Republicans

[Xanith]

Sure Ill take this on.

Only Republicans think that being educated and acting professionally is considered "elitist" and is a political liability.

Untrue. You label someone as an elitist because they talk one way to their constituents and then when you don’t think you are being reordered you state how people are simply clinging to their guns and their religion with antipathy to those who are not like them. That is a perfect definition of an elitist. One who purports support for the lower class to their faces yet secretly despises them.

Only a Republican can think it's ok to embezzle $150,000 to buy personal clothing as long as it is donated to charity later.

Clothing is part of a campaign expense and there is nothing illegal about spending money to outfit someone. No law broken means there is no embezzlement. I never heard anyone complain about Hillary’s 10k pants suits. All of a sudden clothing is a major issue?

Only a Republican can think a TAX CUT for the Working Class is "Socialist", but a trillion dollar bail-out to bankers is not.

No handing out money to people who don’t pay any taxes in the first place is no tax cut and purely a Socialistic idea. That is Obama’s plan, as he puts it “spreading the weath around”. I recently heard a tape of him giving a speech in 2001 describing his angst about the civil rights movement and how he wished it had included income redistribution (spreading the weath around). Leave no mistake about it, in his life he has surrounded himself with communists (in college Saul Alinsky) and radicals (Bill Ares and Rev Wright) he is a pure Socialist (if not a Marxist, from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs).

Only a Republican can think that a Christian candidate who has talked about the need to separate Church and State, and not to take scriptures too literally, be accused of being a secret orthodox Muslim.

If you read Obama’s own book he clearly states that he was drawn to the Muslim faith (and even dabbled in it early in his life), and how some of his friends at his church that he was going too was a clear supporter of Luis Farakan. Other than that the only people that think he is a secret orthodox Muslim are those kook bloggers who like to spread conspiracy theories. The Republican Party has never said or asserted such things, just as you can’t hold Democrats responsible for every left wing kook out there, so you can’t hold Republicans for the same.

Only a Republican can buy into the idea that an unlicensed divorced Plumber will be taxed more under a plan to cut-taxes for those making less than $250,000.

I don’t know if you are too young to remember but Bill Clinton also promised a middle class tax cut before he got elected. For some strange reason he never got around to it, even when the economy was doing good. Democrats have a long long history of saying one thing about taxes and doing another, especially when it comes to taxes on businesses. Increasing the minimum wage (as Obama wants to do), and raising taxes on those evil rich businesses will all have adverse effects on the economy and on jobs. All you have to do is take a look at history and Obama’s record to find out what he is actually going to do with taxes. I can’t believe people are actually falling for his 250,000 line, you would think after countless broken promises and a long history of raising taxes people would actually learn.

X

[System_Error]

I was going to type a nice long message, but I don't see a reason to when your post is consumed by such ignorance and blind bias that everyone can see. As long as someone has that liberal/democrat label, they have your vote.

If I was like that, then I would honestly vote for the other party, not my own. Whichever moron gets to be president next will be faced with decisions and situations that will make them very unpopular by the end of their presidential term.

In my opinion, both candidates suck. That's all there is too it. I don't see that you could (largely) argue in favor of McCain unless you just don't want Obama elected. I also don't think you can (largely) argue in favor of Obama unless you are retarded enough to believe his message of change and hope. Both are terrible candidates. Both are going to screw up.

Whoever is elected next will have the majority of their supporters either criticizing them greatly or not supporting them a year or two down the road. So you people that carry around signs, bumper sticks and act like it's a football team you are following to the super bowl really baffle me.

[Shaggy Hiker]

If I was like that, then I would honestly vote for the other party, not my own. Whichever moron gets to be president next will be faced with decisions and situations that will make them very unpopular by the end of their presidential term.

Amen. It doesn't have to turn out that way (Roosevelt was popular enough to get re-elected repeatedly), but if I had to bet on it, that's certainly the way I'd bet.

In my opinion, both candidates suck. That's all there is too it. I don't see that you could (largely) argue in favor of McCain unless you just don't want Obama elected. I also don't think you can (largely) argue in favor of Obama unless you are retarded enough to believe his message of change and hope. Both are terrible candidates. Both are going to screw up.

I don't really agree with this. I think both candidates have some excellent qualities, and are probably the best we can do under our system of voting. Oddly, they may be the best we can do anyways. How many people would really support anybody who I fully agreed with? How about somebody that Xanith fully agreed with? Every member of this forum is also a member of at least one fringe group, and our views are unlikely to be reflected in the majority.

However, I actually like these two candidates. There has been a period of coasting and/or reactionary politics since the mid 70's. Maybe it has always been that way, but you don't really need visionary leadership when things are going pretty well. The rampant fiscal mismanagement that we have gotten away with since the 80s has really had little or no impact on us because the period has been one of mild downturns interspersed into some great financial upswings. Being president during that time was sort of like picking good stocks in the late 90's: While some people might have done better, pretty nearly anybody could do an adequate job.

Now we may be facing a need for real leadership. Are these two candidates ideal for real leadership? Not a chance, but then again, who is? Obama might very well lead. We've drawn some good leaders from inexperience. McCain is rash and prone to being hot headed, but rash has been a compliment applied to several of our past leaders. Who else is there? Name a visionary leader who has a prayer of getting elected? I can name several who could get elected, but who would be very unlikely to turn anything around. Now we have two who are likely to follow interesting courses. Will they be the right courses? We can't be sure, and we never have been before.

[System_Error]

I don't really agree with this. I think both candidates have some excellent qualities, and are probably the best we can do under our system of voting. Oddly, they may be the best we can do anyways. How many people would really support anybody who I fully agreed with? How about somebody that Xanith fully agreed with? Every member of this forum is also a member of at least one fringe group, and our views are unlikely to be reflected in the majority.

OK ok ok... So my statement was a little stretched. I am just not very optimistic about this next term and don't see that either candidate will do the glorious works we all want to see. Then again, that's me making a broad statement based on my judgment again. I'm sure there's at least one person in this nation that will be satisfied at the end of this next term.

[Shaggy Hiker]

OK ok ok... So my statement was a little stretched. I am just not very optimistic about this next term and don't see that either candidate will do the glorious works we all want to see. Then again, that's me making a broad statement based on my judgment again. I'm sure there's at least one person in this nation that will be satisfied at the end of this next term.

I'm sufficiently pessimistic about our economic situation that I would be willing to say that if our heads are above water after four years then the incumbent will have done well. I just don't like the convergence of a few trend lines.

[Shaggy Hiker]

Untrue. You label someone as an elitist because they talk one way to their constituents and then when you don’t think you are being reordered you state how people are simply clinging to their guns and their religion with antipathy to those who are not like them. That is a perfect definition of an elitist. One who purports support for the lower class to their faces yet secretly despises them.

That statement requires that gun fanatics and religious folks are the lower class. I can think of a few who would disagree with that. Are those types typically lower class? My perception is that those who are very vocal on either issue are not lower class by any definition. Of course, the quote is from Obama, and the groups you mention are not likely to support him.

Clothing is part of a campaign expense and there is nothing illegal about spending money to outfit someone.

A couple points. One, John Edwards was flayed for a pair of $400 haircuts, and this has blown those haircuts out of the water. If the cost is ten times as high (one report had 4k for hair styling in that total bill). The other point is that some of the stores are saying that they certainly haven't sold that much to any campaign, as it would be extraordinary even for them. Which introduces the bizarre suggestion that reporting that the money was spent on clothes was covering up for something even more outrageous.

No law broken means there is no embezzlement.

True, not embezzlement. There is some question about violating finance laws, but it is irrelevant, since nobody cares.

I never heard anyone complain about Hillary’s 10k pants suits. All of a sudden clothing is a major issue?

Hillary is a multi-millionaire who can buy whatever she wants. However, clothing has ALWAYS been a major issue for female politicians. There were people on this very forum attacking Hillary for her looks and clothes, and this place is a bit more intellectual than most. It's a sad commentary on our society, but this is not "all of a sudden".

I don’t know if you are too young to remember but Bill Clinton also promised a middle class tax cut before he got elected. For some strange reason he never got around to it, even when the economy was doing good. Democrats have a long long history of saying one thing about taxes and doing another, especially when it comes to taxes on businesses.

So does everybody else. People expect the candidates to state what they will do. Presidents don't introduce legislation. They can certainly twist arms to get certain legislation introduced, but that's a tricky game, especially when the house is held by the opposition party, as was the case for Clinton from 94 on.

Nobody should take campaign promises seriously in the specifics. Those statements are only promises for the ignorant. For the rest of people, campaign promises should be suggestions as to the general philosophy that will be pursued. On this issue, I would say that it comes down to whether or not you buy into Trickle-Down economics or not. Obama doesn't appear to, while McCain does, but not strongly. I've already stated that I think the concept is an ignorant conept foisted on an ignorant public by ignorant or greedy people.

[capsulecorpjx]

Sure Ill take this on.



Untrue. You label someone as an elitist because they talk one way to their constituents and then when you don’t think you are being reordered you state how people are simply clinging to their guns and their religion with antipathy to those who are not like them. That is a perfect definition of an elitist. One who purports support for the lower class to their faces yet secretly despises them.




Clothing is part of a campaign expense and there is nothing illegal about spending money to outfit someone. No law broken means there is no embezzlement. I never heard anyone complain about Hillary’s 10k pants suits. All of a sudden clothing is a major issue?




No handing out money to people who don’t pay any taxes in the first place is no tax cut and purely a Socialistic idea. That is Obama’s plan, as he puts it “spreading the weath around”. I recently heard a tape of him giving a speech in 2001 describing his angst about the civil rights movement and how he wished it had included income redistribution (spreading the weath around). Leave no mistake about it, in his life he has surrounded himself with communists (in college Saul Alinsky) and radicals (Bill Ares and Rev Wright) he is a pure Socialist (if not a Marxist, from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs).



If you read Obama’s own book he clearly states that he was drawn to the Muslim faith (and even dabbled in it early in his life), and how some of his friends at his church that he was going too was a clear supporter of Luis Farakan. Other than that the only people that think he is a secret orthodox Muslim are those kook bloggers who like to spread conspiracy theories. The Republican Party has never said or asserted such things, just as you can’t hold Democrats responsible for every left wing kook out there, so you can’t hold Republicans for the same.



I don’t know if you are too young to remember but Bill Clinton also promised a middle class tax cut before he got elected. For some strange reason he never got around to it, even when the economy was doing good. Democrats have a long long history of saying one thing about taxes and doing another, especially when it comes to taxes on businesses. Increasing the minimum wage (as Obama wants to do), and raising taxes on those evil rich businesses will all have adverse effects on the economy and on jobs. All you have to do is take a look at history and Obama’s record to find out what he is actually going to do with taxes. I can’t believe people are actually falling for his 250,000 line, you would think after countless broken promises and a long history of raising taxes people would actually learn.

X

touché

[Xanith]

touché

Thats more of a response than I expected, thanks

X