Democrats & Liberals Archives

McCain's definition of rich: i'll ask my staff

Mr. Maverick’s recent remarks that you have to make $5 million dollars a year (link) in order to be called ‘rich’ is funny all by itself; combine that with the fact that he has no idea how many houses (link) he and his wife own, is hysterical. Talk about out-of-touch with the NASCAR voters…

But I’m really not interested in bashing McCain for marrying into his millions of reasons for love; he’s entitled to marry anyone that will let him and, quite frankly, he hit the mother load. So bully for him.

But pretending to be Mr. i-can-belch-the-alphabet-like-the-best-of-them is a bit much. For someone like McCain to portray himself as a regular man who feels the pain of those suffering from some the hardest times in economic history, is a bald (no pun intended, Mr. McCain) faced lie. And giving the current occupant of the White House, I guess that makes him appear Presidential.

But can Obama claim the same high-ground? Probably not. He’s living pretty well-to-do these days. He and his family are definitely not feeling the pinch in the pocket the same as everyone else in the country.

This is not a McCain or Obama problem; it’s an elected official problem.

Today elected officials on both sides vote on Health Care issues when they are supplied with free health care.

Today elected officials on both sides vote on Oil issues that affect the pump, when they are driving around in government paid for and subsidized vehicles.

Today elected officials on both sides vote on Child Care programs when their kids are (if young enough) in free day-care.

Today elected officials on both sides vote on Mortgage programs when they are given free housing through subsidies.

The list goes on and on and on…

McCain’s problem is that he’s so far out-of-touch with the day-to-day trials and tribulations of middle America that he thinks that middle America will understand how a grown man can forget how many houses he owns. Or maybe he’s just having, what my father refers to as a ‘senior moment’.

Either way, I think it’s insensitive to those Americans, who because of the economy, are faced with difficult decisions each day.

Posted by john trevisani at August 21, 2008 2:56 PM
Comments
Comment #259122

I just love John “More Wars” McCain’s spokesman’s responses to the fact that he doesn’t know how many houses he owns:

First off: Doh!!! There it is again! The POW excuse.

“This is a guy who lived in one house for five and a half years — in prison,”

This is becoming quite the all-purpose excuse for McCain’s breaches of ethics, as well as for his confusion and gaffes.

The reality is they have some investment properties and stuff. It’s not as if he lives in ten houses. That’s just not the case,” Rogers said. “The reality is they have four that actually could be considered houses they could use.”

See, that’s all. Only four they can use — not counting the six houses on their Sedona Ranch property. Nothing extravagant here, folks. Four is really a pretty standard number for Americans who’ve reached that “five million dollar” wealth threshold he mentioned the other night.

Those four include an apartment in Arlington, a ranch in Sedona, and two condos, in California and Phoenix, he said. The others include “some investment properties and things like that.”

Yeah, little things like that — which add up to only thirteen million dollars in value. Btw, I guess this must be the “Phoenix condo”?

“In terms of who’s an elitist, I think people have made a judgment that John McCain is not an arugula-eating, pointy headed professor-type based on his life story.”

Based on his life story and how he married into vast wealth, I’d say McCain is much more of the caviar and champagne type. And no, he’s not the pointy headed professor-type in any way, shape, or form. Indeed, as Obama mentioned on the campaign trail, he seems inordinately proud of his ignorance. McCain is more the Gold Digger-type.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 21, 2008 3:42 PM
Comment #259129
But can Obama claim the same high-ground? Probably not. He’s living pretty well-to-do these days.

I think he can claim that ground only because he came from nothing, and has clawed his way up through his own intelligence and hard work.

He and his family are definitely not feeling the pinch in the pocket the same as everyone else in the country.

During hard times, his own mother was on public assistance, therefore, he knows exactly what that means.

This is not a McCain or Obama problem; it’s an elected official problem.

I think it’s more of a silver-spoon elected offical problem.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 21, 2008 4:13 PM
Comment #259131

Barack Obama is the classic definition of a self-made man.

McCain grew up with a silver spoon in his mouth - and if you don’t think children of admirals get special treatment, think again!

He did ONE thing right - refusing to go home. Other than that, he has NO clue about poverty and wouldn’t know a welfare check from a lotto ticket. Proof? “I think a $5M income is when someone is rich.”

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at August 21, 2008 5:02 PM
Comment #259133

I can hardly believe the POW excuse. What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? I guess anytime you question his character, it’s his campaign’s basic reflex.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 21, 2008 5:22 PM
Comment #259135

Short video showing all of: McCain’s Mansions.

Also, check out Bob Cesca on this issue. Guy never fails to crack me up!

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 21, 2008 6:09 PM
Comment #259138

Jack must have been prescient…he foresaw this fool pulling his foot out of his mouth every day leading up to the election. I don’t blame him for dropping out of the red column.

Posted by: Marysdude at August 21, 2008 6:41 PM
Comment #259142

Barack is easy to belch speak. Just try it.

Posted by: Kruser at August 21, 2008 7:05 PM
Comment #259144

Oh Please…class envy again. When some are not shouting racism their yelling about the obscene rich. Y’all defended Mr. Kerry marrying wealth and living the rich life. Mr. Gore was born with the “silver spoon” syndrome. Who cares? What I want to know is, “Where can I get me a huntin’ license?”

Does anyone really believe the voting public gives a damn how much money the candidate has. Great family wealth didn’t stop Roosevelt or Kennedy from being president and the lack of family wealth didn’t prevent President Truman, Age Lincoln or Lyndon Johnson from becoming president.

It’s not how much money the candidate has that worries me, it’s how much money he/she is likely to steal from me that matters.

Posted by: Jim M at August 21, 2008 7:14 PM
Comment #259146

Jim M,

The McCain camp brought up the whole elitist thing as an excuse for people to not vote Obama, and now they’re crying that McCain is being shown as the true elitist in this race.

And the real issue here is either McCain is so out of touch with ordinary Americans by not knowing how many houes he owns, or he is showing signs of dementia by forgetting. Either way you slice it, it’s not good for the rest of us.

Posted by: pops mcgee at August 21, 2008 7:26 PM
Comment #259148

Marysdude, I think I’ll take Jack at his word that he dropped out for his reasons not yours.

What was that old office joke on paper that used to be passed around, McCain might want to remember “Make sure brain is engaged before mouth is open”.

Posted by: Honest at August 21, 2008 7:28 PM
Comment #259150

Honest,

What I said about Jack was mostly tongue-in-cheek, but I never took his word for anything when he was with us, and see no reason to now…

Posted by: Marysdude at August 21, 2008 7:50 PM
Comment #259152

I’m having trouble figuring out why it’s a big deal to own investment properties.

Posted by: Tony Resko at August 21, 2008 7:57 PM
Comment #259153

Is “self-made man” the talking point of the day?
What exactly has he made himself into? How disappointed are the former supporters of Alison Poole’s babydaddy going to be when BHO falls from grace? This is getting old, so here’s some old stuff to go along with it:

{ : > / ] some May comments on BHO:

This guy is W, with a better management team. How do people even fall for this crap? His supporters might try to vote “present” on election day.
He’s in way over his head. The military, the bureaucracy and the Congress would chew him up and spit him out, if he ever got that far. He can’t even decide who his friends are, until someone else tells him. Then he acts like someone is betraying him, by being who they are.

BHO is under the impression that he has somehow redrawn the electoral map, and that, for example, he is a more viable candidate in VA than WV, where Jay R is running. I don’t think so. Some things he knows and some things he doesn’t.
BHO is our weakest candidate since Dukakis. His level of experience is equivalent to John Lindsey in 1972.

…decisions are made by others, who admits his own poor judgement in his personal life, (much more to come later on that), whose opposition to the war was at a speech at a rally, who has been running for office continually for many years, without any record of accomplishment other than what his advisors told him would look good with the interest groups he would need to get to the next step on the ladder.

BHO’s greatest liablility this year will be his own supporters, whether it be the Kos propaganda machine, professional complainers, or fawning media types…


{ : > / ] June comments on BHO

BHO, however, is a joke, a product being marketed, a marionette being manipulated, a trickster, an overeducated fool, disingenuous like all politicians, and unlikely ever to become POTUS…He’s no RFK, JFK, MLK, but pretends to be more than himself, the new Dukakis.

The people that I’m not underestimating are Axelrod and the Strategygroup, in creating a fictional character who was capable of winning the nomination, but is unlikely to win the election in November, much less the election in December. I still don’t understand what BHO’s big hurry is to become POTUS at 46.

It’s not as much of a racial issue with BHO as it is an exotic issue. I believe the last son of an immigrant to be elected POTUS was Jackson, and he got screwed out of it the first time by the electoral college. BHO is trying to run using WJC’s 1992 technique, but it probably won’t work with a candidate from Honolulu instead of Hot Springs.

BHO is where he is because he has a level of ambition, that few others of any ethnicity have had before him, and others have encouraged and promoted him. He appears to be a completely different person, dependent on where he is, and who the people are around him. With more exposure, this will become more apparent to more people, and he will become more of a question mark than a promise.

BHO enters a room, looks around him, and then decdides who he is. People who have met him in one place with one group of people, have not even recognized him in another place with different people.
The strategists were the ones who created your candidate… “the quality of the candidate” has been manufactured as a product promotion.

This is the first election cycle in which the Democratic party has adopted this level of unreality, which may be familiar to you, but looks to me like we are trying to become the people whose thoughts are controlled by others.

People with experience know that the ethnic politics of this country are such that many people answer in favor of a candidate, and those favorables never appear in the voting on election day. People might like the idea of BHO, but that may not actually translate into electing him. His negatives don’t show, because people don’t want to appear prejudiced. Some people who have a lot more contact with ethnic minorities, have fewer qualms about criticism than others who have less contact with people superficially unlike themselves

Most people’s concerns about BHO are not racial, but based on his lack of any substantive experience…He’s no (fill in the blank here with a long list of anyone who ever ran for POTUS after William Jennings Bryan), so people are bound to expect that, if elected, his administration would be mostly a confused mess, possibly sabotaged by the outgoing POTUS adventuring into more entanglements for his successor to untangle, like Bush41 in Somalia.

{ : > / ]

Now behave yourselves. Remember, we’re for sale.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 21, 2008 7:58 PM
Comment #259155

Heh. The righties just don’t get it.

class envy again

Yeah, that old problem. Probably has to do with a tanking economy, and lots of people who have lost their jobs, and lots of others who are having to foreclose on their homes all over the country.

Great family wealth didn’t stop Roosevelt or Kennedy from being president and the lack of family wealth didn’t prevent President Truman, Age Lincoln or Lyndon Johnson from becoming president.

Hey, that’s exactly what Democrats said four years ago, but it didn’t stop the GOP from screaming about John Kerry owning more than one home, and getting their faithful to act like they were totally outraged about it. They were also doing stupid stuff like getting their followers to boycott Heinz Ketchup because he’s married to Teresa Heinz Kerry.

It’s not how much money the candidate has that worries me, it’s how much money he/she is likely to steal from me that matters.

I find it hard to take this comment seriously since Republicans haven’t seemed at all upset or worried about how Bush and Cheney have stolen more than $3 trillion dollars from us, and from our children’s futures for their ginned up Iraq War and Occupation.

I’m having trouble figuring out why it’s a big deal to own investment properties.

It’s a big deal because McCain has been going around calling Obama an “elitist” when he himself is the epitome of a filthy rich elitist. It’s also a big deal because he seems too senile remember how many houses he owns, and will need to have his staff go look it up for him.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 21, 2008 8:26 PM
Comment #259156
Barack is easy to belch speak. Just try it.

Kruser, I don’t know what we’d do without your little touches of class.

Jim M-
Class Envy? We’re planning on voting for a guy who had a million dollars to blow on a house. But that guy is getting slammed by your folks for being an elitist, for being out of touch with the common man.

This, though, is coming from a guy who married a multimillionaire heiress, lives in literally more homes than he can count, and defines the starting line for being rich at five million.

Oh, and on the Kerry front, it’s no better! While it’s true that Kerry remarried rather more wealthily than he did with his first wife, the person charging him with being an elitist is the latest scion of an old money family from back East, an heir to a multi-million dollar fortune himself.

What hypocrites you people are! You criticize and make fun of our people for their wealth and extravagant life styles, Then play up folksy down to earth images for folks who are anything but.

Well, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. We’re not going to sit by and let your son of privilege belittle a person who gained his fortune by his own hardwork and intelligence.

As for the money that gets stolen? Stop being melodramatic. Poor you, you have to pay taxes like everybody else in the civilized world. Why don’t you move to a failed state or third world country where the rates are lower or nonexistent.

I doubt, though, you’ll try anything like that. You like everybody else wants the government backing your money, your safety and everything else.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 21, 2008 8:30 PM
Comment #259157

Pops,

I love how he likes to compare himself to Reagan. Reagan could read a line, though. He could look convincing even in his dementia. McCain reminds me more of James Stockdale with his infamous “Who am I? Why am I here?” speech.

Posted by: googlumpugus at August 21, 2008 8:33 PM
Comment #259158

ohrealy:

BHO is our weakest candidate since Dukakis.

No, he isn’t. He’s a very strong candidate. And what is with this with using the word “our”?
If you were a Democrat, you wouldn’t be doing little else in this blog but attack the winner of our primary.

Remember, we’re for sale.

No we’re, not.
Try speaking for your own party — whichever that is.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 21, 2008 8:37 PM
Comment #259159

Jim M,

Class envy? How do you figure? When have we not had a millionaire president and senate candidate lately?

What I don’t want is someone who believes money makes you a better person, more deserving of opportunity than the rest of us. Sometimes the rich are thieves and creeps, too.

Posted by: googlumpugus at August 21, 2008 8:40 PM
Comment #259161
Barack is easy to belch speak. Just try it
ohreally, I’m pretty sure this…. beats my statement about French being the language spoken in Quebec…. for stupidity. Posted by: janedoe at August 21, 2008 9:26 PM
Comment #259162

All politicians are for sale and go to the highest bidder!!!

Posted by: KAP at August 21, 2008 9:29 PM
Comment #259163

A peek into the extravagance of the McCain family spending habits.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 21, 2008 9:30 PM
Comment #259164

I honestly can’t grasp the concept of being able to spend that much money in an ongoing process.
And dude, see if you like this little bit of dirt more than the last one I put up… ;)


http://www.moveon.org/

Posted by: janedoe at August 21, 2008 9:40 PM
Comment #259165

Jane, that’s a good ad for the North Carolina race.

Have you seen Obama’s latest TV ad? Actually they got one fact in it wrong: the McCain’s don’t own seven properties, they own eight.
That’s pieces of property now, not houses, so this doesn’t include the five additional houses they have on their Hidden Valley Ranch Property in Sedona. So, I guess all together the total number of houses the McCain’s own would be thirteen?
Probably should have held off on buying that last condo this past February (just as McCain was telling Americans to “work a second job” and “skip a vacation” to make their mortgage payments). That thirteenth one seems like it was kind of unlucky…

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 21, 2008 10:07 PM
Comment #259167

It’s just one thing after another nearly every day now. We’re talking about a major melt-down looming. Stay tuned for Denver………….

Posted by: janedoe at August 21, 2008 11:34 PM
Comment #259168

Stephen;
I was on subject,
“But pretending to be Mr. i-can-belch-the-alphabet-like-the-best-of-them is a bit much.” Which is classier?

Elitist delusional condescension; pretending to be president although not even the candidate. Acting that by quoting Bono, you have arrived to save the world are what were rightly ridiculed by McCain. I wanna be a rock star….

Ownership, especially through legitimate means is not a judge of character.

Posted by: Kruser at August 21, 2008 11:48 PM
Comment #259169

Most successful men own real estate investment properties. It’s usually a fairly safe way to turn a profit. Hell, I’ve helped some people find really, really good deals on properties even a couple politicians.
One politician I helped is planning on setting up a very progressive abortion clinic on one of his properties. I think he’s going to call it “If they don’t die at first try, try again”.

Posted by: Tony Resko at August 21, 2008 11:49 PM
Comment #259172

Obama has a 20% lead among voters 18-30 according to recent polls, but only has a slim lead among the other group. He has managed to bring out the young vote through the most highly contested primary, with the highest turn out numbers, that anyone here has been alive for. Nobody expected states like idaho or montana to play such a huge role in the decision against the first real possibility of a female president. This is different than before. There is an energy unlike no other.

There will finally be a return to focusing on education funding, health care funding, and economic restoration.

Posted by: angrymob at August 22, 2008 1:05 AM
Comment #259173

Rhinehold, where the he** are you when someone makes as disgusting a comment as Rusko just did???

Posted by: janedoe at August 22, 2008 1:34 AM
Comment #259174

You’re right angrymob, people who have not found much to get excited about for the last couple of elections and are sick of what we’ve had to deal with, are getting involved and will help show how much this country wants a change !
When we have a feeling of ownership in something, we have more of an interest in taking care of it…….it’s time to get back on track.

Posted by: janedoe at August 22, 2008 1:42 AM
Comment #259177

I sincerely hope Obama has fired up the young. They are notorious for making lots of noise and not turning out to vote, however.

Posted by: googlumpugus at August 22, 2008 9:47 AM
Comment #259183

I find it very telling when people like Jack and others were going to great strides to paint Obama as the elitist candidate early on in this campaign. Now that McCain has had another senior moment and mentioned that one needs 5,000,000,000 dollars to be considered rich, and doesn’t have a clue as to how many houses his family possesses it is suddenly, by conservative opinion, no longer elitist but just a nuance of being wealthy.

I do not believe that any one occurrence could possibly be more telling of just what sort of reality this person lives in. It is clear indication of the true nature of his being. His reality is very different than yours or mine. He is a person who has no perception of what it means to have to make ends meet. He does not have to worry himself with trivialities like knowing how many homes he has, or what it takes to maintain them. He has a staff for that. He lives among and represents a group of people who’s true interests lie in what is best for them only. He panders for approval of us lesser beings in an effort to maintain and further the lopsided gains of the ultra wealthy which have been attained under republican rule. He has a staff of insider lobbyists who will do their best to insure that he keeps the issues in proper perspective. We all know those staffers are surely looking out for our best needs. Right? ;) He really is nothing more than another GW. He is not his own person. He belongs to a social club of elitist users who could not give a rats ass less about those they so handily manipulate for their own personal gain.

Before anyone can accuse me of having class envy I would like to say that they could not be more wrong. I have no problem with people having more. I do have a problem with those people acting as though they sympathize with my reality with no other intent other than garnering my support in an agenda having nothing to do with my reality.

Maybe McCain would be better off in this campaign if he just sat on the sidelines and let his staff of lobbyist friends and Lieberman do all the talking for him. I say this because it is apparent that McCain no longer, if he ever did, has the faculties to make spontaneous and intelligent decisions. Of course should he manage to get elected I am sure we can all rest easy knowing we can rely on his staffers to do right by us.

Posted by: RickIL at August 22, 2008 10:47 AM
Comment #259184
Elitist delusional condescension

As in acting like someone who has come from a humble background and who earned everything on their own merit somehow doesn’t deserve to live well, or gain notoriety, or garner admiration. Or like when someone’s had a wealthy, privileged upbringing and then marries into even more wealth and privilege yet tries to paint himself as a “man of the people.”
Yes, I’d say the term “elitist delusional condescension” definitely applies.

pretending to be president although not even the candidate.

Yeah, pretending to be president. Like when a presidential candidate stands up and announces to America that suddenly “We’re all Georgians,” and then singlehandedly tries to re-start the Cold War with a bunch of hotheaded saber rattling, and then dispatches a couple of his own personal emissaries to the region.

Ownership, especially through legitimate means is not a judge of character.

But finding out that McCain was willing to make up a story about his war experience for votes does speak to character — to a lack of character. As does the fact that he brings up his war experience at every opportunity and has been using it as an excuse for all of his lapses in ethical behavior, and gaffes, and now forgetfulness, says something very disturbing about his character.

Yesterday McCain actually had his spokesman come out and try to defend the fact that he couldn’t instantly answer a question about the number of homes he owns by mentioning the five years he spent as a prisoner of war. I think McCain should have taken a moment to consider the fact that so many of our brave military veterans came home from Vietnam in far worse shape than he did. Many of our vets own no homes at all and live on the streets of America, while legions of others have suffered permanent, horrifically debilitating injuries.
In my experience, people of good character tend to keep things like that in mind.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 22, 2008 11:17 AM
Comment #259185

RickIL, well said!

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 22, 2008 11:20 AM
Comment #259186

VV, Well Said!!

Posted by: Marysdude at August 22, 2008 11:37 AM
Comment #259188

goog:

I sincerely hope Obama has fired up the young. They are notorious for making lots of noise and not turning out to vote, however.

He has definitely fired up the young, and I hope they get out and vote, too. But I also hope that voters of every age took notice of the fact that just yesterday Obama had a few of his long held positions on the wars we are fighting made into a reality.
After McCain’s mountain of criticism about Obama’s judgment regarding needing a timetable for withdrawing from Iraq, yesterday the Bush administration was finally forced to concede to a timetable. And back in July, McCain sneeringly criticized Obama when he said we needed to send more our troops into Afghanistan. Well, yesterday they came out and announced that they’re going to be sending 11,000 more troops there.
In fact, just a few short weeks ago McCain actually called Obama “naive” for holding his positions. So much for McCain’s advanced “experience”,”judgment” and “expertise,” eh?

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 22, 2008 12:01 PM
Comment #259189

Resko-
First, it’s Rezko. If you’re going to troll, at least get the person’s name right.

Second, the law at issue potentially exposed doctors who performed legal abortions that resulted in live birth to criminal liability for what they could not control: the baby dying. The ambiguity of the law would have had contradictory effects. Given that Obama is pro-choice, he wasn’t about to vote for a bill whose structure would create such legal chaos.

Besides, like I said before, the compassion here seems awful convenient among the politicians. For an aborted fetus to survive, they must be far along enough in their development to survive outside the wound. Such late term abortions themselves are rare, most abortions being performed in the first trimester. Rarer still, we could say, are the fetuses that survive the procedure.

Yet when asked to back the S-CHIPS bill, which extends healthcare to the children who are most definitely alive, you can hear the crickets over among the right wing.

Again, convenient.

Barack Obama does not have to back bad laws that are meant to score political points off of the exceedingly rare children born live after an attempt at abortion.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 22, 2008 12:12 PM
Comment #259191


RickIl: “I do have a problem with those people acting as if they sympathize with my reality with no other intent other than garnering my support in an agenda having nothing to do with my reality.”

If you are suggesting that your statement applies to McCain, I have no problem agreeing with you. However, if you are trying to suggest that the statement does not apply to Obama, you are, IMO, very wrong.

Wasn’t it Obama who crudely tried to manipulate blue collar workers with his “I feel your pain” statement? Remember, Obama was against NAFTA until he garnered the nomination. Afterwards, his message became All Hail the New World Order.

Just another typical political campaign for leader of the free world.

Both parties are driving this country towards the abyss and the MSM in typical b*** s*** fashion, wants to know which candidates family is more bourgeois than the other.

No matter which candidate wins, their family will leave quite wealthier that when they went in. There is nothing better for a politicians pocketbook than having the right contacts and cronys. We all know or should know that blind trusts are just another scam perpetrated on the people by politicians.

Posted by: jlw at August 22, 2008 12:40 PM
Comment #259192

“As for the money that gets stolen? Stop being melodramatic. Poor you, you have to pay taxes like everybody else in the civilized world. Why don’t you move to a failed state or third world country where the rates are lower or nonexistent.”

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 21, 2008 08:30 PM

Stephen, thanks for the back-handed confirmation that high taxes are a form of political thievery. As for moving to another country…No Thanks! I’ll stay here and continue as an advocate of low taxes, responsible spending and individual freedom, our traditional values mainly responsible for the U.S. not being a “failed state or third-world country”.

Stephen, you could consider a move to France, Great Britain or any number of countries who already have adopted your failed liberal governance policies.

“When we have a feeling of ownership in something, we have more of an interest in taking care of it…….it’s time to get back on track.”
Posted by: janedoe at August 22, 2008 01:42 AM

Well said janedoe. Liberals own our vast governmental social programs that are breaking the back of taxpayers and government. And, they appear most interested in promoting and expanding these programs they own. It just feels so good to show compassion and caring by spending someone else’s money, taken by government force.

Posted by: Jim M at August 22, 2008 12:57 PM
Comment #259193

These rightwing trolls who try to insert abortion into every thread aren’t really pro-life.
What they are is Pro-Birth.
It’s all about religious dogma, male dominance and the ability to control women.
If these people were really pro-life they’d concern themselves with the lives of America’s children once they are born. But in their hypocrisy, they’re all for the death penalty and totally against America subsidizing things like contraception, health care, preschool, daycare, decent schools and adequate housing for all children, free job training and college educations for those who can’t afford those things, unemployment and disability benefits, social security and medicare. They’d even prefer children to live in the limbo of foster care than to ever allow gay couples provide stable, loving, adoptive homes for these children.
These people don’t even demand public funding or assistance when it comes to the needs of our veterans, or for mentally ill people.

Pro-Birth, not Pro-Life. We should start calling it for what it truly is.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 22, 2008 1:05 PM
Comment #259194

>Pro-Birth, not Pro-Life. We should start calling it for what it truly is.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 22, 2008 01:05 PM

,

This time I must disagree with you…they are not PRO anything, they are ANTI anything that works or is good.

Posted by: Marysdude at August 22, 2008 1:15 PM
Comment #259195

I have the hardest time of anyone staying on thread…sorry once again.

Posted by: Marysdude at August 22, 2008 1:17 PM
Comment #259197

It’s quite a stretch to go from talking about how a rich-beyond-their-wildest-dreams politician claims to be juswannadaguys all the way to a pro-life discussion.

Jeez

Posted by: john trevisani at August 22, 2008 1:37 PM
Comment #259198

jlw:

Both parties are driving this country towards the abyss

So tell us jlw, what political party do you belong to? I see so many in this blog railing and complaining against America’s two main political parties, and yet I never see any sincere, convincing, or eloquent promotion of third parties. I also must say that I personally find it ludicrous (as well as tiresome) to listen to all these sweeping complaints that try so hard to lump Democrats in with Republicans after the kind of “leadership” that Bush and the Neocons have delivered to the nation for the past eight years.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 22, 2008 1:37 PM
Comment #259199

JT:

It’s quite a stretch to go from talking about how a rich-beyond-their-wildest-dreams politician claims to be juswannadaguys all the way to a pro-life discussion.

Jeez

Forgive me, John. You’ll notice that I tried to stay on topic for the majority of this thread, but then I saw yet another instance of abortion trying to be inserted into the discussion, and I lost it there for a minute.
Very sorry about that.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 22, 2008 1:47 PM
Comment #259200

jlw

If you are suggesting that your statement applies to McCain, I have no problem agreeing with you. However, if you are trying to suggest that the statement does not apply to Obama, you are, IMO, very wrong

I am saying that my statement does apply to McCain. I am implying that it fits McCains character and lifestyle much more so than Obama’s. The differences here are that Obama’s upbringing and life experiences put him much more in tune with my reality. As for Nafta I remember Obama saying that he felt it could use some refinements. Regardless of what I or Obama think, Nafta is currently well entrenched into our society. That road has been built and we will have to figure out as a nation how best to travel it. It can not be denied that we are now part of the global society. It seems to me that being part of the global society means that we will have to adjust to it. Not vice versa. But of course tweaks can be made along the way. The sort of tweaks that are made will be what affects our economic future with relation to the global society. I think I feel better with a person more of the people working on those tweaks than a corporatist. We all know who the self proclaimed supposedly conservative politicians of this country are really looking out for.

Posted by: RickIL at August 22, 2008 1:48 PM
Comment #259202

Has anyone here heard all the crap about ‘O’s consorting with and buying a house through a common criminal? Does anyone here remember anything about the Keating Five? Isn’t FIVE bigger that ONE? Does anyone here think McPain is crazier than a coot for even bringing it up?

Talk about elitist…who is more of an elitist than he who thinks his consorting is less criminal than someone elses consorting? Isn’t that the very essence of elitism?

Posted by: Marysdude at August 22, 2008 2:20 PM
Comment #259204

Dude

Good point. Now that the campaign has officially taken the negative avenue I think it important to remember that everything no matter its actual significance is fair game. Obama is guilty by association only. McCain’s list of sins, guilt and shadowy associations by comparison will in the end be much much larger and omnipresent. He will win, hands down, the most illusory and suspicious candidate award.

Posted by: RickIL at August 22, 2008 2:46 PM
Comment #259205

Dude, I agree. Perhaps folks need to be reminded about Keating, the Keating Five, and McCain’s role in the largest of all of the S&L scandals — a bailout that ended up costing American taxpayers 2.6 billion dollars.

The simple truth is, McCain Is A Crook And He Always Has Been.

And just for fun, here’s a link to John Cole’s Balloon Juice. Ever hear the song Big Bad John? A couple guys have written some brand new lyrics for the tune, and called it Seven House John. Totally hilarious!

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 22, 2008 3:19 PM
Comment #259207

The problem with being right about any of this is that we here are the only ones who will care or know. MSM will not bring it up, even if it is thought of. We are in a hell of a mess without an informed public and the fourth estate to keep it informed.

Posted by: Marysdude at August 22, 2008 3:26 PM
Comment #259210

McCain gets a pass on all of his indiscretions also because the Dems don’t bring it up every 5 seconds like the right wing hit machine does. The MSM is lazy and not inquisitive - they don’t do investigative journalism any more - hell, I don’t think Faux News even has a journalist on staff. I think they’re also afraid Mr. Anger Management will yell at them if they ask him tough questions.

I thought it was ironic to hear some McCain staffers complaining about Obama’s personal attack and how disappointed they were that he had given up his pledge not to go personal. WHAT?!? After some of the outrageous things he has said about Obama. Hell, McCain hasn’t run an add that wasn’t a personal attack on Obama in months. Obama mentions that this whole “I’m too rich to know how many houses I have” episode because it shows that he is out of touch with average Americans and it is Obama that is making personal attacks. Then McCain has the nerve to say “I’m not questioning his patriotism” … but he has said that Obama is willing to lose a war to win an election - that is not only questioning someone’s patriotism he is calling Obama a traitor.

Posted by: tcsned at August 22, 2008 4:17 PM
Comment #259211

The basic premise of this thread is that JMcC, who married a rich wife, should know how she spends her money. The fact that he doesn’t would be more indicative of not being interested in her financial matters than anything else. If you were prosperous, and lived in AZ, you would have a house in Sedona and Flagstaff, plus something close enough to airport access in Phoenix or Tucson, unless you had your own airstrip. People would also be trying to sell you property in new developments, where you might end up owning something, just to go along with your business connnections, or have access to a favorite golf course which might only be available to the property owners.

V V, let’s see the email from Howard Dean where he put you in charge of the Denmocratic party. I was satisfied with BHO as my senator, then when the primaries began, people began publishing the most outrageous list of his “accomplishments” imaginable. I looked into this pretty seriously, and now have a much lower opinion of him, and that opinion keeps getting lower the more the netrunts and kossackers keep trumpeting the same nonsense that has already been refuted.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 22, 2008 4:33 PM
Comment #259212

i think obama makes a lot more sense when both of them were asked about taxes. obama’s all “glib” while mccain talks about how tax raises is not what we want. i admit i am biased on obama’s outlook on this, but mccain will certainly win over the hearts of the wealthy. see what i mean at this video in pollclash

Posted by: zdink at August 22, 2008 4:38 PM
Comment #259217

ohreally-
Self-made man is a fact, which happens to make for a good talking point because it’s true. But more to the point, when I said it, I was just spontaneously saying what came to me.

Obama earned a education, attending good schools on scholarships and student loans.

He’s no Bush. Can you imagine Bush being asked to teach at an Ivy-league Business school? Yet Obama’s job for quite a long time was constitutional law professor.

I believe certain kinds of charisma can work with an empty-suit type of person, but Obama’s isn’t that type Obama is eloquently conversational. he can be nuanced without losing people in the weeds like Kerry did.

As for redrawing the map, he might not complete the job in one election, but he’s doing better than any candidate has in recent times among Democrats, extending our party infrastructure beyond the Northeast. He’s doing real world to extend the party’s influence and candidates into places where we simply haven’t competed for a long time.

I would answer your objections like this: the problem with this party is that we’re such wimps about electability. Rather than actively try to sell people on candidates, we passively, neurotically try to choose blandly inoffensive candidates. That has been our recipe for disaster for the last thirty years.

If you look at McCain and Clinton you’ll see that simply having the best campaign consultants money can by isn’t enough. I have no doubt Obama’s consultants are good, but his kind of talent can’t be coached. When the consultant tail wags the dog, you get contradictory figures like Bush and McCain, who can’t seem to figure out what it is they’re doing. The basic reason for this is that you can’t fake consistent thought and comprehension.

You also get more in the way of canned rhetoric, because if your candidate isn’t really doing most of the thinking for themselves, you can’t afford to have them responding sincerely and directly to questions. It’s too much of a risk of going off message.

I don’t see those signs of a submissive candidate in Obama. For better or worse, he’s the leader, not the led.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 22, 2008 5:23 PM
Comment #259218

tcsned, I’m really glad that Obama is finally hitting back after those months of nothing but sleazy personal attacks.

It’s like Ali with Frazier — rope a dope — let him tire himself out throwing punches, and then, Wham!
:^)

Good opinion piece from Eugene Robinson in the Washington Post: Johnny We Hardly Know Ye

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 22, 2008 5:48 PM
Comment #259219

ohrealy, sounds like there is still a lot of biter and sour (Hillary) grapes to me.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 22, 2008 5:51 PM
Comment #259221

Jim M-
Excuse me, but what precisely did you think I was calling melodramatic? Saying that a tax is money stolen from you is what I labelled so. It’s your way of saying in an extra-loaded manner, that you don’t agree with the taxes. You use the implicit claim of illegality (it’s not legal to steal of course) to sidestep the fact that taxes are agreed upon and legislated as the law. A tax can be a bad tax without the absurd claim being made that it’s against the law. It’s rhetorical laziness, and I’m going to call you on it.

I’m an advocate of responsible spending. As a committed liberal, but also a realist, I have to recognize that you can’t ge everything you want. You have to prioritize, and sometimes simply choose.

I’m not going anywhere. I love this country. I don’t like everything they do in Europe, but they’re a hell of a lot happier right now than we are, because we hitched our wagon to an elitist amd government economic policy where the priorities of business were placed higher than the priorities of the general public and the middle class. As a result, very little of that high tide floated most American’s boats.

You can talk about how these policies have made us more prosperous, but the actual numbers speak differently. So do our experiences.

I’ve seen the middle class go from relatively comfortable to perilously unstable, and experienced firsthand the consequences of an overprice, underdelivering healthcare system. A lot more people are hurting nowadays, and you folks are still trying to be oblivious to it, above all it, because you think the rest of us who are complaining are just whiners who don’t know what’s good for us.

We know our interests better than you think, and although your ideology blinds you to it, we know that ultimately we do need the government’s help at times, and it would be nice for it to be there, rather than yanked away by our benevolant masters in the Republican party. At the end of the day, the Republican failed to deliver the alternatives that would make government assistance and oversight unnecessary, and by doing so left people little rational choice but to come to us for help. And we will give it.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 22, 2008 6:00 PM
Comment #259222

S.D., you’re wrong on almost all points. He’s not the leader, he’s the chosen. He was chosen because he is a promotable commodity. The comparison most applicable to Bush is that we had the legacy POTUS, now you want the set-aside POTUS.

Did anyone ever publish a list of jobs that this guy did while he was “working his way” through school? My family is fairly prosperous, but I had to work in family businesses as a kid, and in college I worked for a large company part time all four years, and in one summer for UPS, and paid all my own tuition and expenses. My older brothers worked summers at a gas station for a neighbor. Where is the record of your guy doing anything besides talking.

On sleaze, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Even in Mother Jones, they’re starting to see through the B.S. and get suspicious. I should have copywrighted “The Audacity of Hype”.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 22, 2008 6:12 PM
Comment #259223

VV, and others…just a little aside…but speaking of Ali….he has personally requested to be seated at the convention , to show support for Obama. I’d say that is a pretty awesome endorsement !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCH1ixQbLmE

Posted by: janedoe at August 22, 2008 6:15 PM
Comment #259225

I’m gonna love the ad with the FBI tapes of McCain taking bribes. Of course, he gave them back and didn’t know they were bribes….after he got caught.

Posted by: googlumpugus at August 22, 2008 6:27 PM
Comment #259227

People that are such poor judges of character that they were supporting Edwards while bashing WJClinton, and now support BHO, should seriously consider not mentioning any of the better candidates. I say BHO should pick Harry Reid for VP, based on The West Wing script where the election all came down to NV. The media has is down to Bayh, which is dumb, because he would be replaced by a Rpblcn, or Biden, who, like so many others in the Senate, is so much more qualified than BHO to be POTUS, that he looks like another Lloyd Bentsen, but maybe he can lock in those 3 electoral votes from DE.

Mr. “Barack is easier to belch” also thought Orson Wells wrote 1984 a few threads back, so consider the source.

Reuters on their recent poll:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qg9YRCI5-XE

Posted by: ohrealy at August 22, 2008 7:19 PM
Comment #259228

For Stephen and others, a short quote from Professor Alexander Tyler writing about 230 years ago aptly describes the cycle of nations.

“The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency back into bondage.”

In my opinion, the U.S. is somewhere between abundance and selfishness. Liberals have known for some time that we can rob the government treasury thru the ballot box, take the booty and institute huge government social programs, use the social programs to plunder even more to attract those who have resisted the lure of something free from government thru prior self-reliance. An Obama presidency combined with a liberal congress will quickly takes us thru complacency and apathy to their dream of dependency. And we all know what comes next.

The liberal will tell you that it’s only fair that we take someone’s possessions (whether personal or corporate) and give it to another at the point of a gun. And Stephen has told us that this is not only fair, but legal. Bondage is also legal if congress and the courts say it is. And that my friends, is just where liberals are leading us.

We all remember that revered liberal congressman, Dick Gephardt’s declaration regarding high-income earners as, “people who have won life’s lottery”! It wasn’t hard work or making correct life choices, no…it was all luck. And, by extension of that logic, the poor and low-income earners are victims of (take your choice) discrimination; bad luck; capitalism; un-level playing field; or some other unfortunate circumstance beyond their control. And, you will never hear a liberal tell anyone that perhaps it’s their own fault they are where they are. No siree Bob, it’s not your fault and let us, and the government, make it right. We’re going to make that lottery-winning SOB pay thru the nose.

Posted by: Jim M at August 22, 2008 7:22 PM
Comment #259231

Jim M,

We are all together on the earth…the greatest of us only as good as the least of us, and yes it is a lottery. Even though you believe, in your heart and mind, that the big earners and inheritors have achieved all by hard work, sweat and skills unknown to us mere mortals, it ain’t necessarily so. Who among us CHOSE the location of our birth? Who among us CHOSE our parents? Who among us CHOSE whether we would be blessed with talents and skills? Who among us CHOSE the levels of intelligence necessary to use the tools needed to excel?

Stating unequivically that those who have succeeded in this country did so on their own hook, is naive and presumptuous. Yes, those who earn or inherit should be allowed to keep their wealth…but, only to the degree that they don’t limit all others to sub-human existance. That is one of the reasons for taxation, and a damned good one to boot.

There are abuses to any system, so some take advantage of social programs, and some take advantage of trade and barter programs. That’s life. We slow down for the slowest and help carry the weakest. If we don’t we don’t deserve any of the largess…earned or inherited or given.

Posted by: Marysdude at August 22, 2008 8:43 PM
Comment #259232

Beautifully said, Dude. Sounds like your Mary is one fortunate lady.

Jane, Ali at the Convention! That is awesome.

ohrealy, the unrelieved bitterness is a drag to read. On the bright side, I refuse to let it get me down.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 22, 2008 9:19 PM
Comment #259233

vv,

Mary went to bed early this evening because she was ‘bored’. Perhaps she dosen’t understand just how fortunate she is??? Forty-four years of wedded bliss, and she’s bored? Who’da thunk it?

Posted by: Marysdude at August 22, 2008 9:50 PM
Comment #259234

Maybe you need to remind her by joining her there, Dude? ;^)
Forty-four years — how wonderful! Congrats.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 22, 2008 10:01 PM
Comment #259235

hey dude……. ” lmao “…and sorry about the dude thing, but looks like it has caught on… ;)
Is everyone waiting to get their email from the Obama camp with his announcement??

Posted by: janedoe at August 22, 2008 10:06 PM
Comment #259236

VV, I think it’s pretty cool about Ali and he is quite respected by lots of people, so it’s awesome indeed !

Posted by: janedoe at August 22, 2008 10:09 PM
Comment #259237

Jim - that’s a pretty simplistic assessment of why people are rich and poor. Many of the wealthy have gotten that way because of their talents, intelligence, and decision making; likewise, many of the poor are that way because of poor decision making. That being said, was Cindy McCain given great wealth because of her talent, intelligence, or hard work? No she got it in a genetic lottery so to speak and by proxy John McCain got his wealth by marrying a lottery winner. There are many poor in this country that have done all the right things and have had circumstance dictate their situation - many have had catastrophic illnesses (the leading cause of bankruptcy in this country) and had no health insurance or one of those wonderful, caring insurance companies that denied their claim on a technicality, pre-existing condition, or just because they tell a certain number of people no just because some won’t take them to court to get fair payment. Or they could be victims of discrimination - yes, it still happens in today’s world, granted it isn’t as common as it was when I was a child but it still happens.

The poor in this country and around the world are some of the hardest working people on earth. To paint them all with your broad brush of being less intelligent, less talented, or less hard working than those who have succeeded is just plain wrong. That kind of outlook smacks of social Darwinism.

I don’t like paying taxes anymore than the next guy. But I also like my roads to be paved, to have someone on the other end of the phone in a fire or other emergency (and NOT someone on the other end of the phone with a tape recorder and no warrant), and to have a military to protect my country from foreign invaders. I think it has been highly immoral to fight the Iraq war on our children’s dime while the very wealthy get tax cuts. That is patently unfair and my two little children will be paying for this mistake for the rest of their lives. If we were going to strap a debt like that on our children’s back at least we could have given them something useful. The Bush Administration has taken robbing the treasury to a high art - it is not the liberals as you assert. While the Democratic Party may have been guilty of “tax and spend” in the 70s and 80s, I would love to go back to those days than our current “borrow from China and spend” government the GOP has given us. If our social programs have created a dependency as you assert - though I disagree as most people who wind up on public assistance do so temporarily not permanently, it is because we have not done enough. If we did the right thing for our poor and working classes and not just thrown a check at people and provide child care, health care, a good education and not just a check.

Alexander Tyler wrote his assessment of the life cycle of democracies that democracy will last long enough for people to vote themselves the riches of the treasury seems pretty bitter. This obscure figure of history by no means had it right. Just because it was written 200 years ago doesn’t make it so. If you want to quote forgotten works from 200 years ago how about our Constitution we now have a president that thinks it was wrong to give us freedom of speech, freedom to assemble, the right to a speedy trial, the right against unlawful searches and seizures - how has that worked out?

Posted by: tcsned at August 22, 2008 10:12 PM
Comment #259238

Marysdude,

Perhaps I missed it but you forgot to mention that even those that have the most, those that are said to have made it on their own, didn’t.

For every “rich” person of whom it is said they made their own millions, there are dozens, scores, hundreds, and thousands of people that without whom none of those millions would have been possible.

Rocky

Posted by: Rocky Marks at August 22, 2008 10:14 PM
Comment #259239

Sorry marysdude - I didn’t see your eloquent response - I started writing and then had to put the babies to bed. Well said!

It looks like my Gov. Kaine is out as well as Bayh. Biden looks like the one - I would have liked to see my home state represented but Biden will be a good VP and a good campaigner. Will be checking my text messages tomorrow morning!

Muhammad Ali at the convention will be great - he took a stand against an unjust war and paid a huge personal price. I met him while in school in Germany in the 70s - he came to the Army school I was in while my Dad was stationed there. He was at the time the most famous person in the world. He was funny and very gracious to come visit the children of service men and women not long after the time when his country turned its back on him for taking a moral stand.

Posted by: tcsned at August 22, 2008 10:24 PM
Comment #259240

Rocky,

Yeah, there’s that too.

tc,

If I apologized every time I didn’t read a particular entry, I’d do nothing but apologize. You write some pretty sane and appropriate words yourself.

jane,

Ali, is a plus in any crowd. To have him in Denver will be great (well, hell, he is the ‘greatest…right?).

Posted by: Marysdude at August 22, 2008 10:32 PM
Comment #259248

It’s official….Biden it is !
Yes, all that dude. Ali is a class act and Obama is running a classy campaign, and it just feels good to listen and watch him present issues and field the BS that McCain is throwing out.
It’s going to get fun now kids…. ;)

Posted by: janedoe at August 23, 2008 1:32 AM
Comment #259250

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden

Has anyone seen this guys grades from school? He’s dumber than “W”! Obama is done, bad choice Barry. A plagerist who cannot stop talking when he is in the limelight, I promise he will make some mistake as the campaign goes on. He would have been better off Ted Kennedy for God’s sake.
Now we have two of the most left wing voting records for Republicans to harp on.

Posted by: Maxcroft Squire Muhldoon at August 23, 2008 4:53 AM
Comment #259256


Right wing voting has been the reason, and still is the reason, we are in this pile of crap, so Yay Obama and Biden.

Posted by: napajohn at August 23, 2008 10:22 AM
Comment #259260

dude

There are abuses to any system, so some take advantage of social programs, and some take advantage of trade and barter programs. That’s life. We slow down for the slowest and help carry the weakest. If we don’t we don’t deserve any of the largess…earned or inherited or given.

Heartfelt words of compassionate understanding. I fear though that they will be lost on those they are directed at. The wealthy have made great strides under Bush in that they have gained as much or more as the rest of us have lost. They of course will feel slighted should the tax base once again hit them a little harder. They validate their status and position in society solely on what they think they have earned. They believe because they have more it gives them the right to ignore those who have less. Because, well, those who have less simply have not earned the right to assistance. It is not their responsibility to help those in need. It is fine for them to enjoy the proceeds of tax loopholes and government subsidies, but a travesty when they are asked to give a little more to help those in need simply because they can easily afford to. For one side this argument is about the recognition of the importance and moral value of taking care of our own. For the other it is about at least retaining and hopefully furthering the widening gap in wealth and class distinctions. For many of them money trumps conscience. It is what validates their position in society.

Posted by: RickIL at August 23, 2008 11:12 AM
Comment #259261

Maxcroft Squire Muhldoon-
There are two separate instances where he was accused of plagiarism, but both are thin. He made a speech several times that used elements from Neil Kinnock, British Labour Party leader’s speech, and cited it every time but one. The other time he was when he was a student, where large chunks of legal text were included in one of his papers. He said that he had not known the proper rules for citation at the time, retook the course and it was dropped from his record.

ohrealy-
You should stop underestimating the rest of us. Who made you the judge of our intentions? He has what’s been missing from so many Democratic candidates: charisma, confidence in Democratic Party politics, the ability to hit back without doing it in a petty way, and the willingness to give himself over to the direction Americans want this country to be moving.

Nobody else came close. It helped many of us make our decisions when he held his ground so ably on Super Tuesday, despite losing New York, New Jersey, and other states like that.

The complaints that I heard about him basically amount to “a lack of experience” and “He’s not a WASP”. Experience, though, isn’t of much use to people when everybody with experience is perseverating with the same mistakes. His intelligence and his even-temper, combined with the willingness to work on change, cancel out concerns about inexperience. As for the “WASP” thing, it’s about time.

We’re never going to get a perfect candidate. We went for DLC type folks a number of times and didn’t win. Time for a new strategy.

Jim M-
It’s highly ironic that you talk about robbing the treasury through the ballot box. What do you think deliberately running deficits to fund huge tax cuts is?

I’ve made my opinion plain: the decision is up to the American people as a whole. We do need to balance the budget. From there, the American people go where they choose. If they’re willing to pay more taxes to recieve some benefit, that is their choice, whether you agree with it or not.

If they want more money back, then they will have to decide what they can do without coming from the government, and deal with the consequences of that. People’s judgment will work best with the bright line of a balanced budget telling them what the benefits and costs of their wishes are. So long as we’re trying to pay for things with free money, what’s even more spending on top of that? Nothing, really.

Every time we’ve had a Republican president in the last thirty years, the proportion of debt to GDP has risen.

As for the rich? I got no problem with them, just want them supporting their fair share. They did in the 90’s, and everybody benefited from the relaxation of our debt situation.

But here’s the thing: they’ve taken up nearly all the growth we’ve seen in the economy for themselves. and that is the economic equivalent of atherosclerosis. An economy is more than just a bunch of rich people investing and paying people. Money circulates, like blood. Debt clots that blood. stinginess from the top hardens the arteries, leaving the people who earn less with less disposable income, less ability to do work, less ability to contribute to the economy.

The Twentieth Century saw a huge increase in the Middle Class, and because of that, a huge increase in economic growth and prosperity. America is as strong as it is because rather than relying on the rich to power an economy based on service and goods delivered to them, America spreads the wealth more evenly and makes up for the shortfall with the volume of business done.

Liberal economics is about supporting the elements that help create this improved circulation. Now in times past, they used outdated methods that relied just on central control, but there’s new liberal thinking on such matters.

At the end of the day, independence is what we aim for mostly, and part of how we do that is by taking the poor, the old, the disable and making them less of a personal burden. Another part of this is that we create more fair and equitable markets where people can buy goods and services, make investments without feeling that they’re going to get ripped off at every turn. We impose standards that require products to last, to be safe, in short not to be an economic liability to those who use them.

I could go on, but the point is this: liberalism is about using government to ensure that a person who is responsible and works hard has a better than even chance of making progress in this economy towards a better standard of living. If the Rich have to pay more in taxes for this to come about, okay. If the average person is willing to pay more taxes to get something they want, okay. But this is not something that’s going to be forced on the majority of Americans without their permission. They are going to elect people who think one way or another about liberalism, and if they choose to throw their lot in with the liberals, then that ought to tell you what you need to know about what they think about the taxes and everything.

The trouble here is that people like you just don’t care to have the American people make that decision for themselves. You just don’t trust them.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 23, 2008 11:32 AM
Comment #259265

You are a humorless bunch! Orsen Wells vs Orwell, an honest slip.
Ben Franklin coined the term “middlers” for shopkeepers or small businessmen. We get the middle class from this. It has been characteristic for democracies to destroy their interests due to envy. Protecting the interests of enterprising individuals is what conservatism is about. Stirring up hatred toward those who take the risks and stresses of being in business is the heart of liberalism.

Posted by: Kruser at August 23, 2008 11:55 AM
Comment #259266

Concerning “rich”. My business and many others were taxed out of Michigan. While stressing about how to make ends meet, my wife and I agreed that having each other and two healthy sons with our potential in a great country like this is “rich”.
McCain’s only mistake is allowing a sophist to bait him into trying to define a relative term.

Posted by: Kruser at August 23, 2008 12:14 PM
Comment #259271

>McCain’s only mistake is allowing a sophist to bait him into trying to define a relative term.

Posted by: Kruser at August 23, 2008 12:14 PM

Kruser,

McPain’s only mistake is, was and will be to continue the failed ventures of the past eight years. Economic ventures that supported giant corporations, wealthy families and Wall Street, while ignoring the rest of us, AND the Iraq stupidity, which left us all in dishonor. Hopefully ‘O’ will help reverse that, but if he can’t, or if McPain continues it…God help us, for we are lost…

Posted by: Marysdude at August 23, 2008 12:48 PM
Comment #259272

Kruser-
That’s Orson Welles. And being on the internet, you could check to see whether it was right to begin with very quickly.

Back in the day, a middle class person tended to be a small business person. Most people lived in poverty. What changed that was a combination of the industrial revolution and liberal policies that allowed people in the Middle Class better economic security.

Enterprising people aren’t saints, and when businesses get big enough, and labor is cheap enough, it can become difficult for the market by itself to punish their bad behavior.

It’s not about saying people can’t get rich, or shouldn’t. It’s about having some kind of equalizing force in society that keeps the business class from becoming a virtual aristocracy, able to misbehave with impunity at everybody else’s cost.

Those who have wealth like to keep it. And they don’t always act rationally, wisely, or well to get what they feel they have coming. What liberals believe in is having checks and balances between industry and the public.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 23, 2008 12:54 PM
Comment #259273

Which has cost us more…not in dollars, but in national crisis and bent budgets…Corporate bail-outs and corporate welfair, or our social programs?

Think Chrysler, Keating Five, Savings & Loan fiasco, Mortgage Bank credit crisis, and lowering taxes on the individual beneficiaries of those corporate failures.

Toss in a ‘war’ to stop Saddam’s WMD, and you really get a grim picture of ‘conservative’ governance.

Posted by: Marysdude at August 23, 2008 12:54 PM
Comment #259274

Stephen,

I’d throw in labor unions and the GI Bill. They also contributed greatly to a middle class. The only difference between us and other nations was once our middle class. Now, other nations have caught on, but we seem to have lost our vision.

I wonder why that vision appears more clear to ‘liberals’ than to ‘conservatives’? It seems it should be the other way around…

Posted by: Marysdude at August 23, 2008 1:00 PM
Comment #259277

S.D. “what’s been missing”, you mean like returning to the good old day of Gennifer, Paula, and Monica. Joseph “Beau” Biden III, AG of DE, is seeking to prosecute this guy,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Lrf8DbrJH0 , and it looks like that’s the reason that his father was the VP chose.

“judge of our intentions”, how about judge of your level of experience, young Stephen http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Gf41y3pvB0 , but I guess experience is bad now, except when nominating a VP who might be able to find his way around DC.

I hope you are able to reach your goal of becoming a spin doctor, and this years experiences will further your career. BTW, thanks a lot for helping make JMcC POTUS. You’ll probably go down in history as the Odumbacrats.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 23, 2008 1:16 PM
Comment #259278

Jim M.
Your Tyler quotes are qustionable, sounds more like latter day conservatives mis-leading their loyal followers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Tyler

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/tyler.asp

sorry to burst that bubble.

Posted by: j2t2 at August 23, 2008 1:26 PM
Comment #259280

>You’ll probably go down in history as the Odumbacrats.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 23, 2008 01:16 PM

ohreally,

Oh, really?

Posted by: Marysdude at August 23, 2008 1:34 PM
Comment #259295

ohrealy-
Larry Sinclair? Are you f***ing kidding me? He’s a con-man with 13 aliases! And he’s probably avoiding colorado for the time being, because there’s a warrant out for his arrest.

The Public Citizen investigator in Colorado stated that Sinclair’s outstanding legal troubles there appear to date from 2001, and that Sinclair’s effort to convince the judge in 2004 to dismiss those charges failed. The Pueblo County Sheriff’s website, which pictures Sinclair under the word “Wanted,” cites felony theft and forgery charges.

He couldn’t even pass a polygraph test.

If this is the witness you’re relying upon, I’m sorry.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 23, 2008 3:24 PM
Comment #259299

S.D., not effing kidding, there are many elements of his story that ring true, especially some of the local details. Unless you find that Scaife is behind it, it doesn’t make any sense. He’s not bright enough to be coached that well. There would be a lot more of this, but the media has decided to treat BHO like JFK, which he doesn’t deserve based on the record of nothingness. At some point, this is going to go mainstream, but I’ll be swimming the dharma river somewhere else.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 23, 2008 3:49 PM
Comment #259300

ohreally, those videos about Sinclair are about as lame as you can get. He is a wanted felon in numerous states,having served about half his lifetime at this point for charges from drugs, to theft, to major credit card fraud.
But hey, thanks for tipping everyone off now to his wherabouts…..he’ll end up back where he belongs.

Posted by: janedoe at August 23, 2008 3:52 PM
Comment #259302

Maysdude,

Chrysler, paid back it’s loan with interest. Those kinds of loans I don’t mind or object to. I made some money on the turn around, myself.

Jesse Jones was the head of the RTC in the Depression. He understood the problem was credit. He advocated government loans. RESPONSIBLE credit is not a problem.

Posted by: googlumpugus at August 23, 2008 4:06 PM
Comment #259304

j2t2 says, “Jim M. Your Tyler quotes are qustionable, sounds more like latter day conservatives mis-leading their loyal followers.

Authorship…uncertain, prose conclusion…undeniable. Jim

Most of the negative responses to my post center around the word “fair” and then proceed to list all the calamities that can befall a person to justify the need for our huge, bloated, budget busting government social programs.

These same folks would have us believe that every beneficiary of these social programs is deserving and that I am just a greedy and uncaring person. Again I will say, never, ever will you find a liberal telling anyone that they are where they are because of their own deliberate choices. It’s always someone else’s fault and by God, they will set it right no matter how much it costs someone else.

I didn’t think I would have to state the obvious…that there are some who do need temporary and meaningful government help. Just recently liberals tried to make the case that “children” up to the age of 25 living at home should be included in Schip. We now have legalized paying social benefits, including social security to those who are not even citizens. We had Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama floating trial balloons of huge new spending programs. We’ve had these same liberal pols suggesting we nationalize certain industries to dole out their profits to be “fair”. Even then, many of you deny the reality and significance of the quotes attributed to Mr. Tyler.

Now we hear great praise for Ali and how so many folks are just drooling on their shoes over this man because he was against our involvement in VietNam. Why not invite Jane Fonda and a few others like her. For certain, you won’t find the DNC saluting any VietNam vet for their valor or service. It seems our hero’s are no longer determined by unselfish deeds performed with love for their fellow man, but rather, by political correctness.

Posted by: Jim M at August 23, 2008 4:45 PM
Comment #259311

For certain, you won’t find the DNC saluting any VietNam vet for their valor or service.
You mean like the right did with John Kerry in 2004? — Savage

Posted by: A Savage at August 23, 2008 6:17 PM
Comment #259314

> For certain, you won’t find the DNC saluting any VietNam vet for their valor or service. It seems our hero’s are no longer determined by unselfish deeds performed with love for their fellow man, but rather, by political correctness.

Posted by: Jim M at August 23, 2008 04:45 PM

Jim M,

Did you get this arrogant all by yourself or did you get some help from Cheney/Bush?

I’m no hero, and I don’t belong to the DNC, but I did spend two and a half tours in Viet Nam, and certainly am proud of belonging to the Democratic Party. I’m reasonably sure that the party is more proud of my service than the repug bunch will ever be…look at what they did to Max Cleland, John Kerry and their own John McPain. Repugs hate our military.

Posted by: Marysdude at August 23, 2008 7:08 PM
Comment #259333

ohrealy-
Ringing true is what all kinds of stories do, fictional and otherwise, and being true is not necessarily a prerequisite of that. Meanwhile, you have a guy who has a criminal record, who has more aliases than McCain has houses, and who specialized in crimes of deception.

My thinking is, you want to believe what he has to say, just as many people want to believe what the SwiftVets and Jerome Corsi said.

My thinking also is, you have to examine evidence with an eye to it’s truth, not merely its convenience. If your aim is to persuade other, you need better evidence than the word of con-man felon. It doesn’t pass the smell test with anybody but somebody who already hates Obama, and they’re not the ones you have to convince.

Jim M-
They deny the reality of the quotes because nobody can find the supposed source, nor the quotes themselves. You didn’t even get the man’s name right. It’s Tytler, and they can’t find the quotes. Hell, I don’t even think they can find a book by him titled “The Fall of the Athenian Republic”, much less find the quotes in books he did write.

Authorship…uncertain, prose conclusion…undeniable. Jim Most of the negative responses to my post center around the word “fair” and then proceed to list all the calamities that can befall a person to justify the need for our huge, bloated, budget busting government social programs.

You’re big on neutral language. I can tell.

The person who’s bloated the budget most of all in recent times has been Bush. He’s increased federal spending more than Carter. During the limited time that the Democrats have been in office, they’ve also kept growth in spending down below 1%, in marked contrast to years of three to six percent growth under the Republicans.

I really don’t like government when its get bloated, when it’s not fully paid for by revenues, when it gets inefficient. I don’t expect it to do everything for people.

All these cute little turns of phrase tell us more about your opinion than they do about why we should share that opinion. Most of us, especially the liberals find your verdicts absurd.

These same folks would have us believe that every beneficiary of these social programs is deserving and that I am just a greedy and uncaring person. Again I will say, never, ever will you find a liberal telling anyone that they are where they are because of their own deliberate choices. It’s always someone else’s fault and by God, they will set it right no matter how much it costs someone else.

Never? I know quite a few liberals who think differently. However, blurting such stuff out is easier than thinking about it.

What a liberal might say is that people get into the position they are in part because of their choices, in part because of that of others, and that we have to watch out for the secondary effects of other people’s actions, especially in light of past events, like the depression, where bad decision-making snowballed into a catastrophe.

As for service in Vietnam, I’d suggest you look at how many Democrats are veterans, as opposed to the Republicans. You’re dealing in stereotypes, Mister. it’s easier for you to bring out these canned responses than admit to the problems at hand.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at August 24, 2008 12:21 AM
Comment #259360
S.D. “what’s been missing”, you mean like returning to the good old day of Gennifer, Paula, and Monica. Joseph “Beau” Biden III, AG of DE, is seeking to prosecute this guy, [deleted BS link] and it looks like that’s the reason that his father was the VP chose.

Larry Sinclair is a criminal and a toothless crack-head who has tried using bullsh*t to scam several other people out of money. This is just his latest scam. Mentioning that loser’s bullsh*t like it’s something to be taken seriously is act of transparent desperation among Republicans and vindictive Hillary supporters. It is laughable.

“judge of our intentions”, how about judge of your level of experience, young Stephen [deleted flamebaiting link] but I guess experience is bad now, except when nominating a VP who might be able to find his way around DC.

Did anyone click on the link that was provided? What could possibly have been the point? “Young Stephen”? What a damn joke. I suspect the real truth is we’re often arguing with extremely immature fourteen year old boys in this blog.

I hope you are able to reach your goal of becoming a spin doctor, and this years experiences will further your career. BTW, thanks a lot for helping make JMcC POTUS. You’ll probably go down in history as the Odumbacrats.

Pathetic Troll.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at August 24, 2008 12:01 PM
Comment #259385

S.D., Sinclair’s story rings more true than 90% of what your candidate has ever said, not to mention the resume that was created for him basically out of thin air. Why would you even bring up the criminal aspect when your guy consorted with Tony Rezko until it became inconvenient and he had to give back some money? Clearly, a person being a criminal, is not an issue for BHO. Did anyone who has the use of their eyes and ears watch the Saddleback forum? The first thing that came to mind, easily noticeable to people familiar with persons with that kind of problem, was that your guy was high. Your guy is W2, but he isn’t even in AA.

V V, a person whose posts indicate the level of obliviousness to reality as yours, inability to follow the discussions here over any period of time, and never even looked at the upper right hand corner of the main page for the site before making other uninformed remarks, should not refer to anyone else as pathetic, when you keep having to repeat another persons entire post, since you apparently don’t think the rest of us know how to follow a discussion in a thread. If any part of what Sinclair said is true, your guy will never become POTUS, and too much of it is true.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 24, 2008 3:12 PM
Comment #259386

“Authorship…uncertain, prose conclusion…undeniable. Jim”

Jim M you have conviently left out character in your quick assessment of this quote. Not I’m not questioning your character but I am questioning the character of the conservative movement leaders that intentionally deceive you and other loyal followers. Seems to me you would do the same, or does the ends justify the means when it comes to movement propaganda? Shouldnt you questions the intentions of the messenger that email these blurbs to the troops as if they were actually true quotes from wise and knowledgable people and not words of fiction from devious manipulators. Do you not question why they would not use their own names instead of historical figures. I realize A 200 year old quote from a professor lends a certain amount of credence to the work but if its creators cannot be truthful dont you question their character?

To me that’s not the moral high ground, that according to previous posts, your looking for in your politics.


As far as the message itself I think we are in a selfishness complancy stage of this cycle. Of course as the repubs/conservatives mindset has been dominant in this Country since the ‘80’s I have a hard time believing its all things liberal that will bring this country down. After voodoo economics and “free market/deregulation” as defined by the conservatives, if it wasnt for government bail outs we would be in or near a depression by now. Yet all you can do is blame Obama if he is elected. Do you realize how foolish that sounds? How can anyone deny what has happened the past 30 years and then blame it on those out of power and those that may be elected to power later?

In summary Jim M as far as this quote is concerned both the message and the messenger is lacking any credibility. How can you follow these people so blindly?

Posted by: j2t2 at August 24, 2008 3:15 PM
Post a comment