Banks, Esq.
10-21-2008, 03:31 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>instead of doing that face, care to explain? srsly pass on the knowledge thats what this thread is for right? <p>or is it just to bash on Dems all day long and not provide any good info</TD></TR></TABLE><p><br><TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>B!RDMAN jr.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i dont know this shit is too confusing that im not even gonna vote.<p>At least whoever wins presidency and if they do fail, at least i know im not gonna feel responsible for voting for them.<p>look where Bush has gotten us nowhere, maybe Gore woulda done worse or better who knows. <p>i can really care less who wins, just do the fuckin job right. All i know is Mccain supports the rich people and isn't going to help the middle class in any way. <p>Then Reps say that thats just what the media wants to you to believe, but the charts are there and he even says it in his speeches...so how is that a lie? </TD></TR></TABLE><p>#1 - You should vote. If not, you dont really have a right to complain.<p>#2 - Bush or Gore, who knows?<p>#3 - McCain caring only about the rich and not about the middle class? - false. It's no secret about how Republicans feel regarding personal wealth, but to say that McCain across the board isnt concerned about a considerably large segment of the population is a bit of a stretch.<p>#4 - I dont remember a speech in which McCain said he didnt care about the middle class. Charts are cute, I can make some too.<p>#5 - The media?.............

El Payne
10-21-2008, 03:32 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>CodeMan</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>You can't be serious man. First, the entire video was thrown out the window when the producer stated that "Obama supported infanticide", which is an outright lie that we can argue if that's what you're looking for. Second, do you know anything about Philip Berg? He's a known nutcase. He sued the 9/11 commission, he sued Bush, he sues everybody. He's threatening to get himself disbarred for fucks sake. Not to mention...<p> <A HREF="http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html" TARGET="_blank">http://www.factcheck.org/elect....html</A> <p>This is the kind of shit that contributes to us being in the position we're in. If you want to talk about issues, talk about issues. This wingnut talk has got to stop though. It's not helping (or hurting) any one individual and does nothing but harm the collective in the grand scheme of things. This country needs forward progress right now, from any candidate, not this crap.</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Funny how he mentions an Obama connection with the folks who run Fact Check and then you post their link. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emsmilep.gif" BORDER="0"> <p>And there is plenty support showing he has supported it. I just posted one link (of the many) in one of these threads...<p>Also, I'd still like an explanation for Obama hiding so many of his records, including his birth certificate. <IMG NAME="icon" SRC="http://images.zeroforum.com/set1/smile/emthup.gif" BORDER="0">

El Payne
10-21-2008, 03:33 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Jomo</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>To be honest the middle class isn't really getting shit either way. 60% of the nations population who fall in that 30K-60K are getting a break under both plans. Not much of one either way, but it could be worse. However McCain is choosing to help out everyone in tax cuts regardless of income. So to say he supports only the rich would be inaccurate. </TD></TR></TABLE><p>Correct again!

El Payne
10-21-2008, 03:34 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Jomo</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Too thick?</TD></TR></TABLE><p>No, I just don't fall for the "sh*t runs uphill" finger pointing that the media so loves to use.

Major
10-21-2008, 03:34 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>PistolStarta</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p>Did you know the rich pay more under the bush tax cuts than under clinton? Maybe the fact that McCain is giving all classes tax cuts not just people who make xamount-xamount, everyone</TD></TR></TABLE><p>i dont personally think anyone should be taxed more than anyone else....if we HAVE to be taxed at all I think it should be a flat rate<p>i dont want to be penalized if i become filthy rich one day

CARTER
10-21-2008, 03:34 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>Mr. Simon, Esq.</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"><p><br>#1 - You should vote. If not, you dont really have a right to complain.<p>#2 - Bush or Gore, who knows?<p>#3 - McCain caring only about the rich and not about the middle class? - false. It's no secret about how Republicans feel regarding personal wealth, but to say that McCain across the board isnt concerned about a considerably large segment of the population is a bit of a stretch.<p>#4 - I dont remember a speech in which McCain said he didnt care about the middle class. Charts are cute, I can make some too.<p>#5 - The media?.............</TD></TR></TABLE><p>Okay the media makes those charts right? So why do you guys always put up charts to prove points? Doesn't the media make those also? <p>Then people say vote for what you believe in not the party. But then when you do that someone questions you.."oh do you think the president is actually going to do that for you once he's elected"<p>so wtf all these questions of what if..

PistolStarta
10-21-2008, 03:36 PM
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD><i>Quote, originally posted by <b>MajorPayne</b> &raquo;</i></TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">i dont personally think anyone should be taxed more than anyone else....if we HAVE to be taxed at all I think it should be a flat rate<p>i dont want to be penalized if i become filthy rich one day </TD></TR></TABLE><p>I agree, Obama is raising taxes on some, cutting on others. McCain cuts across the board. Not to mention the increase in capitol gains tax on Obamas side when 52% of stock owners are middle class.