Are you in favor of higher taxes? Do you want to continue to have the right to own a firearm and purchase the ammunition for it? Just a couple of questions that may give you your answer. There are many more but I will save those when election time gets a little closer.

 

Do you make over 250,000.00? If not I assume you will choose Barack Obama since that group will get a tax cut. 95% of working Americans will pay less in taxes. So, are you in favor of lower taxes? If so Barack is your man.

 

How many bills did he introduce in the US Senate or the Illinoise Senate to repeal the right to own firearms?

Are you in favor of higher taxes? Do you want to continue to have the right to own a firearm and purchase the ammunition for it? Just a couple of questions that may give you your answer. There are many more but I will save those when election time gets a little closer.

 

Cville, I love you, but do you have any links to back up this scare tactic?

So you got nothin'??

 

:confused:

 

Didn't quite follow that...you'll have to elaborate. I guess I'm a little slow.

Do you make over 250,000.00? If not I assume you will choose Barack Obama since that group will get a tax cut. 95% of working Americans will pay less in taxes. So, are you in favor of lower taxes? If so Barack is your man.

If he doesn't mind, let me try and clarify what cvillecat was trying to say:

 

Obama's tax plans is to put massive taxes on the rich. Many of us believe that taxes on the rich are both A) harmful to the economy; B) passed down to the consumer; and C) is employing class welfare. Now, specifically:

 

A) High taxation of anyone (ESPECIALLY the rich) are bad for the economy. Those very wealthy have more incentive to "hide" their money in tax shelters, overseas, etc. which slows down the availability of loanable funds (interest rates go up, investment projects become more expensive, etc.) which often time slows down economic growth (which in turn hurts everyone, ESPECIALLY the poor- the reason why America's poor are so much better off is because, coupled with extreme American generosity, our economy has grown tremendously and the poor benefit from that through more jobs, new meds, etc.) Secondly, non-corporations are not held as separate entities from their owners, and many of these companies, while it seems that they have a lot of $$$, would be what some would call small businesses. Whereas corporations have the resources to find tax loopholes and such, these businesses don't, and they often go bearing a lot of the tax burden. It is for this reason that small business owners will vote predominantly for the R's (as well as others)

 

B) If we tax the huge corporations, are they going to continue to operate as before large taxes were implemented? No- they are either going to make up for lost profits by raising prices, leave the market (creating deadweight loss, which is bad for everyone), or find ways around it. None of these solutions helps the problem.

 

C) Class welfare. I simply don't know why the rich should have to pay more taxes. It isn't fair. I think that everyone should pay the same percentage, or at least a similar percentage.

 

So, you may be right when you say that Obama's plan will have us paying less directly in Federal Income taxes, you may be right, but I think that we will feel it more in other areas.

:confused:

 

Didn't quite follow that...you'll have to elaborate. I guess I'm a little slow.

 

What are the positions that make him an idealogue? You said he was, I asked to name a position and went on the show how his position on a particular issue had changed.

 

FWIW even if he is lying it makes him a pragmatist. Idealogues will not even say what it takes to get elected -

Are you in favor of higher taxes?

 

From: Standardnewswire.com

 

Barack Obama's Higher Taxes Agenda

Obama Record of Voting for Higher Taxes Equals Failed Judgment

 

"While hardworking families are hurting and employers are vulnerable, Barack Obama has promised higher income taxes, Social Security taxes, capital gains taxes, dividend taxes, and tax hikes on job creating businesses. In fact, during just three years in the U.S. Senate, Barack Obama has already voted 94 times for higher taxes. Barack Obama doesn't understand the American economy and that's change we just can't afford."

 

BARACK OBAMA'S PLATFORM OF HIGHER TAXES WILL FURTHER WEAKEN OUR ECONOMY

 

Barack Obama Has Proposed A Slew Of Tax Increases:

 

Barack Obama Has Called For Higher Income Taxes, Social Security Taxes, Capital Gains And Dividend Taxes, And Corporate Taxes, As Well As "Massive New Domestic Spending." "Obama's transformation, if you go by his campaign so far, would mean higher income taxes, higher Social Security taxes, higher investment taxes, higher corporate taxes, massive new domestic spending, and a healthcare plan that perhaps could be the next step to a full-scale, single-payer system.

 

· Barack Obama Also Called For A Tax On Coal And Natural Gas. Obama: "What we ought to tax is dirty energy, like coal and, to a lesser extent, natural gas." ("Q&A With Sen. Barack Obama," San Antonio Express-News, 2/19/08)

 

· Barack Obama Called For A Windfall Profits Tax On Oil Companies. Obama: "I think it is appropriate for us to impose a windfall profits tax on our oil companies." (Sen. Barack Obama, Remarks At A Campaign Event, Charlotte, NC, 5/2/08)

 

"[Obama] Wants To Raise Taxes Even Above The Levels Of The Clinton Era, Including A Huge Increase In The Payroll Tax." (Editorial, "The Obama We Don't Know," The Wall Street Journal, 6/4/08)

 

If Barack Obama Is Elected To The Presidency And Democrats Get A 60-Vote Majority In The Senate, Taxes Will Go Up. "What will happen to the U.S. economy if Barack Obama wins the presidency and he's backed by a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate? Taxes will go up." (Rich Karlgaard, Op-Ed, "Where Will Taxpayers Hide?" Forbes, 6/16/08)

 

Barack Obama's Plan To Raise Taxes During An Economic Downturn Would Only Further Weaken Our Economy:

 

CNBC's Maria Bartiromo Asked Obama: "Why Raise Taxes At All In An Economic Slowdown? Isn't That Going To Put A Further Strain On People?" (CNBC's "Closing Bell," 3/27/08)

 

In The United States Senate, Barack Obama Has Repeatedly Voted For Higher Taxes

 

Barack Obama Voted At Least 94 Times For Higher Taxes In The U.S. Senate. (RNC Research)

 

· To Date, Barack Obama Has Voted For A Tax Increase Approximately Once Every Five Days Congress Has Been In Session. (RNC Research; The Library Of Congress Website, thomas.loc.gov, Accessed 6/8/08)

 

Barack Obama Voted In Favor Of The Democrats' FY 2009 Budget, Which Would Raise Tax Rates For Americans Earning As Little As $31,850:

 

Obama Voted Twice In Favor Of The Democrats' FY 2009 Budget Resolution. (S. Con. Res. 70, CQ Vote #85, Adopted 51-44: R 2-43; D 47-1; I 2-0, 3/14/08, Obama Voted Yea; S. Con. Res. 70, CQ Vote #142: Adopted 48- 45: R 2- 44; D 44- 1; I 2-0, 6/4/08, Obama Voted Yea)

 

The Democrats' Budget Would Raise Taxes On Individuals Earning As Little As $31,850. "Under both Democratic plans, tax rates would increase by 3 percentage points for each of the 25 percent, 28 percent and 33 percent brackets. At present, the 25 percent bracket begins at $31,850 for individuals and $63,700 for married couples. The 35 percent bracket on incomes over $349,700 would jump to 39.6 percent." (Andrew Taylor, "Presidential Hopefuls To Vote On Budget," The Associated Press, 3/13/08)

 

In The Illinois State Senate, Barack Obama Had A Record Of Voting For Higher Taxes

 

In The State Senate, Barack Obama Supported "Hundreds Of Tax Increases." ABC's Terry Moran: "[O]bama was considered a reliable liberal Democratic vote in Illinois. For instance, voting for most gun control measures, opposing efforts to ban so-called partial birth abortions and supporting hundreds of tax increases." (ABC's "Nightline," 2/25/08)

 

In 2004, Barack Obama Voted For A $304 Million Tax Increase On Businesses In Creating The Tax Shelter Voluntary Compliance Act. (H.B. 848, Illinois Senate Floor Third Reading, Passed 30-28-1, 5/20/04, Obama Voted Yea; Dave McKinney, "Blagojevich Threatens Up To 5,000 State Layoffs," Chicago Sun-Times, 5/21/04)

 

· The Legislation "Triggered A Huge Outcry From Business Groups," Which Contended It Would "Drive Companies Out Of State" And Cost Jobs. "The governor's bid to raise taxes and fees by close to $400 million and reel in another $300 million-plus in corporate tax breaks has triggered a huge outcry from business groups, which contend the moves will drive companies out of state and cause Illinois to lose jobs." (Dave McKinney and Leslie Griffy, "Blagojevich Threatens Up To 5,000 State Layoffs," Chicago Sun-Times, 5/21/04)

 

In 2003, Barack Obama Voted For A Bill "That Raised A Huge Number Of Fees And Taxes" On Businesses And Licenses. "Obama voted for a bill during the 2003 Illinois General Assembly legislative session that raised a huge number of fees and taxes for businesses and licenses to cover day-to-day expenses of state government." (Terrence L. Barnich, Op-Ed, "4 Partisan Questions For Obama," Chicago Tribune, 7/29/04)

 

· The Legislation Negatively Impacted Illinois' Trucking Industry, Costing The State 25,000 Licensed Trucks In 2005. "Almost 17,000 fewer commercial trucks and 2,700 fewer trucking companies have been registered in Illinois for 2005, fueling the trucking industry's claim that Gov. Rod Blagojevich is driving businesses out of the state with his new fees and business taxes." (Brian Wallheimer, "Governor's New Fees Are Driving Trucking Firms Out Of Illinois, Industry Says," St. Louis Post- Dispatch, 5/5/04)

 

In 2003, Barack Obama Voted To Tax Natural Gas Purchased Outside Of Illinois. (S.B. 1733, Bill Status, http://www.ilga.gov, Accessed 2/11/08; S.B. 1733: Concurrence In House Amendment #4, Passed 31-27-00, 5/31/03, Obama Voted Yea)

 

· The Natural Gas Tax Made Natural Gas More Expensive For Industrial Buyers Such As Manufacturers. "The natural gas tax. A new policy under Blagojevich's budget will make natural gas more expensive to industrial buyers. Currently, Illinois offers an exemption on the sales tax paid for natural gas, but the new budget ends that exemption, a move that could become a major expense for steel mills and other factories that use large quantities of natural gas." (Kevin McDermott, "Area Dodged Legislative Hit On Schools, Roads," St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 6/8/03)

 

· Barack Obama Voted For The Natural Gas Tax, Which Threatened Jobs, At The Same Time That Illinois Was Leading The Nation In Jobs Lost. "Just as harmful to the state's economy are the large taxes on natural gas brought from out-of-state suppliers and the rolling stock sales tax. Both of these taxes will negatively affect important businesses as well as the employees who are dependent on these Illinois companies. I have received phone calls and letters from all sectors of the business community who reported that the projected loss of revenues due to these increased taxes and fees may well cause them to close their facilities in Illinois and move to a more business-friendly surrounding state while still serving Illinois customers. Illinois leads the nation in jobs lost. We cannot afford to drive more businesses from our state." (State Rep. Carolyn Krause, Op-Ed, "Increase Tax Incentives, Not Taxes For Businesses," Chicago Tribune, 6/13/03)

 

In 1999, Barack Obama Voted In Favor Of S.B. 1028 To Create The Illinois First Infrastructure Program, Which Raised 146 Taxes And Fees. (S.B. 1028: Senate Floor Third Reading, Passed, 58-0-0, 3/23/99, Obama Voted Yea; S.B. 1028: Senate Conference Committee Report, Passed, 42-17-0, 5/21/99, Obama Voted Yea; Editorial, "Jack Ryan Woefully Unprepared For Attack On Obama," The State Journal-Register, 4/18/04)

I thought Obama was running against McCain?

 

Through the years, there have been soooo many influential and policy changing vice presidents such as.......and.........that guy. Other than being a lousy hunter and avid statesman for the cause of heart disease, can you remember any groundbreaking feats accomplished by Dick Cheney in the last eight years? I'll bet you don't need to use a second hand to count them.

 

Vice-president is to politics what the first base coach is to baseball. Who was the last first base coach who won or lost a baseball game? Anyone?

What makes Barack Obama more credible and qualified than Sarah Palin?

 

If you're among those who can't vote for McCain because his VP is "unqualified", can you please tell me what makes the democratic presidential candidate more qualified than the republican VP? What has Obama done as a senator that is more impressive than Palin's work as governor?

 

 

Obama has demonstrated that he has a grasp on the major issues facing the country (domestic and foreign policy) and he can articulate a coherent position on them. Now, you may not agree with his positions, but at least he can explain them in a way that displays an understanding, a logical thought process, and a conclusion. Palin has not shown that she has the foggiest idea about complex domestic and foreign policy subjects.

 

Did you see Palin's response to the question Katie Couric asked her about the $700 billion financial system bailout?

 

COURIC: Why isn't it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families who are struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries; allow them to spend more and put more money into the economy instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess?

 

PALIN: That's why I say I, like every American I'm speaking with, were ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health-care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy, helping the—it's got to be all about job creation, too, shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. So health-care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans. And trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, scary thing. But one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today, we've got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that.

 

 

:confused: This is absolute nonsense. What the hell is she talking about? I could name a dozen people in this forum who could give an infinitely better answer than that, without any coaching!

 

Do we actually want someone backing up John McCain (who, let's be honest, is a bit of a geezer) who can't answer a straightforward question about the most serious financial crisis this country has faced since the Depression?

What are the positions that make him an idealogue? You said he was, I asked to name a position and went on the show how his position on a particular issue had changed.

 

FWIW even if he is lying it makes him a pragmatist. Idealogues will not even say what it takes to get elected -

 

It makes sense now. You confused me with someone else. :thumb:

Do you make over 250,000.00? If not I assume you will choose Barack Obama since that group will get a tax cut. 95% of working Americans will pay less in taxes. So, are you in favor of lower taxes? If so Barack is your man.

 

How many bills did he introduce in the US Senate or the Illinoise Senate to repeal the right to own firearms?

How is that true when 40% of working americans don't pay federal tax?

I thought Obama was running against McCain?

 

Through the years, there have been soooo many influential and policy changing vice presidents such as.......and.........that guy. Other than being a lousy hunter and avid statesman for the cause of heart disease, can you remember any groundbreaking feats accomplished by Dick Cheney in the last eight years? I'll bet you don't need to use a second hand to count them.

 

Vice-president is to politics what the first base coach is to baseball. Who was the last first base coach who won or lost a baseball game? Anyone?

 

Thanks. That was one of the underlying points of the thread. It seems crazy that a VP candidate has completely taken over this election...and one of the biggest criticisms against her (lack of experience) is comparable to the presidential candidate of the criticizing party. It's insane.

Obama has demonstrated that he has a grasp on the major issues facing the country (domestic and foreign policy) and he can articulate a coherent position on them. Now, you may not agree with his positions, but at least he can explain them in a way that displays an understanding, a logical thought process, and a conclusion. Palin has not shown that she has the foggiest idea about complex domestic and foreign policy subjects.

 

Did you see Palin's response to the question Katie Couric asked her about the $700 billion financial system bailout?

 

 

 

 

:confused: This is absolute nonsense. What the hell is she talking about? I could name a dozen people in this forum who could give an infinitely better answer than that, without any coaching!

 

Do we actually want someone backing up John McCain (who, let's be honest, is a bit of a geezer) who can't answer a straightforward question about the most serious financial crisis this country has faced since the Depression?

 

So, as I said earlier, it's all about what they say and how they say it now, as opposed to looking at how effective they have been in previous positions.

 

Sorry. That just doesn't work for me. My weighing system is bass ackwards...

I posted this in the other thread and I think it is apropos here. If it isn't logical enough let me know.

 

 

It's my opinion that people do indeed place too much emphasis on "experience." If experience were important there would be apprenticeships to the President or a Constitutionally mandated amount of specific service required. Having been an executive doesn't make a person more likely to be a better President. Having the right ideas and having the right intangibles to implement them are far more important. At least, that's my opinion.

 

Palin's experience is arguably comparable with Obama's. But, when Palin can't articulate a single cogent thought on the bailout or foreign policy and attempts to mitigate concerns about it with the idea that because of Alaska's geographic relationship to Russia she's somehow experienced in the area I can't help but feel a bit insulted. Even when she has attempted a to-the-point answer she's pre-empted and contradicted McCain's stances. You can point at Obama's stammering and vocal pauses all day, but at least knows the major arguments, which side he advocates, and why.

 

We've had only three interviews with Palin and they've all been poor, most especially the interviews outside of friendly territory. The Couric interview was embarrassing. If these were simple coincidences or if she is capable of better then the campaign wouldn't go to such lengths to shield her from questions.

So, as I said earlier, it's all about what they say and how they say it now, as opposed to looking at how effective they have been in previous positions.

 

Sorry. That just doesn't work for me. My weighing system is bass ackwards...

 

I have no doubt that Palin is competent enough to be Governor of Alaska and the mayor of Wasilla. It's just a big jump between leader of an iceberg and the leader of the world. She's in over her head and anyone who doesn't see that or doesn't want to admit it has their head in the sand.

So, as I said earlier, it's all about what they say and how they say it now, as opposed to looking at how effective they have been in previous positions.

 

It's not about rhetoric for me. When asked about problems with democracy in the Middle East vis-a-vis Hamas, she rambled on about Ahmadenijad and knowing who our allies are. I'm sorry, but that is beyond ridiculous to be on a national ticket for the highest office and not be able to discuss what is arguably the most pressing foreign policy issue of this and future administrations. Keep in mind, democracy is one of the reasons for invading Iraq, the reason a fundamentalist group has power in countries neighboring Israel, and, yes, why Ahmadenijad is President of Iran (though the Ayatollah is the supreme power). Yet, no thoughts? No conversation?

 

Here is her quote:

Yeah, well especially in that region, though, we have to protect those who do seek democracy and support those who seek protections for the people who live there. What we're seeing in the last couple of days here in New York is a President of Iran, Ahmadinejad, who would come on our soil and express such disdain for one of our closest allies and friends, Israel ... and we're hearing the evil that he speaks and if hearing him doesn't allow Americans to commit more solidly to protecting the friends and allies that we need, especially there in the Mideast, then nothing will.

Edited September 29, 200817 yr by Habib