Democrats & Liberals Archives

McCain’s Own Frankenstein Creature

When a McCain supporter announced, at a one of his rallies, that her greatest fear was that she didn’t trust Barack Obama because she thought that he was an Arab (link), McCain should have realized, right then, that he helped bring the Creature back to life.

McCain, when confronted with dismal polling numbers and an incoherent message, attached the electrodes to the Creature in an effort to bring life into his faltering campaign. And in doing so, McCain inadvertently awakened the Creature from its sleep and sat back and watched in horror as the Creature devoured everything in its path; including McCain’s own message. The Creature also forced McCain to distance himself from the damage, creating even more confusion to already bewildered campaign.

And, as in Shelley’s novel, the Creature couldn’t be controlled and was set out to wreak havoc on its community. In McCain’s case, the community was his campaign.

Now McCain wants to put the Creature back in its grave.

Senator McCain, don’t push off the misguided beliefs of your followers because their misinformed. Those followers are deceived because of your misinformation. Remember, you approved the message against ‘that one’?

Let us hope that McCain’s Creature ends like Shelley’s Creature did; so remorseful of his master’s death, the Creature vows suicide and vanishes.

For when McCain’s Creature floats off on his ice craft and fades away into the deep mist, hopefully so goes the fear of Barack Obama as President.

Posted by john trevisani at October 14, 2008 4:33 PM
Comments
Comment #266839

He only perpetuated the hatred by not extinguishing it. He had the chance to clear the air and say that Obama is not an Arab Muslim, and clearly failed to do so. He called him a great guy or something along those lines, but did not even try to eradicate the myth behind the hatred. He has let this process turn him into a real shady @sshole.

Posted by: horse at October 14, 2008 6:22 PM
Comment #266841

My own perosnal fears of Obama getting the presidency have nothignto do with his race, Heritage, haircut or his style of dress. I just plain and simple don’t trust him or his ideas. Myself i clear about 26K a year not much at all in this day and age anymore. But everything I own, I have worked long and hard for and gave up many other simple pleasures in life to aquire, I even own my own home, albiet small. But as Aaron Tippen would sing “I got it honest”. Myself, i also belive that if one works hard and applies themselves and makes a killing in buisness its their accomplishment in what they earn, and just because they chose to have children the children shouldn’t be penialized just because they fell into wealth ( most of them blow it soon enough anyway). That is one thing I do not like about Obama Any sort of redistribution is not a good thing, we redistrubited wealth to katrana victems in a way gave from our coffers so they could buy bling, tatoos and hookers.

Again using my own persepctive, my back yard spills into a low income housing project, for the first week of the month all can smell in my yard is steak, the next 3 weeks then are back to mac and cheese, again a personal responcibility issue, it is not my fault that they cannot make a budget and live within their means, its pretty common sence… but wait the goverment cannot stay on a budget either..they all have newer cars than me, every one of them have a cell phone, but not one of them a job?!?!?!?

Persons appreciate what they have accomplished and worked hard for , those given such know in the next month they will be given such again and are prone to waste is what my point is. So the poor will stay poor, not because society foreces them to but more of bad choices make them that way. Perhaps if the poor didn’t have cable tv they couldnt access reality shows and see allthe bling hte media says they are suppsed to have?

That is why i distrust Obama, more goverment programs will create more waste even though it wins votes.

Posted by: Rhancheck at October 14, 2008 6:52 PM
Comment #266842

>That is why i distrust Obama, more goverment programs will create more waste even though it wins votes.
Posted by: Rhancheck at October 14, 2008 06:52 PM

Rhancheck,

I’m sorry, but you seem to think Obama will institute more government programs and you will end up having to pay for them. There is no way, now with this economic plunge, that either candidate can keep from instituting more government programs…the only difference will be in how those programs are paid for, and who reaps the benefits of them.

mccain: borrow more from China, institute programs wherein the wealthiest 1% reaps 95% of the benefits. Pay the debt from the coffers of our grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

Obama: Raise taxes on those same wealthy individuals to pay for programs that give direct assistance to the ones who are suffering the most from the economic fiasco created by those same wealthy individuals.

No contest…

Posted by: Marysdude at October 14, 2008 7:10 PM
Comment #266843

john trevisani,

Good post…thanks.

Posted by: Marysdude at October 14, 2008 7:11 PM
Comment #266848

Marysdude

No I don;t expect to be paying for them I am saying they are damaging our society as a whole, I am saying that giving cash and prizes to the poor only make them more dependant on more cash and prizes beacuse they blow what we give them. I would support a workfare right now, I would support mandatory finiance training before benifits are given, I would support the turn in of reciepts at the end of every month for audit.

The going rate of foodstamps is .50:1 so for 25 bucks one of the “neighbors” would put 50 bucks of food on his card of my choice. The system is very abused and throwing more cash at it will not solve it.

Posted by: rhancheck at October 14, 2008 8:10 PM
Comment #266851

When I read the title of this article, I immediately thought it was going to be about the Palin’s. You know, 1st Dude and McCain’s Pain who catered to secessionists who hate the U.S. government and United States so much they want Alaska to become its own nation. As Gov., Palin provided praise and a hearty welcome to the Alaskan separatist Party, known as the Alaskan Independent Party. 1st Dude became a member of the party, and has been influential in Gov. Palin’s office up to and including heavy involvement in TrooperGate.

Ah, the surprise to find the article was about the other ‘Creatures’ crawling out of the woodwork to find a friendly crowd for their hate talk, prejudices, and fears.

McCain says he has heard “kill him” taunts at Obama campaigns toward McCain. Odd thing is, it doesn’t appear McCain has attended any of Obama’s rallies, and the media has not chosen to air such Obama crowd hate talk, whether due to its absence altogether or a media bias. But, the fact is, there appears to be no evidence of such hate and fear promotion at Obama rallies; Obama tells his crowd not even to ‘Boo-o-oh’ McCain, but simply show up and vote for Obama. Awfully docile and civil sounding compared to “off with his head” and “he is a terrorist” and “kill him” sounded frequently enough at McCain rallies as to be recorded on many an occasion.

So, are there no Republicans with cameras catching the revolutionary war pounding at Obama’s rallies? Are they that broke, that unimaginative, or, is there simply nothing there, there?

Make no mistake, human nature is not different on the Democratic side than on the Republican. What appears to be different is the rhetoric of the leading candidates and the direction they lead their following’s passions and energies.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 14, 2008 9:03 PM
Comment #266856

Rhancheck,

You are correct in what you say. It requires personal responsibility. The problem with government handouts is that they are free and the person receiving them has never had to work and therefore has no appreciation. For example, take the handout of houses to the low income, which dems did through Fannie and Freddie. These people did not have to work for the houses; they did not have to save a down payment, they did not have to prove employment or the ability to repay the loan. When tough times came and the welfare checks weren’t enough to make the payments, they simple let the houses go back to the bank. They had nothing invested, therefore they had nothing to loose.

On the other hand the dems are determined to place these people back in the houses they lost and we the taxpayers, will simply give the houses to them. No payment needed, they were paid for by the taxpayers.

Now concerning the statements by marysdude, BHO will raise taxes. The dems can’t help themselves. They have to raise taxes. It is the only way they can continue to give handouts to the “POOR”.

They will raise income tax, SS tax, gas tax, death tax, and capitol gains tax, in fact there has never been a tax they cannot raise. BHO is lying through his teeth when he says, only the rich will be taxed. When a self-employed Plumber, at a town hall meeting, asked him about taxing his company, BHO told him it was necessary to re-distribute wealth. Re-distribution of wealth is the basis of communism, and it will destroy any desire to get ahead, or start a business.

Lastly, let me say, you may not be making the big bucks yet, but you should be proud of yourself for finding a way to better yourself and buying a home. I am glad you were able to do it and without the help of the government.

Posted by: Oldguy at October 14, 2008 9:55 PM
Comment #266857

There are millions upon millions of people who support either candidate, and hundreds of thousands of people who’ve attended these speeches and rallies. Undoubtedly, among all these people are both sinners and saints.

Why does McCain need to answer for any bone-headed thing said by any random supporter? Does Obama need to answer for fire-bombings of McCain supporters’ property (as recently occured in Oregon?).

This discussion is, however, a case study in how one can frame and even create a political narrative.

Isolate the behavior of supporters on one side, ignore the behavior of supporters on the other side, and then try to make your political points.

How about the promise of “race riots” if Obama loses, something that has been said repeatedly by Obama-friendly pundits?

It that a threat of violence? An attempt to intimidate and subvert the Democratic process?

I’ve had numerous McCain supporters tell me that they’re afraid to put up yard signs or put bumper stickers on their cars for fear of vandalism and assault, something which is no idle fear.

People hype the comments of random people in a crowd, while meanwhile the Obama people are instituting the most frightening campaign of intimidating free speech in political memory with their “Truth Squads” attempting to use law-enforcement and teams of lawyers to crush any dissent.

With Obama’s support of the so-called “Fairness Doctrine,” his campaign’s coordinated attempts to shut down and intimidate any anti-Obama pundits on media shows, and his involvement to the tune of a $800,000 payment with the vote-fraud organization ACORN, I’m starting to wonder what an Obama administration would like. A lot like a Mugabe, Hugo Chavez, or Fidel Castro administration it appears.

Should we be surprised, should Obama win the 2008 election, if he wins the 2012 election with 100% of the vote? An exaggeration, obviously, but for all the silly talk about Bush’s attempts to “crush dissent,” (despite the fact that there is so much dissent out there that his party appears likely to lose the White House), Obama seems to have the political instincts of a third world dictator when it comes to silencing critics.

Posted by: Loyal Oppostion at October 14, 2008 10:07 PM
Comment #266865

I’m afraid the Frankenstein creature was alive and thriving before McCain stirred it. Most of what he stirred up were things Hillary tried to stir up. The monster’s in all of us. Just as the compassionate soul’s in all of us. It’s a matter of which one we feed. Some people get rich feeding the monster.

Rhancheck

Of course you’re right about people who’ve been on welfare all their lives. They don’t take care of anything. It would appear people have to at lest think they’re earning their way, or it warps their minds. We need more sheltered workshops so people who can’t take care of themselves can feel better about themselves. Of course that costs money too.

As for Barack raising taxes—— John McCain was right (in 2000)! Giving all the billionaires a big tax cut was stupid! Between all the deregulation and that stupid tax cut our economy is in worse shape than most of us have ever seen.

Posted by: Mike the Cynic at October 15, 2008 12:05 AM
Comment #266867

I love it.

The “ugliness” is not Obama’s associations and friendships with hate-spewing pastors, terrorist bombers, and shady organizations guilty of voter fraud.

The “ugliness” is MENTIONING such things because somebody might get mad about them.

Just out of curiosity, if Obama becomes president, will criticism of him continue to be seen as giving expression “to the monster in all of us?” What is it, precisely, about Obama which makes opposing him a mortal sin?

The way his supporters talk about him and brand anyone who questions his very questionable actions as “monstrous,” I expect we’re closer to gulags, re-education camps, and thought police than we’ve ever been in this country. It’s downright frightening… made even more so by his supporter’s blind support and blind hatred for everybody who even TALKS negatively about him.

Posted by: Loyal Oppostion at October 15, 2008 12:25 AM
Comment #266870

Loyal Opp. asked: “What is it, precisely, about Obama which makes opposing him a mortal sin?”

Objectivity! I criticize him and I am going to vote for him. I would hope all voters would take such a critical view of the candidates they intend to put at their lead to follow.

Critique needs to be relevant, empirically determinable and replicable, and speak directly to the policies and direction the candidate wishes to lead the people in.

Now if you want to critique Obama as a person who is not going to make zeroing out the deficit in his first 2 years in office, there is ample evidence that is true by his own words. But, one must take an equally critical view of all the candidates. McCain is lying about zeroing out the deficit and he damn well knows it. He will face a Democratic Congress who will not give him the line item veto, and his legacy may not permit him to shut the country down to make his point about cutting government revenues even as he himself proposes new spending and growth of government programs. Then again, he is so flip floppy erratic that he just might for the fun of it. What the hell, he has access to Cindy’s multi-millions and only a few years left to spend it. He has nothing to lose.

Objectivity is the answer to your question.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 15, 2008 12:53 AM
Comment #266874

“I am glad you were able to do it and without the help of the government.”

Making 24k a year, s/he probably got a FHA loan which is government help.

“take the handout of houses to the low income, which dems did through Fannie and Freddie. “

you are describing FHA loans, and most people can’t save up the 20k+ for a conventional down payment so people like us need government help.

I work hard too, but as a social worker with about the same income as raincheck(If I had a child I would qualify for food stamps, yet I am like so many other working households), and I could not imagine saving 20k+ in cash in a reasonable amount of time (

I deal with the other side of it all day long, but poor people have squandered opportunities for thousands of years and that will never go away. It is not easy however to draw the line between those that ‘deserve’ help and those that don’t, so the ‘handout’ generalizations are flacid.

If things continue like they are, your self-employed plumber will be in the same boat as the rest of us government program moochers. And by the way, you can not be on welfare all your life as Clinton limited it to 5 years, and I see people already exhausting that limit.

Posted by: monoply at October 15, 2008 1:51 AM
Comment #266877

In all actuality I paid for 12 years on an article of agreement had a small chunk of change saved up from the Marine Corps days and put it down after i was done with my contract so no goverment involvement at all no va loan no fha not even a bank loan.. got lucky in that respect was 350 a month for 12 years its a tiny house prolly 30x30 hellthe garage is larger than the house LOL but i can say i earned it off my own sweat. Unfortuantly median income in this area is about 35K a year..town data we aren;t the city there is prolly more farm animals than people here. As for health care I won;t say i’m lucky but I use the va to cover my needs, I don’t consiter that a handout , i consiter it somethign i earned from shield/storm. I’ll always be a backer of the idea of goverment service after high school,
wether it be military, civil, or possibly a job corps sort of program to give the real life trainning that the schools don’t teach.

Workshops would be great i wouldn;t mind paying for that at all, but we have all beenin a workshop before if you only half pay attention you can get thru it, one has to WANT To better their situation. Its a motivational factor thats needed wether it be on thier end or the goverment putting a limit on the timeline.. as Pres Clinton tried to make the attempts to so, don;t remember that period well unfortunatly was away from tv and news a lot back then in service days.

But my whole point was that its not the slander or the cat calls or bieng impresionable that made many conservatives shay away from Obama. its some actual concerns about items other than namecalling and such.

Posted by: Rhancheck at October 15, 2008 2:11 AM
Comment #266878

I want honest answers for Obama’s past relationship’s, from him, and want his college info made public…is this too much to ask?!? The guy is running for a fairly high office.

It seems it could be made public he eats babies and uses their skin for mittens and 50% of the population wouldn’t care.

OK fine Bush wasn’t a good politician. He, for some reason decided not to play to the press better and had many bad choices to choose from, but it’s no reason to dive off a cliff.

Obama is a politician with a shady past as is McCain. The difference is we know what McCain was doing in his younger years and a lot of it was quite admirable. What was Obama doing? Why can’t we read his thesis on Soviet arm’s?

I understand the left will pooh-pooh this but their are plenty enough questions out there. A tax and spend lib I can deal with, I’ll buckle down and be fine, but the questions that have been raised seem fairly serious.

Posted by: andy at October 15, 2008 2:12 AM
Comment #266884

>I want honest answers for Obama’s past relationship’s, from him, and want his college info made public…is this too much to ask?!? The guy is running for a fairly high office.

Posted by: andy at October 15, 2008 02:12 AM

andy,

If that were all you wanted, it would be easy. You can find the answer to every one of those questions by a little research. Obama has answered every one of them, and every one of them has been investigated by the media and political hangers on from his opposing party. But, that is not what you want…you want to find out you are right about him, and that ain’t gonna happen.

The right spent over seventy million dollars of tax-payer monies, and countless millions of private funding, checking into every orifice on Bill Clinton. That was the same kind of quest you have going with Obama…just because you want something to be wrong in someone’s background, does not make it so.

Posted by: Marysdude at October 15, 2008 6:54 AM
Comment #266887

Andy, et al..
Barack Obama has been campaigning for 20 months; about the same time that Palin has been office. He’s bested the Democratic field by going through this process called primary elections. During the primary elections, the other candidates have certainly played up angles in Obama’s past; from Ayes to Rev. Wright to real estate dealings. Obama has been vetted over the course of the 20 months of campaigning. i’d even go as far as to say, he’s been vetted more than any other candidate.

With all of the character assassinations that have continued throughout the primaries, Obama has stayed true to his message and answered these allegations head on. In June, these ‘Creatures’ have been put to rest.

That is until McCain’s polling numbers started to drop.

The McCain campaign revived the Creature with their strong rhetoric and some of the McCain supporters believed it. It was the GOP and McCain that aired their attack ads and always included the ‘I’m John McCain and I approve this message.’

For McCain the result of these attack ads were the complete opposite effect; his numbers dropped because of the ads. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/15/us/politics/15poll.html

Posted by: john trevisani at October 15, 2008 7:22 AM
Comment #266888

McCain is not responsible for the rabid hate on display at republican rallies. It comes with the Party. I am convinced it is the result of Rush and Hannity.

Posted by: Schwamp at October 15, 2008 7:58 AM
Comment #266889

> I am convinced it is the result of Rush and Hannity.
Posted by: Schwamp at October 15, 2008 07:58 AM

Schwamp,

Yeah, that’s where the hateful discourse comes from…Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reily, and that blond, skinny, trash mouthed, bimbo…and the ditto-heads repeat…repeat…repeat…until the slobbering masses can’t think for themselves…but mccain and Palin share the blame, because they knew who they were talking to and what the result would likely be.

Posted by: Marysdude at October 15, 2008 8:18 AM
Comment #266892

LO

What is it, precisely, about Obama which makes opposing him a mortal sin?

It is not that you criticize him. It is how some go about it. Some are using planted false inferences of race, religion and patriotism in efforts to create hatred, fear and doubt to a mob mentality of all too eager recipients. In a nutshell it is classless and reeks of KKK tactics.

Posted by: RickIL at October 15, 2008 8:50 AM
Comment #266901

I initially wrote a long response to posters here who have been complaining about low income and poor people and then I erased it.

Trying to explain why people are poor and how hard it is to get out of that cycle became to hard to explain. I decided nothing I say will have an impact on what others think.

I just have to keep reminding myself that people that complain about poor people really at heart are fearful. Frequently people are scared that they themselves are only one step away from proverty. That they themselves are not good enough and the only way to feel good about themselves is to devalue others.

It is no better than assuming all democrats or republicans are bad, evil people because some are.

Why do we expect the least of our society to act the best-to not make mistakes, to not make bad decisions-to be perfect. I myself have made bad decisions and I am middle class. I have bought a steak (TV, car, so forth) that I could not afford. I have the skills, intelligence, and education to get a job but at times have not used them wisely. I have gone out to eat at a fancy restaurant and then had to tighten my belt at the end of the month and paid a bill late.

I am just glad that there are others in our society that see life differently that reach out to the poor and less fortunate. I realize that what you believe about someone else says a lot about your own self-esteem.

As for McCain-Palin, for me it is very simple. I do not like their politics and I don’t like the way they are running their campaigns. I don’t know whether Barack is really as good as he seems. He is a politican. After watergate and Nixon, I made up my mind I would never trust a politican again but now feel I have too. Anytime someone says they don’t trust him I assume that is code for he is black and I don’t want to vote for a black person. Sometimes because of fear we go with what is confortable (McCain)and known because we lack the ability to step out of our comfort zone and go for the better choice the unknown.

I see no reason here to address the muslim, terrorist thing as I believe that everyone posting here democrat or otherwise really knows the truth.

Posted by: Carolina at October 15, 2008 10:06 AM
Comment #266904

Oldguy

“Now concerning the statements by marysdude, BHO will raise taxes. The dems can’t help themselves. They have to raise taxes. It is the only way they can continue to give handouts to the “POOR”.”

the sad thing is that they will allow the bush tax cuts to expire, which in itself will be one of the biggest tax increases in history. nothing to do except sit, and wait. they don’t even have to lift a finger.

rhancheck

you hit the nail right on the head. be careful though in your income bracket according to the dems you should be one of them. keep talking like that and you’ll blow thier whole argument.

Posted by: dbs at October 15, 2008 10:15 AM
Comment #266912

dbs,

We are close to twelve ‘TRILLION’ dollars in debt. We got there on the stupid Republican mantra…tax cut…de-regulation…tax cut…de-regulation…tax cut…Reagan started it, BushI passed it on, Clinton began a process that could have reduced it, had it been continued, but BushII failed (in every respect), and now we owe socialist countries half our Gross National Product. What kind of damage, compared to that can taxation cause?

janedoe,

Why do I talk to trolls?

Posted by: Marysdude at October 15, 2008 11:44 AM
Comment #266913

Carolina
Its not about being fearful of helping people, its about being forced to help them according to how others believe.

And, I don’t trust The Obama because his past and record does not support the rhetoric he is campaigning on today and I believe his politics are harmful to our nation.
So why is your distrust of McCain “very simple,” but distrust of The Obama racist?

You know, this constant labeling of everybody who dares criticize The Obama as a racist by the Dems is no different than labeling everybody who criticized Bush as traitors. Do you like hearing all Dems are traitors to their country? Is The Obama a traitor because he did nothing to condemn or stop the few liberals who hate do their country? Is he a traitor because of what those nutbags said and did everytime he spoke against the war. Of course not.

The Obama does not have the record, judgment or experience to bring this country together and be an effective leader for ALL the people of this country. That is why I will not vote for him and that is why the left calls me a racist for stating that.

Posted by: kctim at October 15, 2008 11:45 AM
Comment #266915

Marysdude

“Clinton began a process that could have reduced it,”

you mean like raising taxes on social security recipients ? c’mon dude you can’t blame the entire problem on the republicans. this train wreck goes back many decades.

Posted by: dbs at October 15, 2008 12:13 PM
Comment #266918

dbs -

Actually, it was in response to a challenge to ‘find out where it all started’ that I did some research into the hard numbers using the government’s data.

To make a long story not much shorter, the deficits run by both Dems and Republicans were really not that much different from each other…until Reagan came along.

Now don’t get me wrong - I will always say Reagan was one of our greatest presidents, because his victory in the Cold War far overshadows everything else he did wrong.

But it was Reagan who brought us ‘trickle-down’ and ‘supply-side’ economics…and it was during his presidency that the deficit truly started to balloon. And you should bear in mind that to Republicans, Reagan was the bearer of political Gospel not to be questioned. If Reagan did or said it, it must have been right.

This is why Dick Cheney said, “Reagan proved deficits don’t matter”. Remember that the next time you hear a Republican claim that he’s going to ‘balance the budget’.

Your comment about Social Security is only a small matter in the overall picture. If you want to cut our deficit and return to budget surpluses…the get ‘trickle-down’ and ‘supply-side’ economics out of your head.

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at October 15, 2008 12:47 PM
Comment #266919

I just need to inject a bit of humor in here…..for you on the right, it’s a joke, so please…laugh!
dude, I couldn’t tell you, except that we all have this drive to make a point, explain a belief, or for some, to just beat the crap out of others until they quit and go away.
When we realize we’re trying to get into a closed mind, that’s our cue to just stop.

Back in 1990, the government seized the Mustang Ranch brothel in Nevada for tax evasion and as required by law, tried to run it. They failed and it closed. Now we are trusting the economy of our nation to a pack of nitwits who couldn’t make money running a whorehouse and selling booze?


GIVE ME A BREAK …

Posted by: janedoe at October 15, 2008 12:50 PM
Comment #266920

>The Obama does not have the record, judgment or experience to bring this country together and be an effective leader for ALL the people of this country. That is why I will not vote for him and that is why the left calls me a racist for stating that.
Posted by: kctim at October 15, 2008 11:45 AM

kctim,

All points worth discussing and making decisions on. If that were what Obama had to contend with, there are plenty of arguments he could put up to refute them, and win or lose accordingly. You may not be voting bigotry, only you would know any ulterior motives when you get behind the curtain…but, the tone of the mccain campaign has a decided slant toward casting fear and doubt toward Obama, and those fears and doubts have little or no basis on the issues you mention. Those fears and doubts are cast in such a way as to rouse a mob to heights of rancor because of smears on character. mccain knows the slow witted people he aims that crap at don’t know any better, and that they will respond to his (and Palin’s) false rhetoric. mccain has so little honor left that he will willingly ride the coat-tails of that crowd fury into the White House.

Vote for him on the grounds you expressed, if you must…but, please remember the rest of him comes along for the ride. You can’t separate his dishonesty and dishonor from the supposed ‘conservative’ you think he is.

Posted by: Marysdude at October 15, 2008 12:52 PM
Comment #266921

janedoe,

Sounds like a story like Will Rogers would have told…he was a FUNNY man…LOL, and thanks for helping bring us down from our ‘serious’ cloud.

Posted by: Marysdude at October 15, 2008 12:56 PM
Comment #266922

kctim,
Missouri is a swing state. You need to get on board with Obama. Just think of all the bad things coming that you’ll be able to blame on him.

Posted by: Schwamp at October 15, 2008 12:57 PM
Comment #266924

Schwamp,

KC’s in Kansas too, are you sure tim is from Missouri? I was born in Missouri, and I don’t remember him being there…I think he’s from Kansas…;)

Posted by: Marysdude at October 15, 2008 1:08 PM
Comment #266928

Dude
They have everything to do with the issues I mentioned and BOTH campaigns are using them to win. But to suggest that either of them are trying to encourage violent mob mentality is nothing but partisan BS.

IF I was going to vote for McCain, I would feel better about his “dishonesty and dishonor” than I do about Obama’s “dishonesty and dishonor.”

Schwamp
I love my rights too much to just throw them away so I can “blame” somebody.
Besides, what good would it really do? He could be worse than Bush and the left would still defend, ignore and excuse everything he does just as the right has done with Bush.

And don’t believe that swing state crap. Kansas City and St. Louis want a black President and all the “freebies” he has promised, so they will flock to the polls and vote based on those two factors. The rest of the state is what is pretty much split and those against Obama aren’t really encouraged to show up and vote.

Obama will take Missouri and I will have to listen to my union neighbors whine and complain about govt intrusion into their lives and high taxes for another 4-8 years.

Posted by: kctim at October 15, 2008 1:37 PM
Comment #266930

Missouri, or Misery as I called it when living there, is run by the absolute biggest believers in taxes in the United States. That it has been a Republican state, and failed again and again to eliminate state, county, city and personal property taxes, speaks to the misery index of being Missouri.

I spent 2 years there, and headed back to the No State or County income tax, and no personal property tax state of Texas. Texas is a Republican state too. Odd thing is, when it was a Democrat state, the bulk of its state revenues came from the corporations. Then Republicans took over, and rising sales taxes, rising real estate property taxes, and now efforts to install a state income tax under a Republican governor have become the norm.

Understanding Republicans in office is very easy. Take whatever they say, turn it completely around, and you have their agenda. They legislate in opposition to what they campaign on. And incredibly, this endears them to their supporters.

Republicans in Texas government have been working hard to make Texas Missouri Misery. Even now including toll roads to tax citizens to go to and from work. Understanding Republicans is very, very easy.

Bush has been an excellent example. He ran in 2000 and 2004 on smaller government and cutting the deficit in half. We got from Bush the largest government ever and a doubling of the national debt. Easy, easy, easy….

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 15, 2008 1:40 PM
Comment #266935

janedoe

“When we realize we’re trying to get into a closed mind, that’s our cue to just stop.”

thats an exellent point.

Posted by: dbs at October 15, 2008 1:59 PM
Comment #266936

Yes the blacks will come out for Obama but they would do the same for Hillary. The thing about Obama is he really isn’t black and that’s why white america is having no problem voting for him - Just like they cheer for Tiger Woods.

He’s a northern Bill Clinton, a little smarter and not quite as smooth.

Posted by: Schwamp at October 15, 2008 2:01 PM
Comment #266950

David -

Careful, now! You know that the Republicans have wrapped themselves in the Flag-with-a-capital-f, and that means they can never, ever do anything wrong, and that God is guiding their every footstep!

Easy, indeed!

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at October 15, 2008 3:11 PM
Comment #266960

WHO Cares where, when, how, and if McCain can ‘comeback’?

By l.t. Dravis

ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL – Wednesday, October 15, 2008 - The McCain campaign is talking ‘comeback’ and I wonder, how’s the media reading that message?
Are newspaper, radio, and TV editors hoping for hope or promise?
Hope won’t create enough drama to capture the public’s attention so editors understandably hope it isn’t hope.
Promise, on the other hand, implies drama so the media will want to jump on the promise story, create lots of interest, and continue to enjoy exceedingly profitable ratings.
Barack Obama leads John McCain by fairly good margins in most polls today so the 2008 Presidential Campaign isn’t providing enough drama to attract enough listeners, readers, and viewers, ratings are at risk of dropping and the media worries it could find itself in a world of economic hurt … kind of like the rest of us … and who wants that?
Let’s go back to that golden moment in time, just about six weeks ago, when John McCain introduced Sarah Palin, the great GOP Hope, to the world and lead Barack Obama in most polls.
Who was more excited … the McCain campaign or the media?
Because a switch in the polls – either way – creates drama and drama creates increased ratings and increased ratings create increased advertising revenues, the media was thrilled beyond compare.
The media, especially the 24/7 cable news networks, live or die by ratings and any drama they can dig out of the 2008 Presidential Campaign is as good or better for ratings as any national tragedy (Madonna’s divorce, Nancy Reagan’s pelvic fracture, a drop on the DOW, an earthquake, a hurricane, etc.).
If this wasn’t a campaign year, what would Bill Bennett, Wolf Blitzer, Anderson Cooper, Sean Hannity, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews, Andrea Mitchell, Bill ‘Cussman’ O’Reilly, or Rush ‘Oxycontin’ Limbaugh be talking about today?
Janet Jackson’s bout with vertigo?
Whether or not the Phillies can put the Dodgers away in five?
Who was dropped from ‘Dancing with the stars’?
Or the economy?
The economy … for sure.
But is there enough economic news to fill up 24 hours a day of air time, seven days a week?
And, how willing would advertisers be to spend big bucks to have their sales pitches surrounded by doomsday news that sends a clear message to viewers: Don’t spend!
Not very … so, what is the media to do?
Continue to cover the boring fact that Obama leads McCain in the polls while ratings and revenues drop?
Or try to convince the public to watch and listen because there’s reason to believe McCain can ‘comeback’ to beat Barack Obama?
The answer is obvious.
So, how would the media’s ‘McCain-can-comeback’ campaign shape up?
You’d see more “Breaking News” coverage on even the slightest positive movement in McCain’s numbers.
You’d see and hear more talking heads talking more about every possible way McCain could improve his chances to beat Obama.
You’d see more columnists write about every possible angle on how the McCain campaign might ‘comeback’ to win the election.
And, you’d see and hear more promotional spots created to convince you to watch and listen to more news stories about how McCain can win.
I know what you’re thinking … it’s not impossible for John McCain to ‘comeback’ and win the election … no matter what the media does.
And you’re absolutely right.
If the economy somehow takes a positive turn, if McCain and Palin tone down the negative rhetoric and actually tell voters how their lives would be better if they vote Republican, if John McCain can convince voters that he is not ‘erratic’, or if there was some sort of national emergency that made McCain look like the better candidate to protect us, he could very well ‘comeback’ to win the election.
Nevertheless, since the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, no matter what the circumstance may be, John McCain is not likely to demonstrate the kind of consistent leadership the country wants and so desperately needs.
So, I’m not at all convinced anything is likely to change for John McCain and his running mate until after the votes are in and they both go home.
But that won’t stop me from tuning in to every bit of media drama – real and otherwise – about McCain’s ‘comeback’.
How about you?


Copyright © 2008 by LTD Associates West, Ltd. All rights reserved.

If you have questions, comments, or concerns, Email me at LTDAssociates@msn.com (goes right to my desk) and since I personally answer every Email, I look forward to hearing from you soon. If you’d like to blog with us, go to http://bothsidesnowbiz.blogspot.com/ and let us know what you think about what we think.

Posted by: l.t. Dravis at October 15, 2008 4:24 PM
Comment #266963

The real trouble comes when Republicans ask for an honest accounting of Obama’s behavior, he gives it, and they don’t believe him.

The point of “asking” Obama for an honest accounting has not been to get that honest accounting, it’s to put a moralistic face on spreading suspicion and rumor as truth, spreading doubt about the candidate’s character.

I believe that when you put such accusations out there, people have every right to check your sources and your assumptions.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at October 15, 2008 4:37 PM
Comment #266965

S.D.
Sure people want an honest accounting of BHO just like you democrats would want an honest accounting of the republican candidate but when the candidates are vague about their answers or just give partial answers people due tend to wonder. Checking the source of accusations is a very good idea like when democrats said Palin’s daughter was the mother of her downs baby!!!!!!!

Posted by: KAP at October 15, 2008 4:49 PM
Comment #266966

“The real trouble comes when Republicans ask for an honest accounting of Obama’s behavior, he gives it, and they don’t believe him”

Sure he does Stephen, on the second or third try and heaven help us if he “mispeaks,” because then we have to wait until what he said is translated into “what he really meant to say.”

The real trouble comes when anybody seeking answers is given the runaround, because it only raises more questions.

Posted by: kctim at October 15, 2008 4:50 PM
Comment #266967

David R. Remer, not just tooting my own horn here but I thought the same thing about the Republicans. What ever they say, they do the opposite. The mind has trouble grasping that so I thought perhaps there was another answer. But no, there’s those pesky facts again. Yep, definitely, what ever a Republican tells you he will do, he does the opposite. Can’t wait for the landslide win by Obama.

Posted by: ray at October 15, 2008 4:58 PM
Comment #266973

Three aspects of Obama’s leadership would wreck the economy even further and help turn a crisis into a catastrophe:

- Higher Taxes, Runaway Spending, Bigger Deficits

- Bad Character, Bad Values

- Unpredictability and Hyper-Partisanship

RAISING TAXES MEANS FEWER JOBS, SHARPER RECESSION

Barack Obama claims that under his plan, 95% of Americans will either get a tax cut or pay the same that they do today. It should be easy to feed the public’s natural skepticism about that pledge by reminding them of Obama’s many costly promises —- $50 billion more per year to the UN to fight global poverty, $160 biillion a year for a new health care plan, $150 billion to encourage energy independence, doubling of the Peace Corps, universal preschool funded by the federal government, $4,000 a year to all kids who want to go to college and pledge future service, and new $1,000 per couple welfare checks (called “refundable tax credits”) to more than 40 million American households who currently pay no federal income taxes.

Independent analysis suggests that Obama wants to raise federal spending some $800 billion a year. Everyone understands that he can only do so my increasing the total tax burden or vastly increasing our deficit. He would no doubt do both as president.

Earlier in the campaign, Obama promised to pay for his vastly expensive new programs by ending the Iraq war and bringing the troops home. More recently, however, he’s admitted that he’d need to keep a substantial American presence in Iraq on a long-term basis – as many as 75,000 troops. Of the soldiers he would still remove from that conflict, he’s pledged to send most of them immediately to Afghanistan. It’s hard to see why troops in Afghanistan would save substantial money as opposed to troops in Iraq.

There’s no question that the total tax burden would increase under Obama. Instead of the 18% of the Gross Domestic Product currently consumed by the Federal Government, he could take the share as high as 22% or even 25%.

Most people instinctively understand that if our leaders make the total tax burden significantly heavier, it will hurt them eventually.

They can also see the disastrous logic behind raising spending and taxes in the current situation.

If, at a time of credit crunch, your boss must pay much more in taxes, he have less money on hand to pay you a raise or to hire new workers.

Even before the present crisis, Obama’s ambitious plans for governmental expansion looked frightening to many Americans. In today’s mood of insecurity and uncertainty, those vastly expensive schemes should seem terrifying and irresponsible.

Excerpt from; http://townhall.com/Columnists/MichaelMedved/2008/10/15/two_inescapable_truths

Posted by: Jim M at October 15, 2008 6:01 PM
Comment #266974

ray, then I would hope you will consider an independent vote and voting out incumbents from both of those pesky fact parties. Rational logic would dictate that course of action. Unless one is a partisan, of course, then the definitions of rational and logic are altered to minimize cognitive dissonance.

Posted by: David R. Remer at October 15, 2008 6:04 PM
Comment #266978

The Democrats can taste it. They believe they are just weeks away from an economic coup d’état that will allow them to restructure America’s economy in ways that would make FDR blush over the relative anemia of his New Deal proposals. Democrats know that the American economy has the potential to be transformed into a likeness of the European economies they yearn to emulate.

Tax as a percentage of GDP

2006
Percent
Sweden 50.1
Denmark 49.0
Belgium 44.8
France 44.5
Norway 43.6
Finland 43.5
Italy 42.7
Austria 41.9
Iceland* 41.4
EU-15 39.8
The Netherlands 39.5
Great Britain 37.4
Hungary 37.1
Czech Republic 36.7
Spain 36.7
New Zeeland 36.5
Luxembourg 36.3
OECD* 36.2
Germany 35.7
Portugal 35.4
Poland* 34.3
Canada 33.4
Turkey 32.5
Ireland 31.7
Australia* 30.9
Switzerland 30.1
Slovak Republic 29.6
USA 28.2
Japan* 27.4
Greece 27.4
Korea 26.8
Mexico 20.6

Source: OECD

What do you see in the chart? Better yet, what do Democrats see? What does a chart that compares the tax burden on the economies of various nations have to do with anything?

Well, with the United States ranking near the bottom of the chart having a tax burden of only 28 percent and Sweden at the top of the list with a tax burden of over 50 percent, a true free-market Republican would read the chart as proof positive that America is still a relatively free society, economically.

On the other hand, American Democrats see something else in the chart, something more profound. They see democratic socialism as the path to social justice—just look at the Europeans and their government services, not to mention their cultural superiority to “the great unwashed” here in the United States. Democrats see a world of opportunity for the expansion of the tax burden, taking solace in the fact that, “If Sweden can do it, so can we.” In essence, a Democrat sees the once-in-a-lifetime-opportunity to move another 20 percent of the United States GDP into the government sector—it’s like manna from heaven for a socialist.

Excerpt from; http://townhall.com/Columnists/JohnnieBByrd/2008/10/15/can_mccain-palin_fend_off_the_welfare_state

Posted by: Jim M at October 15, 2008 6:27 PM
Comment #266982

Obama, by virtue of his socialist tax schemes, seems determined that more people will ride in the wagon than pull it. Liberals will enjoy the hay ride till it goes over the cliff.

Posted by: Jim M at October 15, 2008 7:05 PM
Comment #266985

Jim M -

Help me out here - I can’t seem to see ANY third-world countries on the list that has a higher tax burden then the U.S. I DO see Mexico as having a more Republican-friendly lower tax rate than the U.S.

This is incredible, absolutely freaking incredible. A conservative shows us a list that should serve as proof positive that higher taxes properly used equals a better infrastructure and greater prosperity…but instead he says it’s proof that America is a ‘relative free society’.

So does that mean that the great majority of our allies are NOT free societies? ONLY AMERICA is a free society?

Oh yeah - Jim M - here’s a clue: Japan, Greece, Korea, and Mexico are ‘free societies’, then? I’ve been to Japan and Mexico…and I assure you that they are NOT freer than America. Greece, I couldn’t tell you about. Mexico…that’s a free society as long as you pay your protection money to the local drug lords.

Sheesh!

Howzabout you give us a list of what countries in the world you consider to be free societies, hm? Betcha won’t do it….

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at October 15, 2008 7:14 PM
Comment #266986

errata - I’ve been to Japan, South Korea, and Mexico, and none of them are freer societies than America.

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at October 15, 2008 7:16 PM
Comment #266990

Jim M,
What you are saying doesn’t really make sense. We already went “over the cliff,” thanks to a conservative philosophy of deregulation and privatization. You don’t get much more “over the cliff” than we are right now. More than a trillion dollars has been spent so far, not on universal health care or education, but on a bailout of Wall Street due to their greed and stupidity. That’s simply astounding. More than $1,000,000,000,000. And it’s not even over, not by any means. The problem is NOT solved, not at all. The only thing that has happened is the patient, namely the US economy, is now on artificial life support, courtesy of the US taxpayer. The federal government is backing commercial paper, and buying equity in banks. It’s the same old free marktet mantra: ‘privatize the profits, socialize the losses.’

Please note- country’s like Greece and Turkey and Canada have similar tax rates, yet they provide citizens with universal health care. Turkey educates its citizens through university level, if they can pass the exams. And remember, Turkey has mandatory military service. They have a lot of challenging neighbors, yet they are better off than Americans. Yet they have not driven their economy off a cliff. Well, go figure.

I can’t believe you can look at today’s economic situation, and worry the Democratic Party will drive us “over a cliff”! We’re already falling at terminal velocity. It doesn’t get much worse.
Seriously. It doesn’t get much worse.

Posted by: phx8 at October 15, 2008 7:30 PM
Comment #266993

Why is it that some on this blog don’t understand what an “excerpt” is? If one finds the excerpt to be worthy of comment, it might not be a bad idea to follow the link and read the entire article. That is, if one truly wishes to understand rather than just quickly type a retort. Who knows, one might just learn something.

It is also confusing to me why some fail to read a sentence to its end. I quoted the following; “America is still a relatively free society, economically.”

When these folks were reading their Dick and Jane books out loud in grade school did it sound like; “Look Jane, see Spot…” That sentence would still make sense but the meaning of watching Spot RUN might be lost. Whoops! I fear I lost some fellow travelers here.

Posted by: Jim M at October 15, 2008 7:58 PM
Comment #266994

If anyone thinks that we are going to be able to pay for this stupid, destructive war in Iraq without raising taxes is dreaming. That alone, not to mention the fact that our infrastructure is in bad shape, our health care system, while the most expensive in the world doesn’t cover tens of millions of people and those that are covered aren’t guaranteed to get covered if they get sick, an education system in need of reform, and last but certainly not least, our military is broken and run down and needs a lot of help. How can anyone in their right mind even talk about lowering taxes. I understand the relationship between taxes and economic health but if it wasn’t for this stupid war that Bush and McCain insisted on we wouldn’t be in this situation or it wouldn’t be as bad as it was. They screwed things up not Barack Obama. Bush and McCain fought against regulating the financial industry and it collapsed under the weight of its greed now they not only want a trillion dollars of our money to rescue them from themselves but they don’t want to have to pay their taxes to pay for their bailout. It is ridiculous, utterly ridiculous.

If I have to pay higher taxes and actually get something in return I can accept that. If I can get a competent government, if I can get affordable health care for my family, and bridges that won’t collapse when I drive over it I will gladly pay more in taxes. I would prefer that we never spend another penny on a stupid war that gets us nothing in return - that I can do without.

Obama made a good point in the second debate when he said that while on paper our corporate taxes look high but with all of the loopholes most don’t pay anywhere near what they should. I would agree to lower the percentage if they all paid, no loopholes, no cheating.

Posted by: tcsned at October 15, 2008 8:01 PM
Comment #266995

Jim M,
The top 400 families have as much wealth as the lowest 150 MILLION people combined. And you defend that set-up as economic freedom? That’s just sad.

Posted by: phx8 at October 15, 2008 8:10 PM
Comment #266997

Jim M -

Okay, I’ll rephrase. What countries other than America do you consider free societies, economically speaking…

…and then I’ll ask you how your list compares with those countries who are considered modern industrialized democracies by most of the world.

Go ahead - I dare you! Betcha won’t do it….

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at October 15, 2008 8:19 PM
Comment #266998

Just a funny little thing just exposed in the McCain camp……seems that McCain found himself the recipient of his very own cell towers for his Sedona ranch…….courtesy offfff………one of his campaign managers who is……wait…..it’s coming………….yep….a lobbyist for Verizon. Go figure. Actually it looks a little worse than just the lobbyist connection.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/15/ethics-problem-for-mccain_n_134992.html

http://reclaimthemedia.org/corporate_power_consolidation/verizon_at_t_gave_mccain_cell_%3D624

Posted by: janedoe at October 15, 2008 8:26 PM
Comment #267002

I just thought of something. If BHO wins the election and the dems gain a filibuster proof majority in congress. What will the media talk about? Their job is create news (not report it)and will they turn on BHO to make a story.

We may be in for boring days ahead. The liberals will be crying and we will say “told you so”.

Posted by: Oldguy at October 15, 2008 9:40 PM
Comment #267032

JIM M,

are worried about the democrats emulating european economies like Ireland, but tonight McCane just said he thought we should emulate their tax structure. Are you still voting for him? If so aren’t you a socialist too?

No wait, YOU can’t be an extremest… but democrats, sure. Of course.

Posted by: angrymob at October 16, 2008 1:04 AM
Comment #267050

Phx8 Said, “”Please note- country’s like Greece and Turkey and Canada have similar tax rates, yet they provide citizens with universal health care. Turkey educates its citizens through university level, if they can pass the exams. And remember, Turkey has mandatory military service. They have a lot of challenging neighbors, yet they are better off than Americans. Yet they have not driven their economy off a cliff. Well, go figure.”” OK I’LL go along with the National health care because our system is a Train Wreck, OK, Now How About a National University system assuming the Students pass the entry level exams , Because In my opinion Their as Big Business as it Gets Too, Deal..

Posted by: Rodney Brown at October 16, 2008 11:03 AM
Comment #267052

Don’t worry Rodney, you will get both under the Obama. Govt more intrusive and bigger than ever.

Posted by: kctim at October 16, 2008 11:36 AM
Comment #267054
Now don’t get me wrong - I will always say Reagan was one of our greatest presidents, because his victory in the Cold War far overshadows everything else he did wrong.

So if Reagan “won” the cold war is Putin or Hu Jintao the victor over capitalism?

Since Bush and McCain revere Reagan, is this the blowback from Reagan’s victory?

Posted by: googlumpugus at October 16, 2008 11:47 AM
Comment #267058

Glenn writes: “Okay, I’ll rephrase. What countries other than America do you consider free societies, economically speaking…

…and then I’ll ask you how your list compares with those countries who are considered modern industrialized democracies by most of the world.

Go ahead - I dare you! Betcha won’t do it….

Gee Glenn, a triple dog dare…how can I resist. As I said earlier, I believe when the government begins levying taxes of more than one-third of the GDP the people begin to loose their economic freedom. When it approaches 40% it is certainly leaning to the socialist side. So Glenn, take a look at the chart and you can answer your own question.

Angrymob writes; “are worried about the democrats emulating european economies like Ireland, but tonight McCane just said he thought we should emulate their tax structure. Are you still voting for him? If so aren’t you a socialist too?

Angrymob, if you look at the chart above you will find that the tax on GPD in Ireland is 31.7%. Slightly higher than the U.S. but well within my parameter of one-third. One-third Angrymob is 33.3%

Posted by: Jim M at October 16, 2008 12:07 PM
Comment #267059

I have to say that I believe our two party system is fundamentally broken. Because of the enormous amounts of money required to run for public office, any candidate who does not sign on with one of the major parties has very little chance of mounting a successful campaign. And once signed on has a very difficult time getting elected unless they tout the party line. Case in point there are only two independents in Congress and one of them used to be a Democrat and was re-elected to his seat. An alternative way of affecting government would be these forums encouraging all outraged citizens to vote for ANYONE BUT MCCAIN OR OBAMA. There are over 200 registered candidates for President with approximately 10 or so in each state (check out votesmart.org for the list of candidates for your state). If we mount a grass roots campaign here in the waning days of the election cycle to get a majority in every state for ANY CANDIDATE EXCEPT MCCAIN OR OBAMA, while voting OUT any incumbant in either local, state or national office, that would make a very Loud and Clear statement to our governement officials that we are sick and tired of their BS government by the few and for the few. Personally I will be voting for a third party candidate on election day….I’m not sure yet whether it will be Cynthia McKinley of the Green party (way left of left) or Charles Jay of the Boston Tea Party (way right of right), I would prefer a centrist, moderate candidate, but there don’t seem to be any of those running in Florida. Unfortunately, the powers that be (the media) elected not to invite any of the third party candidates to the presidential debates (because you see they are some of the few who shape public policy now instead of journalists who unbiasedly report the news).

Posted by: deborah at October 16, 2008 12:09 PM
Comment #267120

All I can say after watching last nights debate is that I need to become a plumber.

Posted by: Tom at October 16, 2008 6:53 PM
Comment #267123

Well if you do that Tom, you might make sure that you have a license, it’s up to date, and so are your taxes……….before you are exposed to the entire world.

Posted by: janedoe at October 16, 2008 7:23 PM
Comment #267124

janedoe,

Agreed! I also will not claim independence when I am clearly a republican plant.

Posted by: Tom at October 16, 2008 7:35 PM
Comment #267159

Jim M -

I believe when the government begins levying taxes of more than one-third of the GDP the people begin to loose their economic freedom. When it approaches 40% it is certainly leaning to the socialist side. So Glenn, take a look at the chart and you can answer your own question.

And the answer to my question is…in your eyes Mexico is a freer state (economically) than America is! And so is CHILE (Assuming you got your list off the Wiki - sure looks similar)! So by your logic, that should mean great prosperity for the Mexican and Chilean people! All you have to do is never actually GO there so you can imagine all the prosperity!

Gee whiz, Jim M - the countries who are taxing more are ALL more prosperous than the ones who tax LEAST? And you’re STILL claiming that taxes are a BAD thing?

Hey - taxes ARE a bad thing…if they’re not used properly. But if they are used for infrastructure, education, health care, business assistance…all the things that really make a country prosperous, then the taxes are a GOOD thing.

But I suppose I’ll see you off to either Mexico or Chile so you can prove that their lower tax rates are a sure path to national prosperity….

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at October 17, 2008 3:16 AM
Comment #267161

janedoe

you don’t need a license when you work for someone who has one. my understanding is that tax lean is for @ $1200. hardly evidence of a major tax cheat. there are members of congress who have had much bigger tax problems. which would you say is a bigger problem ? i believe the attack on the plumber stems from a remark obama made when talking to him. i think he said “we want to spread the wealth”. don’t know if that was the quote verbatim.

tom

“I also will not claim independence when I am clearly a republican plant.”

while that could be the case, it’s still speculation on your part. the concerns the man raised were completely legitimate.

Posted by: dbs at October 17, 2008 8:38 AM
Comment #267185

dbs, is there ANYTHING your party does that you will accept as dirty??
McCain pretty much stepped on his own d**k when he started the “plumber chant”. Same principle as releasing sooper Sarah on the masses without any adequate or appropriate vetting.
He has done nothing but create fodder for us, and even more embarassment for you.
I guess maybe we should stop admonishing you…..and start thanking you!!!!

Posted by: janedoe at October 17, 2008 12:25 PM
Comment #267190

Glenn writes; “Hey - taxes ARE a bad thing…if they’re not used properly. But if they are used for infrastructure, education, health care, business assistance…all the things that really make a country prosperous, then the taxes are a GOOD thing.”

Glenn is arguing apples while I am talking about oranges. Taxation is necessary to fund government…and I don’t know why you would believe I think differently.

My position is than when government taxes become more than 1/3 of the countries GDP it begins to limit the economic freedom of the people upon which those taxes are levied.

Now, many will argue about “good” versus “bad” taxes but that is a moot point. I am not arguing about the use of the taxes collected, but rather the percentage taken from the one who earns the dollars being taxed.

Every dollar of tax represents one dollar less for the individual to use as they see fit. That government uses the tax collected wisely or poorly is not the point I am making.

Once the dollar collected in taxes leaves my pocket it becomes the property of government and the decision on how to spend it is determined by our elected representatives.

My position is simple, leave at least 66 cents of what I have earned in my pocket and let government decide what to do with the other 33 cents.

Some would argue that if a little is good, then a lot must be better. That’s no more true with taxes than it is with prescription medications. Too much of either can kill the patient.

Posted by: Jim M at October 17, 2008 12:55 PM
Comment #267195

Jim M,

What tax bracket did you say you were in?

Posted by: Marysdude at October 17, 2008 1:27 PM
Comment #267233

Marysdude asks; “What tax bracket did you say you were in?”

Sorry, you missed the point, we’re talking about taxes as a percent of GDP.

Posted by: Jim M at October 17, 2008 4:50 PM
Comment #267235

janedoe

“dbs, is there ANYTHING your party does that you will accept as dirty??”

i could ask you the same question. you’re assuming that the plummer was a plant. you now seem to want to discredit anything the plumber said, by slandering him, or making him out to be some kind of tax evading low life, or ulicensed contractor breaking the law. nice cheapshot!

Posted by: dbs at October 17, 2008 4:54 PM
Comment #267257

dbs, spin this as you wish. It wasn’t us that sent the troops out. The msm found this guy because your idol, JSM, mentioned his name 24 frikin’ times in the space of an hour. Sorry that you feel they’re doing their job and just happened to fall into a pile of crap while they were digging ! If I were you, I’d go right back to the McCain camp and bitch at them about being a little over-zealous in their attempt to show that John can relate to the “middle class” America. You know, just occasionally when you look hard enough for the truth, dam if you don’t just find it.

Posted by: janedoe at October 17, 2008 6:37 PM
Comment #267259

janedoe

“The msm found this guy because your idol, JSM,”

huh ? my idol ? your joking right ? i think i’ve stated many times here at WB that i have never voted for mc cain, and that i don’t really care for him. in fact here’s a post i directed at you on another thread.

“janedoe

i didn’t vote for mc cain in the primaries. if told me a year and a half ago that these two would be my choices i wouldn’t have believed you. IMO we are choosing between a silver tonque con artist, and a silver haired hot head. WHAT A CHOICE ! obama is way to far left for me, and i’ve never liked mc cain. unfortunately i’ll be stuck voting for what IMO is the lesser of two evils. YIPPEEEEE !!!

Posted by: dbs at October 16, 2008 01:03 PM “

do you always just make things up ?

if the plumber had said something obama could’ve used against mc cain, he’d have repeated it constantly, and so would the media. you guys seem to think you have already won this election, and maybe you will. if you don’t i’m sure we’ll listen to you bitch for the next four years that the election was stolen.

if you do win the rest of the country will be as screwed up as california.

Posted by: dbs at October 17, 2008 7:25 PM
Comment #267264

janedoe

BTW, if you wanted to, you could dig crap on just about anyone and use it against them. there probably aren’t to many people out there that don’t have some kind of skeleton in thier closet. what you think you have on the plumber is nothing. he owes $1200 to the IRS. do you even know the circumstances surrounding it ? i like the fact that the dem that replaced foley in florida, claiming we needed to bring respectability back to washington has been caught cheating on his wife with some young staffer, and it appears she’s may not be the only one.

Posted by: dbs at October 17, 2008 7:38 PM
Comment #267269

I don’t, and as far as I know..we don’t think we “have anything” on this guy. I don’t give a rat’s ass who he is, or what he does ! And again, it wasn’t “us” that sent the media out to find him. McCain is the one who mentioned him an excessive number of times during his tirade the other night. Guess somebody figured if McNasty was so enamored with him that there may be a good story.
Guess it was just a fluke that his 15 minutes of fame may end up being a nightmare. What is it they say about the heat and the kitchen>>??? hmmm????

Posted by: janedoe at October 17, 2008 8:35 PM
Comment #267330

janedoe,

;)

Posted by: Marysdude at October 18, 2008 11:24 AM
Comment #267359

Jim M -

“My position is than when government taxes become more than 1/3 of the countries GDP it begins to limit the economic freedom of the people upon which those taxes are levied.”

So, Jim M - does this mean that the FAR more prosperous countries whose tax rates make them less ‘economically free’ in YOUR eyes are really just wasting that money? What is it that makes those countries MORE prosperous, MORE stable, MORE peaceful, SAFER, and simply better places to live than Mexico and Chile?

Jim M, the available data show that that ‘economic freedom’ as YOU have defined it is in no way equivalent to the population of a country leading longer, healthier lives with greater opportunity for advancement.

So what is more important to you, Jim M? “Economic freedom” as you define it? Or the overall population having longer, healthier lives with greater opportunity for advancement?

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at October 18, 2008 3:11 PM
Comment #267475

As usual Glenn gets confused and attempts to equate economic freedom with mortality rates or some other such nonsense. His statement;

“Jim M, the available data show that that ‘economic freedom’ as YOU have defined it is in no way equivalent to the population of a country leading longer, healthier lives with greater opportunity for advancement.”

proves my point. I wonder what Glenn means by “opportunities for advancement” for a population. Would that mean more opportunity to earn more so more can be taken in confiscatory taxes? Taking Glenn and the liberal views on economic freedom to a theoretical perfect world…if the 50.1% in Sweeden is great, 100% in the U.S. would be better.

I have a friend who lived in the perfect world in Poland when the Soviets were in control. In that perfect world he said, “we pretended to work and they pretended to pay us”.

That there are some among us who are incapable of personal responsibility in their financial, social and health care matters is not in question. That liberals would make us all dependent upon government is the problem.

Posted by: Jim M at October 19, 2008 4:18 PM
Post a comment