My DH and I, both middle-aged and white, voted for Obama because

• JIHAD - sm
  • If you want to post something on the subject, post - Backwards typist
    • People in glass houses... - Sonny
  • I wasn't going to even read this tripe, but I did..... - MT and worn out
    • The opposition is going to fight the other side... - Zville MT
    • It is called Democracy. - Sweet Grapes
    • Everything would be just peachy if we voted in McPain, right? - sm
      • The majority, as you put it, did not even - Backwards typist
        • And just how do you propose to know what the majority - Did or did not know?
        • P.S. Who decided he was the perfect one - Backwards typist
      • That's not what she was saying - icytoes
        • Not about Bush? Your whole message - uhuh
          • That wasn't my whole message - you just picked out the sentence you wanted to - icytoes
        • Can you please identify any good that - uhuh
          • Stop bringing up Bush - this post was not about Bush - icytoes
            • It is like the old song Love and Marriage - Bushwacked
              • And Bush inherited a lot of crap from Clinton - icytoes
                • Yeah, it would be nice if magic could - uhuh
                  • Getting serious means putting blame where it belongs. - icytoes
                    • Hey, icytoes, you have a lot of sense - Backwards typist
                      • Thanks Backwards Typist - aint that the truth - icytoes
                    • Reality? - warmtoes
                      • Reality - most of the people voted for him only because of his race - icytoes
                        • They voted for him because he was half white? - sm
                          • Only in her imagination. - Reality Check
                      • The majority of the people didn't vote him in because of his polcies - icytoes
                        • My DH and I, both middle-aged and white, voted for Obama because - uhuh
                          • Well your in a crowd of a very few - icytoes
                            • Good for you for voting your conscience. - uhuh
                              • Thanks. Here are just a couple comments - icytoes
            • So one more time...please define - uhuh
              • And once again - see message - icytoes
        • Read a funny quote once and your post reminded me of it. - Zville MT
    • So, it was okay for the uber-right-wing neocons to elect Bush and nominate McPalin? - sm
      • Ummmm....uber right-wing neocons would NOT... - sam
        • Uh, that's McPalin, sam - Truthseeker
          • Uh, that's McCain/Palin - really do need to get that one straight - Time for the truth
            • You're right...should be McPain... IMHO. - uhuh
  • same old show - ArkieMT
    • You certainly have that one right - good observation - icytoes
    • Lazy Response - Truthseeker
      • It's not a lazy response, it's the truth. - Zville MT
    • Wonder what it will take to get everybody else to realize this? nm - LVMT

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

the middle class person's best friend!  Funny how now he wants to help us, when each time he had the opportunity to, he voted against it. 

He just wants our vote and he figured this would be the way to get it.  To promise to not tax us middle class folks.  I don't believe he intends to keep his promise.  He may at first but the bottom line is that all the government spending of his and the 3 trillion dollars he plans to spend....where he is going to get that money?  He is going to get it from us and that includes the middle class. 

All the companies who get tax hikes will pass that tax onto us as well by jacking up prices of products and services so we the consumers pay for that tax hike.  Then Obama will have to raise taxes on the middle class as well to cover his government spending.  It is common sense people.  Look at his record.  He has consistently wanted to raise taxes and that includes on us middle class folks he is all of sudden so interested in helping out since he is up for election.  Give me a break.  I see through the lies and false promises.  That isn't change.  That is Washington elitists at their norm.

Has anyone else noticed what's going on in the middle east with elections?  I don't think I would credit all this to just Obama's speech in Cairo, but my guess is that his example (and ours by electing him) has been noticed around the world.

The "pro-Western coalition" won in Lebanon, beating out Hezbollah.

"The leader of the largest bloc in the pro-Western coalition, Saad Hariri, said early Monday in a televised speech that he extends his hand to the losing side "to work together and seriously for the sake of Lebanon." He urged supporters to celebrate without provoking opponents."  (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/07/lebanon-election-results-_n_212359.html)

And how about Iran?  Check this out.  This looks familiar.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/31210578#31210578

Maybe there's something to be said for extending a hand of peace instead of pointing a rifle. 

1.  I believe in a woman's right to choose.  I have read the FOCA bill and have based my decision on my interpretation of that bill in accordance with my own opinion.

2.  I believe the war in Iraq is a disaster.  I don't think it does credit to our troops to send them into harm's way for an unjust war.  Obama will end that war and get our military home.  The money we spend in Iraq is also included in that.

3.  I agree with Obama's tax plan.  I have sat down and compared the two, and in my situation, I get a better deal with Obama's plan.  I see no difference in McCain's plan and what is going on right now with Bush.

4.  McCain has shown is lack of leadershiip in the fact that he cannot manage his own campaign.  He ran all around like a chicken with his head cut off when the economic crisis hit.  Said he suspended his campaign and didn't. Obama submitted a plan and went with hit, showing leadership qualities.

5. Negative campaining:  This is something McCain and his wife publicly said he would not do, and yet he seems to be okay with it now.

The list is much longer, but these are a few.

I said, I never cared for the Bush administration, but give Bush a break.  Enough is enough.

I have never questioned the authenticity of his birth certificate.  I am not a supporter of Bush but he is our President until Obama is sworn in as President.  GP, you jumped to all types of conclusions because I mentioned it was time to stop ranting and raving about Bush.  That does not mean I am a Bush supporter.

Even Obama has made his peace with Bush and he is working with him.  I think it is high-time you allowed for difference of opinions between dems and pubs.  If the pubs want to question Obama's birth certificate athenticity, then so be it.

Hmmm....after all that castigating of Bush for Katrina...Obama and Biden had chance to shift funds for the Bridge to Nowhere to Katrina relief...and voted AGAINST it in favor of the bridge.

Now that Alaska is front and center in the news again, it is a good time to catch up on a favorite story, The Bridge to Nowhere, using the Washington Post US Congress Votes Database.

Though Gov. Palin originally supported the earmark spending on the Ketchikan bridge (“to nowhere), she eventually killed the project, choosing to spend Federal money on other infrasturcture programs.

However, Sen. Biden and Sen. Obama voted for funding the Bridge, even when given a second chance by Sen. Tom Coburn (R), who proposed shifting earmark funds to Katrina relief.

Sen. McCain did not vote on the Coburn Amendment, though he is on record as opposing the Ketchikan bridge earmark.

Link to votes record below.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/109/senate/1/votes/262/

Who really derailed the Thursday meeting?? It's coming out on the Internet now, See below.... ***Edited by Moderator***

 http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/09/26/in-wh-meeting-obama-muddied-waters/

I'm not voting for Hillary but....

know that it scares the heck outta me and others, Obama.......his middle name is hussein.....

one of the bibles say something to the effect of when the *stuff* happens (the bad stuff) - it's going to happen from the *inside out* -

but glad you are ALL so trusting.......i trust nobody 100%. 

i cannot stand ALL of these candidates this time around......

JMHO - no flames please

Then my income will just push us into that bracket.  I wonder if that will negate my entire income?  If so, I guess we may be better off if I just quit? Right now I work because I can't afford to quit.  I won't be able to afford it then either so what will I do?  I wonder how many others will be in my situation? 

FYI, we live in a small older home that we are trying to pay off so that when our two children are college-age, maybe we can afford it. We don't live extravagently by any means.  What will happen to people like us?

Just call it something besides a tax.

Who Pays for Cap and Trade?

Hint: They were promised a tax cut during the Obama campaign.Article

Cap and trade is the tax that dare not speak its name, and Democrats are hoping in particular that no one notices who would pay for their climate ambitions. With President Obama depending on vast new carbon revenues in his budget and Congress promising a bill by May, perhaps Americans would like to know the deeply unequal ways that climate costs would be distributed across regions and income groups.

Politicians love cap and trade because they can claim to be taxing "polluters," not workers. Hardly. Once the government creates a scarce new commodity -- in this case the right to emit carbon -- and then mandates that businesses buy it, the costs would inevitably be passed on to all consumers in the form of higher prices. Stating the obvious, Peter Orszag -- now Mr. Obama's budget director -- told Congress last year that "Those price increases are essential to the success of a cap-and-trade program."

Hit hardest would be the "95% of working families" Mr. Obama keeps mentioning, usually omitting that his no-new-taxes pledge comes with the caveat "unless you use energy." Putting a price on carbon is regressive by definition because poor and middle-income households spend more of their paychecks on things like gas to drive to work, groceries or home heating.

The Congressional Budget Office -- Mr. Orszag's former roost -- estimates that the price hikes from a 15% cut in emissions would cost the average household in the bottom-income quintile about 3.3% of its after-tax income every year. That's about $680, not including the costs of reduced employment and output. The three middle quintiles would see their paychecks cut between $880 and $1,500, or 2.9% to 2.7% of income. The rich would pay 1.7%. Cap and trade is the ideal policy for every Beltway analyst who thinks the tax code is too progressive (all five of them).

But the greatest inequities are geographic and would be imposed on the parts of the U.S. that rely most on manufacturing or fossil fuels -- particularly coal, which generates most power in the Midwest, Southern and Plains states. It's no coincidence that the liberals most invested in cap and trade -- Barbara Boxer, Henry Waxman, Ed Markey -- come from California or the Northeast.

Coal provides more than half of U.S. electricity, and 25 states get more than 50% of their electricity from conventional coal-fired generation. In Ohio, it totals 86%, according to the Energy Information Administration. Ratepayers in Indiana (94%), Missouri (85%), New Mexico (80%), Pennsylvania (56%), West Virginia (98%) and Wyoming (95%) are going to get soaked.

Another way to think about it is in terms of per capita greenhouse-gas emissions. California is the No. 2 carbon emitter in the country but also has a large economy and population. So the average Californian only had a carbon footprint of about 12 tons of CO2-equivalent in 2005, according to the World Resource Institute's Climate Analysis Indicators, which integrates all government data. The situation is very different in Wyoming and North Dakota -- paging Senators Mike Enzi and Kent Conrad -- where every person was responsible for 154 and 95 tons, respectively. See the nearby chart for cap and trade's biggest state winners and losers.

Democrats say they'll allow some of this ocean of new cap-and-trade revenue to trickle back down to the public. In his budget, Mr. Obama wants to recycle $525 billion through the "making work pay" tax credit that goes to many people who don't pay income taxes. But $400 for individuals and $800 for families still doesn't offset carbon's income raid, especially in states with higher carbon use.

All the more so because the Administration is lowballing its cap-and-trade tax estimates. Its stated goal is to reduce emissions 14% below 2005 levels by 2020, which assuming that four-fifths of emissions are covered (excluding agriculture, for instance), works out to about $13 or $14 per ton of CO2. When CBO scored a similar bill last year, it expected prices to start at $23 and rise to $44 by 2018. CBO also projected the total value of the allowances at $902 billion over the first decade, which is some $256 billion more than the Administration's estimate.

We asked the White House budget office for the assumptions behind its revenue estimates, but a spokesman said the Administration doesn't have a formal proposal and will work with Congress and "stakeholders" to shape one. We were also pointed to recent comments by Mr. Orszag that he was "sure there will be enough there to finance the things that we have identified" and maybe "additional money" too. In other words, Mr. Obama expects a much larger tax increase than even he is willing to admit.

Those "stakeholders" are going to need some very large bribes, starting with the regions that stand to lose the most. Led by Michigan's Debbie Stabenow, 15 Senate Democrats have already formed a "gang" demanding that "consumers and workers in all regions of the U.S. are protected from undue hardship." In practice, this would mean corporate welfare for carbon-heavy businesses.

And of course Congress is its own "stakeholder." An economy-wide tax under the cover of saving the environment is the best political moneymaker since the income tax. Obama officials are already telling the press, sotto voce, that climate revenues might fund universal health care and other new social spending. No doubt they would, and when they did Mr. Obama's cap-and-trade rebates would become even smaller.

Cap and trade, in other words, is a scheme to redistribute income and wealth -- but in a very curious way. It takes from the working class and gives to the affluent; takes from Miami, Ohio, and gives to Miami, Florida; and takes from an industrial America that is already struggling and gives to rich Silicon Valley and Wall Street "green tech" investors who know how to leverage the political class.

and with only a high school diploma. I also believe in Christian values - the actual ones, not the ones that Dobson, Buchanan, et al., supposedly represent.  I do not get offended at the terms because I KNOW many uneducated women who only believe the slogans and information they get from Fox news. Trying to engage them in conversation results in heated statements like the terrorists are walking down every street and we need to fear, fear, fear.  I know that I actively investigate the issues.  Therefore, demographically, I am uneducated, but I take it upon myself to be informed. When Christians are mentioned, I am not offended because I myself can see the distortions and self-righteousness in their spokesmen.