Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

So, if you buy this "very small relationship with Acorn in 1982" ....sm

Posted By: sm on 2008-10-14
In Reply to: Acorn - me

ergo, from Obama's own mouth: "My executive experience is from being a community organizer (with Acorn)" --

Now, that sounds to me, from your post, that he was involved with a group called "Project Vote" --

Let's connect the dots here.....kinda sorta like the scandal hitting the fans lately with all the voter registration fraud that Acorn's involved with now, doncha think?


Sounds like what Obama was doing, way back in 1982?


Nice executive experience.


Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.....like I'm going to be sick again.....


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

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

Just like you buy his very small relationship with
!!
In 1982
My best friend had an abortion. She was 16. She went to an abortion clinic, paid for the procedure, and had the procedure done. There was no need way back then for parental consent. Some children will discuss things like this with their parents, others won't.

As far as clinics, kids can just lie about their age anyway. I've never been ID'd at the doctor's office.


Actually, Obama is NOT "very eloquent" when he tries to speak
Lots of people have noticed this and commented on it. He becomes quite ordinary, hesitant, and as some have said, "professorial".

I'm sure you must have too...or you're simply too bedazzled by pixie dust to notice that Obama is really quite ordinary.
Joint Chiefs Chairman "Very Positive" After Meeting with Obama
Joint Chiefs Chairman 'Very Positive' After Meeting With Obama
-

By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, November 30, 2008; A01


Adm. Michael Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, went unarmed into his first meeting with the new commander in chief -- no aides, no PowerPoint presentation, no briefing books. Summoned nine days ago to President-elect Barack Obama's Chicago transition office, Mullen showed up with just a pad, a pen and a desire to take the measure of his incoming boss.


There was little talk of exiting Iraq or beefing up the U.S. force in Afghanistan; the one-on-one, 45-minute conversation ranged from the personal to the philosophical. Mullen came away with what he wanted: a view of the next president as a non-ideological pragmatist who was willing to both listen and lead. After the meeting, the chairman "felt very good, very positive," according to Mullen spokesman Capt. John Kirby.


As Obama prepares to announce his national security team tomorrow, he faces a military that has long mistrusted Democrats and is particularly wary of a young, intellectual leader with no experience in uniform, who once called Iraq a "dumb" war. Military leaders have all heard his pledge to withdraw most combat forces from Iraq within 16 months -- sooner than commanders on the ground have recommended -- and his implied criticism of the Afghanistan war effort during the Bush administration.


But so far, Obama appears to be going out of his way to reassure them that he will do nothing rash and will seek their advice, even while making clear that he may not always take it. He has demonstrated an ability to speak the lingo, talk about "mission plans" and "tasking," and to differentiate between strategy and tactics, a distinction Republican nominee John McCain accused him of misunderstanding during the campaign.


Obama has been careful to separate his criticism of Bush policy from his praise of the military's valor and performance, while Michelle Obama's public expressions of concern for military families have gone over well. But most important, according to several senior officers and civilian Pentagon officials who would speak about their incoming leader only on the condition of anonymity, is the expectation of renewed respect for the chain of command and greater realism about U.S. military goals and capabilities, which many found lacking during the Bush years.


"Open and serious debate versus ideological certitude will be a great relief to the military leaders," said retired Maj. Gen. William L. Nash of the Council on Foreign Relations. Senior officers are aware that few in their ranks voiced misgivings over the Iraq war, but they counter that they were not encouraged to do so by the Bush White House or the Pentagon under Donald H. Rumsfeld.


"The joke was that when you leave a meeting, everybody is supposed to drink the Kool-Aid," Nash said. "In the Bush administration, you had to drink the Kool-Aid before you got to go to the meeting."


Obama's expected retention of Robert M. Gates as defense secretary and expected appointment of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of state and retired Marine Gen. James L. Jones as national security adviser have been greeted with relief at the Pentagon.


Clinton is respected at the Pentagon and is considered a defense moderate, at times bordering on hawkish. Through her membership on the Senate Armed Services Committee -- sought early in her congressional career to add gravitas to her presidential aspirations -- she has developed close ties with senior military figures.


Some in the military are suspicious of "flagpole" officers such as Jones, whose assignments included Supreme Allied Commander at NATO, Marine commandant and other headquarters service, and who grew up in France and is a graduate of Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service. But Jones also saw combat in Vietnam and served in Bosnia.


"His reputation is pretty good," one Pentagon official said. "He's savvy about Washington, worked the Hill," and at a lean 6-foot-4, the former Georgetown basketball player "looks great in a suit."


Although Jones occasionally and privately briefed candidate Obama on foreign policy matters -- on Afghanistan, in particular, as did current deputy NATO commander Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry -- he is not considered an intimate of the president-elect.


But as Obama's closest national security adviser, or at least the one who will spend the most time with him, Jones is expected to follow the pattern of two military predecessors in the job, Brent Scowcroft and Colin L. Powell, who injected order and discipline to a National Security Council full of strong personalities with independent power bases.


Although exit polls did not break out active-duty voters, it is virtually certain that McCain won the military vote.


In an October survey by the Military Times, nearly 70 percent of more than 4,000 officers and enlisted respondents said they favored McCain, while about 23 percent preferred Obama. Only African American service members gave Obama a majority.


In exit polls, those who said they had "ever served in the U.S. military" made up 15 percent of voters and broke 54 percent for McCain to 44 percent for Obama. "As a culture, we are more conservative and Republican," a senior officer said.


Obama has said he will meet with the chairman of the Joint Chiefs as well as the service chiefs during his first week in office. At the top of his agenda for that meeting will be what he has called the military's "new mission" of planning the 16-month withdrawal timeline for Iraq. Senior officers have publicly grumbled about the risk involved.


"Moving forward in a measured way, tied to conditions as they continue to evolve, over time, is important," Mullen said at a media briefing four days before his Nov. 21 meeting with Obama. "I'm certainly aware of what has been said" prior to the election, he said.


The last Democratic president, Bill Clinton, clashed with the chiefs during his first sit-down with them when they opposed his campaign pledge to end the ban on gays in the military. The chiefs, some of whom held the commander in chief in thinly veiled contempt as a supposed Vietnam draft dodger, won the battle, and Clinton spent much of his two terms seen as an adversary.


But Mullen came away from the Chicago talk reassured that Obama will engage in a discussion with them, balancing risks and "asking tough questions . . . but not in a combative, finger-pointing way," one official said.


The president-elect's invitation to Mullen, whom Obama previously had met only in passing on Capitol Hill and whose first two-year term as chairman does not expire until the end of September, was seen as an attempt to establish a relationship and avoid early conflict. While some Pentagon officials believe an Iraq withdrawal order could become Obama's equivalent of the Clinton controversy over gays, several senior Defense Department sources said that Gates, Mullen and Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of the military's Central Command, are untroubled by the 16-month plan and feel it can be accomplished with a month or two of wiggle room.


These sources noted that Obama himself has said he would not be "careless" about withdrawal and would retain a "residual" force of unspecified size to fight terrorists and protect U.S. diplomats and civilians. The officer most concerned about untimely withdrawal, sources said, is the Iraq commander, Gen. Ray Odierno.


Even as the Iraq war continues, defense officials are far more worried about Afghanistan, where they see policy drift and an unfocused mission. With strategy reviews now being completed at the White House and by the chairman's office, an internal Pentagon debate is well underway over whether goals should be lowered.


Although Gen. David McKiernan, the U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has requested four more U.S. combat brigades, some Pentagon strategists believe a smaller presence of Special Forces and trainers for Afghan forces -- and more attention to Pakistan -- is advisable.


Bush's ideological objective of a modern Afghan democracy, several officials said, is unattainable with current U.S. resources, and there is optimism that Obama will have a more realistic view.


A number of senior officers also look with favor on Obama's call for talks with Iran over Iraq and Afghanistan, separating those issues from U.S. demands over Tehran's nuclear program.


One of the biggest long-term military issues on Obama's plate will be the defense budget, currently topping 4.3 percent of gross domestic product once war expenditures are included.


Obama has said he will increase the size of the Army and the Marine Corps, finding savings in the Iraq drawdown and in new scrutiny of spending, including on contractors, weapons programs and missile defense.


"They know the money is coming down," a Pentagon official said of the uniformed services, and many welcome increased discipline.


But it's neither the military's nature nor its role to volunteer the cuts, the official said. "It's for Congress and the administration to say 'Stop it.' "


Polling analyst Jennifer Agiesta and research Editor Alice Crites contributed to this report.


I understand the relationship between the two.
Iran is also trying to "figure out" how to advance other useful satellite technologies such as broad band, broadcast and telephony. Military applications of those technologies go hand-in-hand there just as they do in any other developing countries. My point is that as long as the US does not take a leadership role in nuclear disarmament in the region (starting with Israel), we have no right to expect them NOT to go there with it.

We can't have it both ways. Iran is leading the way toward competitive development in the region and we have to decide in what environment that progress is going to take place. No one can possibly say what they are willing or not willing to do in terms of nuclear disarmament in the absence of dialog, but one thing is certain. They have a vested interest in seeing Israeal disarmed and it's impossible to say just how far they would be willing to go to achieve that goal until the sabers return to their sheaths and the dialog begins in earnest.
Obama has a passport but he has no relationship with any...
world leaders. McCain has both (a passport and relationship with world leaders).
Don't talk politics unless you have a very good relationship...sm
with them. If there are any rifts now, talking politics will just make it worse.

I talk from experience with a family of dems. If they don't love you unconditionally....well, just don't talk politics. They'll never listen to you.


I did hear him explain his relationship with Ayers

other than just saying he lived in the neighborhood and it seemed logical enough to me.


I really believe we are on the brink of a Civil War.  I fully expect that if the 95% of blacks who support Obama don't get their man in office they'll pitch a major hissy fit.  And don't think the white supremists will sit idlely by if Obama is elected.  The biggest difference as I see it is 95% of whites don't support McCain.  So with that 95% it isn't hard for me to believe this race is about race whether anyone wants to admit it or not.


It's been said that the South will rise again and I believe truer words were never spoken although I don't think this Civil War will be anything like the last one.


This is just my opinion so need in calling me a racist.  I've already said I'll take a chance on the unknown and vote against McCain.


And it is the truth. He did have a working relationship with Bill Ayers....
and he is a socialist. Neither of those things are lies. Just like Obama says about his ads about McCain...."fair game." So why is it fine for him to do the robocalls (which, by the way, any of the Obama fans here on this board could have written) and not fine for McCain? Methinks your hypocrisy might be showing?
I have to take a small exception....
I understand why there was no half staff declaration for Katrina victims and there was for VA Tech. There is a difference in a natural disaster, where loss of life is expected to some degree (not condoned, not accepted, but expected) and a crazy going nuts and murdering 32 people in a heinous horrible bloodbath. I can see why the half-staff for VTech. There has never, as far as I have known, been half-staff for victims of natural disaster, and Hurricane Andrew killed many as well. Although there was no paper half-staff declaration, I did hear personally on many occasions President Bush use some of the same words in talking about the Katrina victims...and he did declare a national day of remembrance for the Katrina victims, which he did not do for the VA Tech victims.
Small and slanted...?
I saw the video. How can a video be small and slanted? It was broadcast on several channels though certainly not CNN. How can that be slanted? A video is what it is. The country producing it did not dispute it, France and Germany did not dispute it. Please tell me how that can be slanted. It is also a fact that they found the intact 747 in the Iraqi desert. That WAS reported on CNN. How can that be slanted? It was there. What possible other purpose could it have to be there? I can see you ignoring a video of two men, but a 747???

You are wrong about the unrest...most of the unrest in Iraq is foreign fighters. If you would watch one of the small and slanted reports as you call them, if only occasionally, you might actually get the BIG picture you keep referring me to. Several of the sectarian fighters have now turned on the foreign fighters instead of each other. Hopefully more of that will occur.

I suppose it will be easy enough for you, if we pull out of Iraq now, to just let the Sunnis and Shias have at it and take all the innocents who just want to work and live with them, aka Viet Nam. For whatever reason, whether you agree with it or not, we are there and the situation is what it is. We can turn tail and run like we did in Viet Nam, or we can finish it.

As to facts to form theories...your facts and theories are no stronger than mine. And again I say...it should not be a far right, a right, a liberal or a far left thing. It should be an American thing. I am an American first. I don't give a good gosh darn about politics. I do give a good gosh darn about this country and keeping it safe for all of us, no matter what direction we lean in. Would that we all felt that way.
I am teaching a small ESL

course in grammar.  Two examples I use


President Bush flew BACK from vacation to sign the Terri Schiavo legislation.


President Bush flew OVER the Katrina victims.


 


It seems to help them understand better.


 


 


small business
Me and DH own a small recreation business, and quite frankly, a few years ago, when the gas prices started getting out of control is when our business started hurting. We are taxed individually, not as a corporation, so I don't see anything in O's tax plan that would hurt us. Maybe help us a bit. Most small business owners aren't making a large fortune, those are the big corporations who have so many dam@ loopholes anyway!
Just one small question?
What about your tax dollars going to support ILLEGAL aliens?  You okay with that?    My husband and I paid a little over $15,000 last year in taxes, 85% of our Social Security benefits were taxed because of our other income. I would hardly consider us freeloaders and I wouldn't mind a little tax cut myself.    Get real, none of us are going to get a tax cut and all of working (and retired) AMERICAN taxes are going to go up.  Thank your Republicans as well as the Democrats.  They all put us another $750 billion and counting in debt.  Somebody is going to have to pay it or you can start worrying about communism when China forcloses on their loans!!!!!!  You people need to take the shades off your eyes.
How about Rev. Otis Small
from Trinity Church (Rev Wright's former church). Obama says he is the wisest man he knows. Oh my gosh, this is beyond scary! Whatup indeed!!!
small message
It's easy to be gracious and appear to reach out to the other side - when you are the winner! I only fear what the OBama masses would have done if their candidate had lost .. a lot more than booing during the concession speech I fear.

I do agree on the republican party comments, however.

But I also think there were a lot of uneducated people who really thought through WHAT OBama said and consider how and when he was actually going to do any them, and even further, exactly how they will be paid for?

oh well. I will support him - he is our new president .. and will also do a lot of praying for our government ..

Small message ..
I will be fair..

I am patriotic ..

I (so far)am guaranteed freedom of speech and the freedom to have ideas of my own ...

I will not sit back and act like he is My Lord and Savior and I should worship his feet or the ground he walks on.

I will give him a chance .. truly

Just my 2 cents.
Small, harmless example
From a journalist, not an opinion personality:

Neil Cavuto:

– We do not pick and choose these rallies and protests. We were there for the Million Man March, even though, as I pointed out, it turned out to be well shy of a million men. [Fox Business, 4/11/09]

and

– You seem to pick and choose what events and protests were worthy. Million Man March, worthy, even though it wasn’t a million men, it was half a million. We covered that because we thought it had a worthy message too. [Fox News, 4/8/09]

Fox News could not possibly have covered the Million Man March.


Breaking out my small violin
I hope by the time you go through any real persecution you will have grown some skin. 
And he wasn't after any small change either. I think..sm
the prolife, anti-gay hoopla is just a front for some of em.

Kind of like *yeah yall keep that song and dance going over there, while I get this money over here.*
I live in a very small town. sm

My state is a red state, but my hometown newspaper carries one column and that is Molly Ivins.  You don't get much further left than that.  I agree.


A couple of small things...
Intolerance is not something I associate with being liberal. Perhaps I need to adjust my thinking.

My compassion extends to all those hurting and in need, just like yours does. However, as you well know and seem so jaded by, one person cannot focus on every area, every part of humanity, every issue. You must choose your issue and throw all your energy into it. I would say that the anti-war arena is pretty well covered, wouldn't you? The anti-abortion arena, however, is not. And that is where I am moved to place my focus. Because there are people affected by war who CAN speak for themselves. They DO have the ability to at least try and protect themselves. Unborn children do not have that luxury. They are totally at the mercy of others, and if you want to talk about a horrendous way to die...there is no more horrendous way to die than being aborted. In a way, it is the ultimate betrayal if someone does not defend the most vulnerable among us. That is why I chose that issue and that is why I will speak out against it with my last breath.

You call me supercilious, yet post something like the nature of conservatism to have lack of empathy? A rather broad brush stroke I would say. How you can criticize something else for having no empathy and turn your back on the unborn...there is NO balance in that to see.

There is no spin, piglet. The facts are obvious. You have chosen to exclude the most needy and vulnerable and even go to the extreme of being highly critical of me for doing so. No spin there.

It is obvious you call things the way you perceive them, and have intolerance for any who do not agree with your perception. Again, that is not a trait I associate with liberals. And again..perhaps I need to adjust my thinking.

No one is asking you to apologize, piglet. These last few posts...amazing. If it were aimed AT liberals I would swear it WAS Ann Coulter. Especially the "I call things the way I perceive them, I don't sugar coat it and I won't apologize for it." VINTAGE Ann Coulter. :-)
She is what small-town America is all about
Loved the speech, love the candidate!!!
Those small-town values are
EXACTLY what the big bad world needs to take it on.  Resolute, firm in beliefs, freedom, country first. 
As an IC, I'm considered a small business, so
but not really sure which will benefit me the most. ICs must all think like small businesses and consider taxes based on that, not as individual taxpayers.

I actually don't agree with either one on all tax issues, so I'm still on the fence. I doubt Barack will be able to enact and MAINTAIN the tax cuts he has promised. I agree with giving seniors a break on taxes when they are on a limited budget, for example, but Barack has said seniors making less than $50K. That means if they make $49K (which is more than I make, BTW), they don't have to pay ANY taxes?? Lower that amount a tad and I might see it as reasonable, but a senior making more than me, receiving senior discounts, Medicare, etc., and then not having to pay taxes. Seems a little off balance somehow.

And simplifying tax preparation isn't one of my top priorities, I have TurboTax for that. A lot of his other tax proposals pretty much mirror McCain's so I don't see much difference there, like the R&D, small biz, etc. I like his ideas on taxes, but IMO, his website is full of promises that he will have a VERY hard time fulfilling.

I like that Barack addresses credit card practices. I feel this is a BIG problem. Good creditworthy people are getting screwed by shady practices of credit card companies left and right. I don't see where McCain has addressed this.

I like McCain's summer gas tax holiday, lowering gas prices in the summer, since historically, gas prices always climb through summer especially around the holidays. I also like his HOME plan, as this would make the people truly affected by subprime loans eligible to trade their mortgage. But probably what I like most is McCain's view on healthcare - restoring control to the PATIENTS. I know people that live in countries with Government provided healthcare, and they do not have any more control over that than any of us with paid insurance policies do. I feel the only way to change this issue is to crack down on the insurance companies, force their hands to make premiums more affordable, make them honor their premium terms, limit their restrictions on patients and pre-existing conditions, and do not allow them to tell patients what procedures they can and can't have and what doctors they can and can't see.
If it is a small business, then it is exempt from this - nm
x
I agree, it is not everyone, it is actually just a small portion (sm)
of people who are showing their racist bents..the problem is that some of them are angry and dangerous. And I know there are many races in our country but this particular "battle" is between white and black... and it goes both ways.
It is happening now on a small scale....
we have one refundable tax credit now that I know of...the earned income tax credit. What Obama wants to do is expand that dramatically, and that is most definitely new. That credit does not stretch to that entire 30-40% of people who don't pay federal income taxes. Obama's plan WILL. Because those people comprise part of that 30-40%. How can he give a tax CUT to 95% of Americans otherwise? THAT is my point. Why on earth tax small businesses and yes, even large corporations MORE, so you can give people on welfare a refundable tax credit check?? In my opinion, extending refundable tax credits to people already on the government t*t is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Yes, we have a refundable tax credit now that benefits some persons. What Obama proposes is taking that from where the earned income tax credit is all the way to the bottom. That is his starting from the bottom theory. How many times have we heard that?
Not yet. Voting at about 4 p.m. EST. I live in a small
town. We have two separate voting places with 3 machines at each place, so hopefully not a long line, but I will stay there until my vote is in. Cannot wait.
Maybe if small businesses like MT companies

receive a tax credit as a reward/incentive to keep jobs INSIDE the USA, that policy will help American MTs.


That's Obama's policy.


And think of the small business owner...sm
The SBO who has a small staff, who then would have a jump in payroll but no jump in income, unless of course he raises prices, but the SBO already has trouble competing with the huge box/chain stores. Raising the min wage ends up screwing the SBO who are the backbone of free enterprise in this country.
Sure, but I'd rather be in a small room with a caterpillar!
nm
Waterboarding is only a small part...(sm)

of what they have done.


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0521-01.htm


How do you assume that my world is small?
How can I believe the rest of your comment and your whole state of mind when you state such nonsense?

What is this supposed to mean, I quote, '....so find a different name to call me?'

I cannot recall having ever met you on this board, Victoria, or whatever your user name is?


I live in small-town America (less than 3,000), and I
We don't believe those with all the cash should get to call all the shots, skip paying taxes, and get rewarded for shipping American jobs to foreign countries.
No, mine doesn't, but many small businesses...
including mid range transcription business who operate as S corporations, the entire income from their business is in that bracket and taxed as personal income. It is going to hit small businesses extremely hard. And I don't think it is fair that they have to pick up the tab to pay for tax CUTS for people who are already in the lowest bracket. I don't think that's right, I don't think that is fair, and it will result in businesses closing or laying off workers. So tell me what pray tell does that accomplish?
small message, church lady...
The most significant thing to me in the entire video is "Vote your conscience." That speaks volumes.
a small town dweller with hemorroids.

nm


 


By a very small majority. We dems do not march in ...sm
lock-step like the repubs seem to do.
Obama wants to grow small businesses

I can stick my head in the sand and pretend I don't know what this garbage is all about but anyone with half a brain would know you can't grow a business when you continue to pay pay pay through the nose AND give it to someone who has no motivation to do crap with their life.  


It's not propaganda. I know one small business owner...sm
who says he will have to do this, should he get over that hurdle of his business growing to being over 250,000, he will then have to pay more taxes under Obama, and won't be able to. I believe him when he tells me this. I've heard other similar stories in the news (and not Joe the plumber either).

Why must you call it propaganda, when some of us know real, live people who run these businesses, who will be forced to cut back on employees, and/or decide not to expand. They won't be able to put money back into their business to grow it because they'll be taxed to death. and may eventually go out of business or go elsewhere, because they won't be able to afford being in business under Obama.

These are real people, with real concerns, not propaganda.


That's why a lot of them are voting for McCain next month.
Moot point and small reminder..
Not ALL democrats voted for Obama, and some wouldn't appreciate your congrats.
I hope you are not that small minded. You may quit your job
any time you like and apply for welfare and see if you get it.  Maybe, Bush will let you draw it now.
Speaking of "geography". Israel only has that small
nm
Buried on pg 6 of our newspaper is this small headline

"Congress kills plan to recover bonuses for Wall Street execs." The below link is from the AP press.


http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/STIMULUS_BONUSES?SITE=NCBER&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT


http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/STIMULUS_WILL_IT_WORK?SITE=NCBER&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT


I live in a small town and the others don't start til later.
Yes, I'd call packed to capacity and a total of four of these parties in a town of 25,000 pretty good.

What you're trying to do here is painfully transparent. Stop embarrassing yourself.
Obama wants to give small businesses tax relief not...sm
raise their taxes. He wants taxes raised on large corporations who are making record profits, paying their executives millions in salaries and perks per year. Also you will find that most companies offshore to countries where they pay pennies on the dollar to workers rather than pay Americans a living wage. These countries are happy not to charge them high taxes because those few pennies feed their people.
How can you call it giving small business tax breaks...
that are minute at best, and then raise their personal tax (the money they take care of their families with) at a higher rate? Makes absolutely no sense.

He wants to raise taxes even more on large corporations...who employ what percentage of the US work force? That makes us even less competitive with foreign countries in the labor market. What part of that can you not understand? When you raise their taxes they either offshore or downsize. That is the nature of the beast. And when he says "record profits" you just buy that and he won't give specifics, because if he did, you would see the fallacy of the thinking. What he needs to be reporting is the profit margin...not the "profit." It costs multimillions to operate an oil company. And "big oil" is a major employer and a huge part of many states' economies...Oklahoma, Texas, Alaska, to name a few. Oil companies and the companies that provide goods and services to oil companies...HUGE part of the nation's economy. Do all the employees of oil companies and the companies that provide goods and services to oil companies...do all of them deserve to get the ax because the people at the top of the chain make a lot of money?

You should check out what the big union higer-ups make. Certainly more than their members will ever see. But you don't hear Democrats talking about disparity in income in unions, now do you?
10% across-the-board. Rich or poor. Big company or small.
X
we had a small business, you deduc everything including the kit sink! sm
coming out 250K after deductions you are sitting pretty. Deductions include payroll, etc. You are the owner of a company and with clear earnings after deductions of 250K you are better off than the majority of families in the US.
ACORN
I heard on the news that ACORN also received some money in the bailout package, put in by democrats!! Guess who was involved with ACORN...