The messages you are viewing
are archived/old. To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database Taking money out
is actually a good idea, since there has been talk of bank runs under the current situation THAT IS NOW HAPPENING UNDER GEORGE W. BUSH.
Why do you "whiners" think that taking money from
nm
Socialism....taking all the goods, money, property, etc....
and putting it in control of the community...socialism. That is how Chavez got into power. Most do refer to Venezuela as a "socialist state." Reuters called it the "socialist government of Chavez." Trouble is, "the community" is not controlling anything. It never seems to reach that point, because the nut at the top gets the power and wants to keep the power, so control says with the government and the "community" is just stuck...dictatorship. It would appear that a good many Venezuelans recognized what was happening (although trying to make himself President for life is a huge clue) and are trying to get the country to vote down the referendum. Cuba is another example. I cannot think of a single instance where socialism did not evolve into a dictatorship. They already have a dictatorship in Venezuela; the referendum would just be a rubber stamp. He has already shut down media that did not agree with him. Still, if the referendum fails it could erupt into a civil war. I hope not, for the peoples' sake.
What dribble and so uninformed, he isn't taking money from small businesses, geez.
Common sense should tell you he is not saying he is taking the money from small business to give to the the middle class.
he is saying he wants to tax fairly the wealthy (businesses over 250,000) and probably take some of the loop holes away. Lower the middle class taxes (if there is one anymore) so we can breathe. Former statesmen have said it is dangerous to put all the money in so few hands, it develops corruption. Don't just read the headlines, read between, on top, in depth, etc. McCain jumped on that statement to win votes. He is wealthy, what makes you think he understands you? The reason our jobs are going overseas is the present adminstration has given all these corporations tax breaks to do so - saying it builds global democracy - it didn't work, it just made the corporations richer). i don't care who you vote for but Ms. Piggy would be better than McCain and dum, DE dum dum.
Yet we get on this board and moan and whine about not getting paid enough and companies are spening millions buying other transcription companies over our backs you think taxing them fairly is socialism.
I am through with this board, it is sad so many want 4 more years of the same. Keep working for pennies while benefits are taken from you, lines per are decreased. Do you think getting less for voice is fair when it takes almost the same amount of time to do it and make half? Do you think the company is taking that much of a hit? Yet they are forcing it so it most be a benefit to them. They are laughing all the way to the bank while you eat the feathers.
Obama Has Democrats Taking Notice...sm
My personal pick for 08.
Obama's Profile Has Democrats Taking Notice
Popular Senator Is Mentioned as 2008 Contender
By Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 18, 2006; Page A01
EAST ORANGE, N.J. -- Barack Obama was standing before a packed high school auditorium when he noticed a familiar face in the crowd -- none other than singer Dionne Warwick. He paused, flashed a mischievous smile, then let loose with a perfectly on-key performance of the opening line of her hit song Walk On By.
The audience of 300 students and adults roared with approval.
Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was sworn into office as a U.S. Senator on January 4, 2005. There is speculation that the popular former Illinois state senator will run for president in 2008.
Photos
Sen. Barack Obama
Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) was sworn into office as a U.S. Senator on January 4, 2005. There is speculation that the popular former Illinois state senator will run for president in 2008.
U.S. Congress
Obama, a first-term Democratic senator from Illinois, seems to be hitting the right notes these days. During Senate recesses, he has been touring the country at breakneck pace, basking in the sudden fame of a politician turned pop star. Along the way, he has been drawing crowds and campaign cash from Democrats starved for a fresh face and ready to cheer what Obama touts as a politics of hope instead of a politics of fear.
His office fields more than 300 requests a week for appearances. One Senate Democrat, curious about Obama's charisma, took notes when watching him perform at a recent political event. State parties report breaking fundraising records when Obama is the speaker.
The money he is bringing in for fellow Democrats is shaping up as an important influence on 2006. And the potential Obama is demonstrating as a political performer -- less than two years after his elevation from the Illinois state legislature -- is prompting some colleagues to urge him to turn his attention to 2008 and a race for the presidency. Obama has made plain he is at least listening.
I think he is unique, said Illinois's senior senator, Richard J. Durbin (D). I don't believe there is another candidate I've seen, or an elected official, who really has the appeal that he does. As for the 2008 presidential race, I said to him, 'Why don't you just kind of move around Iowa and watch what happens?' I know what's going to happen. And I think it's going to rewrite the game plans in a lot of presidential candidates if he makes that decision.
From **Stars and Stripes** Obama: Taking the fight
Obama: ‘Taking the fight’ to Afghanistan
New president will have his hands full with war that is eclipsing conflict in Iraq
By Drew Brown , Stars and Stripes European edition, Thursday, November 6, 2008
A worsening war in Afghanistan — and a growing Taliban and al-Qaida insurgency in the tribal areas of nuclear-armed neighboring Pakistan — will loom large on the agenda for President-elect Barack Obama during the next four years.
On the campaign trail, Obama argued that the war in Iraq has drained troops and resources from the battlefield in Afghanistan, causing the situation there to deteriorate. He has described Afghanistan as "the war we need to win," and he has pledged to send at least two more brigades of U.S. troops to reinforce the 70,000 U.S. and NATO forces already serving in the country.
Obama has also pledged to press NATO allies to contribute more forces, and he has said he will step up training for the Afghan army and police, as well as increase non-military aid to Afghanistan by $1 billion.
"When I am president, we will wage the war that has to be won," Obama vowed, outlining his plans in an Aug. 1, 2007, speech at the Wilson Center in Washington, D.C. "(But) the first step must be getting off the wrong battlefield in Iraq, and taking the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan."
Obama has said he will not "tolerate a terrorist sanctuary" in Pakistan, and he has suggested that he will send U.S. forces on cross-border raids to eliminate high-value terrorists if the Pakistani government cannot or will not take action.
But making campaign promises is one thing. Turning them into realities on the ground is another.
Afghanistan is quickly eclipsing Iraq as the deadlier of America’s two wars. Since May, U.S. casualty figures in Afghanistan have virtually matched those in Iraq on a monthly basis, and for the past two months, more U.S. troops have died in Afghanistan than in Iraq.
At least 151 U.S. troops have died in Afghanistan so far this year, making 2008 the deadliest for U.S. forces since the war began seven years ago, according to icasualties.org. Another 104 soldiers from other countries also have died, according to the Web site. Insurgent attacks and the numbers of civilians killed in the war are also at an all-time high.
At least 626 U.S. soldiers have died in Afghanistan since the war began in 2001.
More troops urged
There are currently about 33,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, but commanders have been clamoring for more forces. U.S. Gen. David McKiernan, the commander of NATO-led troops, has said that at least 10,000 more soldiers are needed in the country, along with more helicopters, intelligence teams and logistics support.
But with 150,000 U.S. servicemembers committed to Iraq, a significant drawdown is going to have to occur there first, Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, warned last June. And analysts caution that sending more troops to Afghanistan is not likely to have the same effect as it did in Iraq, where the so-called troop "surge" last year played a significant role in reducing violence.
"My sense is that we’re not going to troop-surge our way out of Afghanistan," said Stephen Biddle, a former Army War College professor and now a senior fellow on defense policy at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, D.C. "The problem is that the troop ratio needs are too much. Conventional wisdom says that there are not enough feasible reinforcements that can be sent to Afghanistan, even if you draw down fully from Iraq."
In addition to sending at least another two combat brigades to Afghanistan, Obama has said he will press other NATO countries to send more troops and that he would push for those countries that have restrictions on sending troops into combat to lift them.
But there now appears to be little appetite within NATO for either.
Britain, which has 8,000 soldiers operating mostly in Helmand province in southern Afghanistan, has said it doesn’t plan to send any reinforcements, even as it pulls its remaining forces out of Iraq. Britain has lost more than 121 soldiers in Afghanistan, the second-highest total after the United States.
Canada, which has 2,500 soldiers operating in neighboring Kandahar province, plans to pull its troops out of the province by the end of 2011. Canada has lost 97 troops so far, the third-highest total of the war.
France has about 2,600 soldiers serving in Afghanistan, and its parliament voted in September to send another 100 troops, along with more helicopters, unmanned aircraft, mortars and intelligence gathering equipment. But according to press reports from the country, polls indicate that opposition to the Afghan mission is growing. France has lost at least 24 soldiers in Afghanistan since 2002.
Of the other major NATO powers, Germany has about 3,000 soldiers operating in Afghanistan, but its troops are limited to operating north of Kabul, mostly away from combat, and Berlin has repeatedly resisted pressure from the United States and Britain to send troops south into the fighting. Germany has lost about 28 soldiers in Afghanistan, and the mission remains deeply unpopular among Germans.
"It’s probably not going to happen, in terms of caveats or numbers," said Michael E. O’Hanlon, who specializes in U.S. national security policy at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C., speaking of a larger NATO commitment.
The Pakistan problem
In addition to dealing with the war in Afghanistan, Obama is also going to have to confront a growing Taliban and al-Qaida insurgency in Pakistan’s tribal areas, which some analysts see a bigger and more important threat.
"Dealing with Pakistan, where America’s mortal foe al-Qaida is nestled alongside the Taliban, is clearly the most pressing problem we face," Bing West, a retired Marine and former assistant secretary of defense under President Reagan, wrote last week in The National Interest, a foreign policy journal.
In one of his most provocative stances of the campaign, Obama suggested that he would send U.S. combat troops into Pakistan to take out terrorist targets.
"If the United States has al-Qaida, bin Laden, (or) top-level lieutenants in our sights, and Pakistan is unable or unwilling to act, then we should take them out," Obama said, during the first presidential debate at the University of Mississippi on Sept. 26.
But the one known cross-border raid that U.S. forces conducted into Pakistan on Sept. 3 elicited strong condemnation from the Pakistani government, which threatened to open fire on any more U.S. troops who cross the border.
Pakistan has also demanded that CIA missile attacks on its territory be stopped. Missile attacks by unmanned drones operated by the CIA have gone up dramatically in recent months, as U.S. officials have complained that the Pakistani military has not done enough to go after Taliban and al-Qaida sanctuaries in the tribal areas.
The ISI, Pakistan’s powerful intelligence agency, has long-standing ties to the Taliban and other militant groups that date back to the war against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s, and the agency has funded Kashmiri militant groups in its decades-long struggle against India. Pakistan claims those ties have been severed, but many Western officials remain skeptical.
While more attention to Pakistan is generally welcomed among analysts, some warn that taking too much aggressive action in the country could actually destabilize relations with the United States and harm efforts to hunt terrorists.
Independent U.S. action should be taken "only if we have a very, very high-value target in our field of view," said O’Hanlon.
Biddle said that he would be "careful" judging from Obama’s campaign statements how aggressive he might be in Pakistan.
"It’s his way of indicating he’s not soft on terrorism," Biddle said. "(But) I would hope that as a citizen and a taxpayer that should Obama be elected, strategy reviews of these positions would take place between him and his advisers."
Bush floated the idea of re-establishing a diplomatic US interests section in Tehran last summer which for the time being has been shelved.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081004/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_iran_no_deal
Here's the no-brainer rule-of-thumb on this topic. If you wwant war, you don't negotiate with opponents. If you want peace, you sit down aat the table.
When evaluating the credibility of this ad, as yourself that basic question..."Who stands to benefit the most" by taking this position? As they have demonstrated over the past 60 years, it is in Zionist's best interest to perpetuate war in their region. They have been able to enrich their nation immensely with US taxpayer dollars and enjoy an uncontested nuclear bully status in the region as the US's most favorite global puppet. The notion that the US would promote peace or stability in the region would diminish their status exponentially and are the last nation on earth that would like to see the US play the disarmament card.
Tell me, where is Obama going to get the money for
nm
Obama has money out the
ying yang......what....he couldn't pay for his own way to see his dear grandmama....you know....the one he called a typical white person. To critical Palin's clothing expense, etc. and not look at what the others are spending as well is wrong.
BTW, who is paying for Obamarama's 2 million dollar party in Chicago come election day?
CBS follows Obama's Money...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86RAp_iuhOQ
and Obama has money to burn
AP) Democratic Sen. Barack Obama has raised $7.2 million for his presidential campaign since the first polls closed on Super Tuesday night, his campaign said Thursday, a remarkable figure that is causing concern among supporters of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Meanwhile Thursday, the Clinton campaign asked Obama to debate once a week, but he demurred.
Obama, riding a wave of fundraising from large donors and small Internet contributors, also raised $32 million in January.
Clinton acknowledged Wednesday that she loaned her campaign $5 million late last month as Obama was outraising and outspending her heading into Feb. 5 Super Tuesday contests. Some senior staffers on her campaign also are voluntarily forgoing paychecks as the campaign heads into the next round of contests.
Obama and Clinton outpaced all candidates in 2007, with each raising $100 million.
The Obama campaign said on its Web site that $7.2 million has been received since Tuesday evening. Campaign spokesmen said they were confident the figure was accurate.
Buoyed by strong fundraising and a primary calendar in February that plays to his strengths, Obama plans a campaign blitz through a series of states holding contests this weekend and will compete to win primaries in the Mid-Atlantic next week and Hawaii and Wisconsin the following week. Obama might not take lobbyist money...
but his VP certainly does.
Joe Biden’s lobbying ties
August 23, 2008
By Ed Morrissey
HOT AIR - How thoroughly did Barack Obama vet Joe Biden? After months of demonizing lobbyists, Obama selected a running mate who has taken millions in contributions from those same lobbyists Obama supposedly eschewed, at least until the DNC started running out of money. In fact, Biden’s son works as a lobbyist on Capitol Hill, accruing the kind of earmarks that Obama has both decried and pursued:
Biden has accepted $5,133,072 in contributions from lawyers and lobbyists since 2003. Obama does not accept contributions from federally registered lobbyists.
And he has one other weakness that hasn’t received much attention to date. One of Biden’s sons, Hunter, is a registered Washington lobbyist in a year in which Obama has been excoriating lobbyists and the culture of corruption in Washington. The younger Biden is a name partner at the firm Oldaker, Biden & Belair, LLP, and seems to have specialized in lobbying for just the kind of earmark spending by Congress that Obama has vowed to slash.
Also expect to hear more about Biden’s close ties with credit card companies. His largest contributor (based on total contributions by employees) over the past five years has been MBNA, the Delaware-based bank aquired in 2005 by Bank of America than until then was the world’s largest independent credit card issuer and a major supporter of the 2005 bankruptcy bill that Biden crossed the aisle to support.
Once again, I want to point out that lobbying is a Constitutionally protected exercise. The First Amendment gives Americans the right to petition Congress, and nothing prohibits or even discourages citizens from organizing in that effort to harness the power of numbers. Run ethically, the practice of lobbying fills an important role in politics.
Of course, I’m not the one declaring lobbyists persona non grata in the Democratic Party. That was Barack Obama, who declared just two months ago that lobbyists would not fund “my party”:
The Democratic National Committee will uphold the same standard: We will not take a dime from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACs. … They will not fund my party!
Take a look at the top five industries that donate to Biden as well:
Lawyers/law firms
Real estate
Retired
Securities & investment
Miscellaneous finance
Real estate and miscellaneous finance — wouldn’t that figure into the credit crisis and the housing market collapse?
It looks like Obama didn’t just throw Hope and Change under the bus, but himself right along with it. Whether this is hypocrisy or incompetence, it’s stunning either way.
Anyone actually looked at the money Obama wants
nm
Obama money uncensored.
The portraits appearing on the various denominations of US currency has not been revised since 1929 when there were 12 denominations, but 2 of those did not feature former US Presidents (Ben Franklin on the $100 bill and Salmon Chase, US Secretary of the Treasury under Lincoln on the $10,000 bill).
Since then, the $500, $1000, $5,000, $10,000 and $100,000 notes have been taken out of circulation, last printed in 1945 and discontinued in 1969, although the $5000 and $10,000 had effectively disappeared long before then. That leaves only 7 denominations currently in circulation.
Treasury Department records do not reflect the reasons these 7 statesmen were selected. By law, only the portrait of a DECEASED individual may appear on US currency and notes. That would eliminate Obama, at least for the time being.
In the unlikely event that the treasury should issue higher denominations in the future, the next one up for release would be the $500 note, unless they opt for an amount that does not follow the previous denomination sequence. Nigeria seizes money for Obama...
Nigerian anti-graft investigators have seized money raised by the head of the Nigerian Stock Exchange to support US presidential candidate Barack Obama.
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission said it would give the money back to those who attended a gala dinner in Lagos last month.
The EFCC said it had seized 74m naira ($630,000, £314,000), but said no Nigerian laws had been broken.
US political parties are not allowed to receive contributions from abroad.
Charging is not spending money...it is spending someone elses money!
When you are debt free (as we are) THEN you spend money...anything else is just going into debt. I highly doubt he pays cash for anything.
I'm taking this to the top.
x
So you are taking up for the thugs
who are keeping the rescuers from help. You are mentally deranged....very mentally deranged.
doing taking tempature???
I get it now. You figure if you spout enough of your illiteracy on the Liberal board, you will dumb us down to your level.
Taking a survey...
Anyone have any thoughts on Romney being Mormon, will it hurt, help, doesn't matter....Did he convert to Mormonism; I don't remember his father being a Mormon.
Taking this response
x
I'm taking this to the top to enlist
nm
THis is not about taking anything away from kids...they
still have access to birth control...health departments, planned parenthood, clinics, any number of places. It is common knowledge. You hear about it on television on a daily basis, and television, movies, and the internet are where most kids get their information. And frankly, listen to it much more closely than to their parents. Throwing more federal money into any kind of sex ed and/or abstinence programs to me is a waste of money. That was the original question, did I think federal funds should be used for sex ed and abstinence programs.
No, in this culture we live in today, to remove contraception would be idiotic. Sex has been reduced to "expression," having one partner for life has disappeared, multiple partners are fine, yada yada...in that kind of culture to remove birth control would be nuts. Think what the abortion rate would be if that was done...good grief.
By education and programs that doesn't mean dispensing actual birth control. At many schools kids can get condoms. Nearly every health department in the country will dispense birth control and any planned parenthood place will, and that is not going to change.
If you want to reach kids, put those programs on the internet or introduce that kind of information to the shows the kids watch all the time. If you want the information to get to them, that is where it should be covered.
Thank you for taking the time to lay it all out
They will immediately go to Palin flaming because that's all they have. They can never refute any proof made on this board because they can't find any to refute with. Instead, they keep going round and round with the only thing they can remember from TV, Palin this, Palin that.
You don't see the republicans putting down Biden because they are decent people, unlike the dems on this board who refuse to see. AND, the dems on this board know that Biden LOVES McCain and they know in their hearts Biden can't stand Obama; he already said so.
God isn't the problem....taking God out of our
=
fabulous? When he is taking away a better one?
Letting Bush's tax cuts expire? Have you done the math?
profit taking
The rules have not changed yet and the hedge funds are still running loose, betting ups, betting downs. Everything they were doing to get us into this mess is still going on and still legal. Leverage is still high.
For me, taking time every now and then
to look back and reflect on what we come from, where we're at, how far we've come and how far we have yet to go is a good thing. An Abe-Lincoln themed inauguration seems to be as appropriate of an occasion as any. I cannot pretend to understand how it feels to have the pain of slave ancestors' stories dragged up and thrust in my face, but I can speak to pain of a different sort.
The sight of hordes of GWTW southern belles all bedecked en masse in pools of pastel puke conjures up the shame I inherited from my own white ancestors. As a child, I felt plenty of it growing up in a southern metropolis in the 50s where cotton was still king and the vestiges of plantation life were still palpable and, at times, visceral. As a child, I lived in a wealthy community where some household "help" still stayed in "servants' quarters" behind the main residence (gag me). These were the days of segregation and separate but unequal when and the "N" word was still socially acceptable.
Enter MLK and the revolution of the 60s and 70s that turned our country up-side-down, thank you Jesus. The progress has been slow but steady since then, but the fact that I can still feel the stinging shame of where I came from and that you can still feel such outrage over a historical parade lets us both know that we have not yet reached the Promised Land.
When I watch the Azalea Trail Maids next Tuesday, they will not be marching toward me. They do not have the power to bring back the past and slap me in the face with it. Every step they take will be one step further away, back into a time we best not forget anytime soon, and I will be reminding myself that they are indeed GONE WITH THE WIND.
PS. I too am hoping for brisk winds that whip right past those pretty pastel pantaloons and chill them straight to the bone.
I appreciate you taking time out....(sm)
to respond to my post in such a reasonable and adult manner. Keep up the good work! You must be so proud.
Government is taking over
everything and they aren't even smart enough to run the government let alone every business in the US. I just cannot believe you Obamabotics find this okay. This is total government control going on here!!!! This is scary crap!
Thank you for taking the time
I appreciate your reasonable and well-composed argument. I do see how recent actions by this administration could be construed as a power grab, but what actions do think they should have taken instead?
Regarding the private sector argument, if a company accepts federal funding to bail them out of a financial crisis, are they still truly a private company, at least until the money is paid back? I do not agree with all the actions of this administration with respect to the financial crisis, but I do think they had to demonstrate that there are strings attached to receiving taxpayer money. (I may not agree with how they choose to about demonstrating that, however.)
So you are taking the word of
a guy who others consider a little off, Jolie's father? Not a good selection. Can you do better?
You said you had no problem taking on the Taliban...
there is no evidence THEY had anything to do with 9-11 either. Iraq had as much to do with 9-11 as the Taliban did. Both countries had Al Qaeda training camps. Both harbored Al Qaeda operatives. Saddam Hussein funded all kinds of terror operations, including bounties to families of suicide bombers. It was proven that a member of the Sadam Feyadeen met with Mohammed Atta prior to 9-11. Of course, they could have been discussing the weather. Saddam harbored the man who pushed Leon Klinghoffer and his wheelchair off the Achille Lauro...he harbored Al Zarqawi. What more do you need? Him on one of the planes? Your arguments make no sense. Basically, bottom line...you do not care if your protests hurt the effort in Iraq and thereby the soldiers fighting there..and as to soldiers dying for something they did not believe in...the vast majority are not of that mind. If you watched anything but CNN and listened to anything but liberal spin you would see the interview after interview after interview where soldiers do affirm their mission and affirm their disappointment in lack of support of some Americans.
As to Cindy Sheehan's son...other members of her family, her husband included...have said numerous times on the record that Casey Sheehan believed in the effort, and would be appalled at what his mother was doing. We do not make those things up...just because the liberal press does not report it does not mean it does not happen...oh...but I guess in YOUR world, that is true. Because you just pooh-pooh it and say that means nothing to me. Why is it that liberals are so arrogant? Why is it ALL about you? I have tried and tried to wrap my mind around that and just can't. I cannot understand what it is that makes someone disregard the lives and the mission of our military in harm's way just so they can hold a sign and call attention to THEMselves. There is nothing noble about that. The noble ones are the ones in Iraq. How profoundly sad that you cannot see that...in one breath okay to fight the Taliban, in the other just throw Iraq and our boys and girls there to the dogs. How twisted is that...sigh. So...go on about your protesting. Only call a spade a spade. It is about YOU...and making yourself feel good. It is not, nor has it ever been, for anyone else.
Thanks for taking up for me Brunson, the problem is SM
I didn't post any of these posts. Someone is playing a stupid joke and not a very funny one. However, since Lurker seems content to know me so well, I am not sure who got the real butt of the joke ;)
taking things out of context
I agree that it's not fair to take Michelle Obama's statements out of context, but then you turn around and take Cindy McCain's problem out of context. I say leave both wives alone. I know what Cindy did was illegal, so it's kind of apples and oranges, but she's worked through her recovery and worked it out with the law, so I don't think she needs to be beat over the head with it the rest of her life.
I'm taking my response to a new thread
nm
Not interested in taking this off task.
nm
He wan't taking care of a 4-mo old Down infant
nm
All the while, his supporters taking notes
X
oh, REALLY? So snipers or bombs taking out
In many ways, Christianity is even worse than Islam. And it's disgusting to see the US has been so thoroughly infested with it.
Taking a rest today.
Yes, you go ahead. Take a rest. Freedom of speech.
Taking from Peter to pay Paul.....
Well, h@ll........I suppose with this glorious reform package of Obama's, I should just go sit under a bridge, kiss my hard working years goodbye. Obama will kill this society. My husband has also worked his butt off since he was 12 years old and he definitely does not owe anyone his money. They can get off their butts and shovel dirt, dig ditches, work in a powder factory, haul hay, move furniture, dig sewages, whatever. WORK FOR A CHANGE! Live within their means. My husband did it. They wanna go to college, do like us, work your butt off and pay for your college education. Quit whining!!!
Even those families at the low end of the income bracket will be paying dearly in taxes, more than now, and they actually think they will be getting a break. Tax credits are NOT tax cuts.
Socialists are whining, sniveling, moaning, groaning....
You wanna see free money given to people who DO NOT pay taxes? If you don't contribute, don't expect anything else.
Difference in opinion is what makes horse races. I respect your opinion that the b/c is not authentic, I ask that you respect my opinion that it is.
Irregardless, I think the mayhem that would result in Obama not being inaugurated far outweighs his becoming president even IF his b/c should prove to be inaccurate. After all, we have the Congress to keep things in check although there is little comfort for me in THAT. I doubt the electoral college would dare defy the will of the people either and I would imagine all of them are a bucket full of crooks the same as all congress and other politicians.
I fear that Bush will find a reason to declare martial law and I will continue to fear that until he is OUT OF THERE. Would we really want to see that happen? Can you possibly imagine the bedlam at this 11th hour if we woke up and had no president elect? Please, I ask all of you who are trying to make this happen to stop and think what would be the result if you "win."
I did not want to see either Obama or McCain elected nor did I want to see Hillary elected or any of the other candidates. It's a fine kettle of fish we find ourselves in in any event.
And as a final note, I have no confidence in our crooky Supreme Court either. Look how THEY got in their positions.
In fact, 2 years ago, they turned a whole mountain into windmills. Who has those jobs? The company that put them there. Their guys come from another state to maintain and repair them. No locals are employed by that company. Doesn't make sense but that's the way they do it.
marks the location of current message within thread![Joe](http://www.againstobama.com/wp-content/uploads/joe_biden_lobbyists.jpg" "Joe")
