2008 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: Obama (D-IL) vs. McCain (R-AZ)

[Jeebus]

Is it safe to asume that you are just as upset at the enormous sums of money proposed to be spent by McCain on Bush's "foolish and envious visions of grandeur" in Iraq, or is only Democratic spending a problem?

Yes, I am. However, I am more worried about my government, which I faithly pay 1/3 of all my income to, continually giving it to people who are too seemingly too lazy to be responsible for themselves anymore.

The war in Iraq is a mistake, but money spent on defense, which does employ hundreds of thousands of soldiers, helps put bread on the table for said soldiers. My tax dollars to help bailout my next door neighbor is doing nothing to help his welfare - but only to keep his "extravagant" lifestyle.

I also noted that you did not apportion any blame to the lenders and hedge fund operators who lied and failed to safeguard investors' funds for these mortgages, thereby costing taxpayers billions in bank bailouts, but I'm sure that was merely an oversight.

Typical reply. Lets not blame those who made bad decisions based on faulty information and bad promises - let's go after the big corporations that provided said information and promises. That just opens yet another door to the "its not my fault - someone made me do it - I'm a weak minded idiot" argument. I guess there's money in the bank in your line of work for defending those who would rather blame someone else for their problems.

I was raised to be responsible for myself. I knew what I could afford when I went house shopping. I bought within my budget. That's why I live in freakin' BFE! I should have just bought next you Red so you and your more successful neighbors could just bail my lazy ass out.

Its what my neighbors are doing.

[RedScare]

Yes, I am. However, I am more worried about my government, which I faithly pay 1/3 of all my income to, continually giving it to people who are too seemingly too lazy to be responsible for themselves anymore.

The war in Iraq is a mistake, but money spent on defense, which does employ hundreds of thousands of soldiers, helps put bread on the table for said soldiers. My tax dollars to help bailout my next door neighbor is doing nothing to help his welfare - but only to keep his "extravagant" lifestyle.

Interesting that you make this comparison. I've been meaning to comment on the effect of welfare checks. The US economy is 70% consumer driven. When consumers spend more, the economy grows. Poor people, more so than any other group, spend their money as fast as they get it. Therefore, welfare checks, faster than any other form of government stimulus, makes its way into the economy faster and more completely. The recipient may be a deadbeat, but increasing welfare payments spurs the economy, not hurts it. This was the theory behind the economic stimulus checks that went out earlier this year. Problem was, since much of the money did not go to the poor, it did not all get spent, lessening the impact. Even soldiers, one-third of whom are deployed overseas, do not get that money into the economy as fast or as completely as the welfare moms, though we can all agree that the taxes paid to them are more palatable.

Now, trying to link defense spending and soldier paychecks, as if the paychecks are the whole, or even the majority of the spending, is just misleading. Much of that money goes to contractors, many of whom have incorporated offshore to avoid taxes. That defense spending makes less of an impact, percentagewise.

Typical reply. Lets not blame those who made bad decisions based on faulty information and bad promises - let's go after the big corporations that provided said information and promises. That just opens yet another door to the "its not my fault - someone made me do it - I'm a weak minded idiot" argument. I guess there's money in the bank in your line of work for defending those who would rather blame someone else for their problems.

I was raised to be responsible for myself. I knew what I could afford when I went house shopping. I bought within my budget. That's why I live in freakin' BFE! I should have just bought next you Red so you and your more successful neighbors could just bail my lazy ass out.

Its what my neighbors are doing.

Didn't absolve the borrowers of responsibility. Just thought you ought to include everyone who contributed to the crisis. By leaving out the major players...many of whom are now being indicted for fraud...you make it seem as though you have not even read about the crisis and its causes, but merely repeated a partisan's one-sided rants.

BTW, get an accountant. If you pay 33% of your money to the government, you're getting ripped off...badly.

[20thStDad]

What issues are important to you? Maybe that would lead to a more productive discussion than referring to other people's posts as one-sided junk.

Definitely not everyone's posts are one-sided junk, but there was a run on this thread for a while where it seemed like nothing but.

I enjoyed membag's graph about taxes - taxes is definitely an important issue, along with education, and definitely the economy. Seems like any route you take with the economy takes from one thing to help another. So I'm still trying to figure out what I think and what they plan to do.

[TJones]

Interesting that you make this comparison. I've been meaning to comment on the effect of welfare checks. The US economy is 70% consumer driven. When consumers spend more, the economy grows. Poor people, more so than any other group, spend their money as fast as they get it. Therefore, welfare checks, faster than any other form of government stimulus, makes its way into the economy faster and more completely. The recipient may be a deadbeat, but increasing welfare payments spurs the economy, not hurts it. This was the theory behind the economic stimulus checks that went out earlier this year. Problem was, since much of the money did not go to the poor, it did not all get spent, lessening the impact. Even soldiers, one-third of whom are deployed overseas, do not get that money into the economy as fast or as completely as the welfare moms, though we can all agree that the taxes paid to them are more palatable.

Now, trying to link defense spending and soldier paychecks, as if the paychecks are the whole, or even the majority of the spending, is just misleading. Much of that money goes to contractors, many of whom have incorporated offshore to avoid taxes. That defense spending makes less of an impact, percentagewise.

Didn't absolve the borrowers of responsibility. Just thought you ought to include everyone who contributed to the crisis. By leaving out the major players...many of whom are now being indicted for fraud...you make it seem as though you have not even read about the crisis and its causes, but merely repeated a partisan's one-sided rants.

BTW, get an accountant. If you pay 33% of your money to the government, you're getting ripped off...badly.

Those contractors have employees to pay. and materials to buy, and shipping to pay for. Goes back to my point that defense spending benefits ALOT of people in this country, so it should be as much as possible. How about instead of cutting defense spending we cut spending on paying for illegals medical bills, and incorporating bilingual classes in schools or school lunch programs for illegals ? There's a whole lot of dollars there that can used to benefit kids who actually KNOW the English language already.

[sarahiki]

anybody see the news today that Palin's 17-year-old daughter is pregnant? As if things weren't bad enough on that ticket...

[TJones]

anybody see the news today that Palin's 17-year-old daughter is pregnant? As if things weren't bad enough on that ticket...

C'mon now, it was inevitable, afterall, there are only 3 things to do in Alaska, and you can only fish and drink for so long.

[webdude]

Those contractors have employees to pay. and materials to buy, and shipping to pay for. Goes back to my point that defense spending benefits ALOT of people in this country, so it should be as much as possible. How about instead of cutting defense spending we cut spending on paying for illegals medical bills, and incorporating bilingual classes in schools or school lunch programs for illegals ? There's a whole lot of dollars there that can used to benefit kids who actually KNOW the English language already.

Ya right, our defense spending benefits a lot of ppl, like mostly war profiteers, war equipment manufacturers, and the military folks. Only few clueless still buy that slippery slope preemptive 'defense' approach is really helping us, as they continue dishing out the biggest welfare program in history.

[memebag]

anybody see the news today that Palin's 17-year-old daughter is pregnant? As if things weren't bad enough on that ticket...

I wonder what Day Quayle thinks about that.

[wernicke]

Well... now they can start calling her a devoted grandmother too.

Seriously though, quite the unfortunate situation for her daughter to be national news for getting pregnant (although at 5 months pregnant, the Palin and McCain people must have known... right?). Sucks for her.

[sarahiki]

Well... now they can start calling her a devoted grandmother too.

Seriously though, quite the unfortunate situation for her daughter to be national news for getting pregnant (although at 5 months pregnant, the Palin and McCain people must have known... right?). Sucks for her.

It really is unfortunate. And I'd be the first to say it's none of our business, and it's the girl's choice what to do. EXCEPT, Palin wants to limit everybody's choice so that all of us, and our daughters, can only make the limited choice her daughter did. No birth control, no abortion. Choose: abstinence, or being a parent at age 17. So I'd say that what's happening in her family is very much our business. Get outta my bedroom and I'll get outta yours, Palin.

Damn, these people make me angry.

[memebag]

Seriously though, quite the unfortunate situation for her daughter to be national news for getting pregnant (although at 5 months pregnant, the Palin and McCain people must have known... right?). Sucks for her.

I just read an article where the McCain folks say they knew. They say it isn't an issue, and it shouldn't be, but it will be. One has to wonder what's going on inside McCain's head. Is he just throwing this election away? Is it some revenge fantasy against the GOP? Was the activation code from his Viet Cong mind-control masters somehow garbled?

[20thStDad]

It really is unfortunate. And I'd be the first to say it's none of our business, and it's the girl's choice what to do. EXCEPT, Palin wants to limit everybody's choice so that all of us, and our daughters, can only make the limited choice her daughter did. No birth control, no abortion. Choose: abstinence, or being a parent at age 17. So I'd say that what's happening in her family is very much our business. Get outta my bedroom and I'll get outta yours, Palin.

Damn, these people make me angry.

Hehe, I love this comment by Palin:

(source http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/20...alin-says.html)

Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family.

I want to see photoshop (or real) pictures of her with the shotgun within the hour.

Yes, McCain is throwing this on purpose. It seems so easy now that you watch it implode.

[TJones]

Ya right, our defense spending benefits a lot of ppl, like mostly war profiteers, war equipment manufacturers, and the military folks. Only few clueless still buy that slippery slope preemptive 'defense' approach is really helping us, as they continue dishing out the biggest welfare program in history.

You and Red, say "war profiteers" like they are the ones building the guns and bullets by hand themselves. These "war profiteers" keep whole communities alive. Go tell the folks, working at the old Stewart and Stevenson plant where they make the mine sweeping troop transports over in Sealy, that they are all warmongers and profiteers, and see if you can make it out the door. Preemptive defense is what brought the wall down, Preemptive defense is what keeps most other radical countries at bay when they know we are allies with their intended target. Preemptive defense does work, as eveident to your being able to type your feeble minded statements on that little Dell sitting in front of you.

[houstonmacbro]

Well... now they can start calling her a devoted grandmother too.

Seriously though, quite the unfortunate situation for her daughter to be national news for getting pregnant (although at 5 months pregnant, the Palin and McCain people must have known... right?). Sucks for her.

Of course they knew. Or if they didn't, his team didn't do much to vet this pick.

[westguy]

I think they just Googled her name before they picked her.

[TJones]

Hehe, I love this comment by Palin:

(source http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/20...alin-says.html)

I want to see photoshop (or real) pictures of her with the shotgun within the hour.

Yes, McCain is throwing this on purpose. It seems so easy now that you watch it implode.

C'mon 20thSt., it ain't that hard to raise a family these days, at least according to Palin. You can have 5 kids, even with one being a special needs child and still be second in command of the finest nation on Earth. At least Palin's daughter waited until she was 17 to have a child, that shows she waited until she was of legal age to have sex, unless, wait a sec. what is her birthday again ? Only in America.

[houstonmacbro]

I think they just Googled her name before they picked her.

Naw, it had to be something without computers. Remember, McCain doesn't use one.

I think he used a dart board.

[20thStDad]

C'mon 20thSt., it ain't that hard to raise a family these days, at least according to Palin. You can have 5 kids, even with one being a special needs child and still be second in command of the finest nation on Earth. At least Palin's daughter waited until she was 17 to have a child, that shows she waited until she was of legal age to have sex, unless, wait a sec. what is her birthday again ? Only in America.

Yeah I'm totally not judging the daughter - she made her decision and has to live with it, that's enough for her. I can just envision her mom with the shotgun, and it amuses me. I'm not saying I'm any better than them, 2 of my cousins had these types of wedding in my family (at least they were in or right out of college). Good times.

[memebag]

You and Red, say "war profiteers" like they are the ones building the guns and bullets by hand themselves. These "war profiteers" keep whole communities alive. Go tell the folks, working at the old Stewart and Stevenson plant where they make the mine sweeping troop transports over in Sealy, that they are all warmongers and profiteers, and see if you can make it out the door. Preemptive defense is what brought the wall down, Preemptive defense is what keeps most other radical countries at bay when they know we are allies with their intended target. Preemptive defense does work, as eveident to your being able to type your feeble minded statements on that little Dell sitting in front of you.

Are you arguing that we should keep fighting needless wars because they create jobs? You can't think of any other way to create jobs, maybe something that doesn't kill people and waste resources?

[TJones]

Are you arguing that we should keep fighting needless wars because they create jobs? You can't think of any other way to create jobs, maybe something that doesn't kill people and waste resources?

Not saying that at all. We are talking about preemptive defense, and defense spending. Reagan had 8 years of record defense spending without any war. Bush may or may not have avoided a war, but the shells and tanks and humvees are being used and spent, so NEW ammo and vehicles have to be built, do they not ? Don't necessarily need a war to have to spend on defense, but if we had a huge surplus going into this war, would these "war profiteering" people still have jobs ? There are alot more people than just those working in the "wra profiteers" plants. You have independent truckers, you got contractors that have to build more space to house and build for defense. You have people working at the Mickey D's across the street to feed those in the factories. You have to buy gas for the war machines, and on, and on, and on.

You say "needless war" , I say necessary to remove an evil dictator who was gonna have to be dealt with at one point or another.

[barracuda]

Not saying that at all. We are talking about preemptive defense, and defense spending. Reagan had 8 years of record defense spending without any war. Bush may or may not have avoided a war, but the shells and tanks and humvees are being used and spent, so NEW ammo and vehicles have to be built, do they not ? Don't necessarily need a war to have to spend on defense, but if we had a huge surplus going into this war, would these "war profiteering" people still have jobs ? There are alot more people than just those working in the "wra profiteers" plants. You have independant truckers, you got contractors that have to build more space to house and build for defense. You have people working at the Mickey D's across the street to feed those in the factories. You have to buy gas for the war machines, and on, and on, and on.

You say "needless war" , I say necessary to remove an evil dictator who was gonna have to be dealt with at one point or another.

Why not put that money into something that most might consider more beneficial to society, like jump starting the alternative energy industry, improving access and quality of education in our country? I'm not saying we don't need defense spending, but maybe not the high levels you suggest. It seems like a lot of defense spending goes to dead-end projects and over-priced military equipment. There are other ways to improve our strength as a country than just dumping billions into military defense.

[TJones]

There are other ways to improve our strength as a country than just dumping billions into military defense.

I agree that the money could have been much better spent elsewhere if a war hadn't broken out. Hind sight is always 20/20. I also won't get into a debate about whether it is the Govt's. responsibility to find alternative fuels, when there is nothing wrong with the fuels we have currently, there already exists several threads for this. I agree that mine and your children DESERVE the best education possible, hence one of my solutions in an earlier post. I would love to live in your Utopian society of building strength in other ways, but I just don't think that Iran or North Korea is gonna want to have an Academic Decathalon to determine if Israel should be "wiped off the face of the Earth." You don't want to bring a knife to a gunfight when dealing with these fanatical crazies.

[webdude]

You and Red, say "war profiteers" like they are the ones building the guns and bullets by hand themselves. These "war profiteers" keep whole communities alive. Go tell the folks, working at the old Stewart and Stevenson plant where they make the mine sweeping troop transports over in Sealy, that they are all warmongers and profiteers, and see if you can make it out the door. Preemptive defense is what brought the wall down, Preemptive defense is what keeps most other radical countries at bay when they know we are allies with their intended target. Preemptive defense does work, as eveident to your being able to type your feeble minded statements on that little Dell sitting in front of you.

Don't try to justify unnecessary wars with necessary ones, preemptive defense may work, but not slippery slope preemptive wars, which this one is pretty obviously, except to the clueless. To throw money to empty jobs and projects that does nothing productive for the US is welfare. And you are right that even without the war, we would still be throwing money at 'defense', which is also welfare considering that our military budget encompasses what other countries use combined. You can e-imitate me cowardly behind the computer all you want, I can handle myself pretty well, even with welfare war profiteers.

The 'keeps other countries at bay' and 'remove dictator' argument is as as slippery slope as can be, and very reckless and irresponsible, by this line of reasoning, we can also justify nuking 50% of the world, because then, we will be 50% safer.

[TJones]

The 'keeps other countries at bay' and 'remove dictator' argument is as as slippery slope as it can be, and very reckless and irresponsible, by this line of reasoning, we can also justify nuking 50% of the world, because then, we will be 50% safer.

Glad to see you are finally starting to come around.

So, you are trying to deny that our arsenal DOESN'T keep others at bay ? If we nuked 50% of the world, we would be 100% safer. I think actually only nuking about 20% of the world, that the others would get it together and fly right, but I would never advocate nuking !

[ricco67]

Good lord! I'm gone for only a day and you guys chatted up THIS storm?

I'm sure Ed is enjoying the hits on the system.

While I would have more pleased with Romney or Hucklebee, I'm quite content with this selection overall.

My main problem with the current McCain Campaign is that they seem to have no real energy plan (amazingly enough. Paris Hilton's plan made more sense than either sides) and opening up Alaska My main issue with Palin is her wanting creationism taught in schools along with no sex education except for abstinence. The fact that she strongly opposes abortion is another thing that worries me, but I don't think either president will be able to touch R v. W without committing political suicide.

The NRA thing isn't an issue for me, give me full registration and keep the guns out of criminals' hands and I'll be content. The other so called issues are something I'm going to have to look into more before I could make a reasonable comment on it.

[TJones]

Good lord! I'm gone for only a day and you guys chatted up THIS storm?

I'm sure Ed is enjoying the hits on the system.

While I would have more pleased with Romney or Hucklebee, I'm quite content with this selection overall.

My main problem with the current McCain Campaign is that they seem to have no real energy plan (amazingly enough. Paris Hilton's plan made more sense than either sides) and opening up Alaska My main issue with Palin is her wanting creationism taught in schools along with no sex education except for abstinence. The fact that she strongly opposes abortion is another thing that worries me, but I don't think either president will be able to touch R v. W without committing political suicide.

The NRA thing isn't an issue for me, give me full registration and keep the guns out of criminals' hands and I'll be content. The other so called issues are something I'm going to have to look into more before I could make a reasonable comment on it.

Ricco, there is absolutely NO WAY that she could, with a straight face, advocate abstinence. What, with 5 kiddos and a knocked-up 17 year old. What kind of message does that send ? "I can't teach my own daughter to stay away until she is married, so why should your kids listen to me ?"

[ricco67]

Ricco, there is absolutely NO WAY that she could, with a straight face, advocate abstinence. What, with 5 kiddos and a knocked-up 17 year old. What kind of message does that send ? "I can't teach my own daughter to stay away until she is married, so why should your kids listen to me ?"

Then I believe she has a problem. Teaching abstinence is living in a fantasy land.

[sarahiki]

Ricco, there is absolutely NO WAY that she could, with a straight face, advocate abstinence. What, with 5 kiddos and a knocked-up 17 year old. What kind of message does that send ? "I can't teach my own daughter to stay away until she is married, so why should your kids listen to me ?"

Of course she can! She does, and she will. That's what's killing me about this. She opposes sex education other than abstinence, and she certainly opposes birth control. And you know that that doesn't mean she opposes it just for her family. It means she will work hard to make those the rules as far as her power allows her to.

Which is why I will not accept that her daughter's situation is a private matter. She won't allow others the privacy to make personal decisions with their bodies, so why should we respect her family's privacy?

Sorry, I am really having trouble getting off this particular soapbox today.

[webdude]

Glad to see you are finally starting to come around.

So, you are trying to deny that our arsenal DOESN'T keep others at bay ? If we nuked 50% of the world, we would be 100% safer. I think actually only nuking about 20% of the world, that the others would get it together and fly right, but I would never advocate nuking !

You are actually trying to pass these slippery slope reasons as valid? How about this one, if we expand our domestic social programs, ppl won't be stuck in a rut, and therefore they won't cooperate with outside terrorists for money and we will end up being safer, therefore let's expand our social programs to keep America safe from bombings.

Of course she can! She does, and she will. That's what's killing me about this. She opposes sex education other than abstinence, and she certainly opposes birth control. And you know that that doesn't mean she opposes it just for her family. It means she will work hard to make those the rules as far as her power allows her to.

Which is why I will not accept that her daughter's situation is a private matter. She won't allow others the privacy to make personal decisions with their bodies, so why should we respect her family's privacy?

Sorry, I am really having trouble getting off this particular soapbox today.

Hypocrisy is a necessary virtue for republican nomination

[TJones]

Of course she can! She does, and she will. That's what's killing me about this. She opposes sex education other than abstinence, and she certainly opposes birth control. And you know that that doesn't mean she opposes it just for her family. It means she will work hard to make those the rules as far as her power allows her to.

Which is why I will not accept that her daughter's situation is a private matter. She won't allow others the privacy to make personal decisions with their bodies, so why should we respect her family's privacy?

Sorry, I am really having trouble getting off this particular soapbox today.

Sara, Palin CAN'T enforce the rule in her own home, how the Hell can she expect the rest of the country to get on board with it ???

You are actually trying to pass these slippery slope reasons as valid? How about this one, if we expand our domestic social programs, ppl won't be stuck in a rut, and therefore they won't cooperate with outside terrorists for money and we will end up being safer, therefore let's expand our social programs to keep America safe from bombings.

So that's your big plan? Become the welfare department for the whole friggin' world ? Sure, that will go over like a fart in church.

FYI, people get "stuck in rut" when they know the welfare dept is gonna send that Govt. check on the first and fifthteenth. They have no motivation to go get a job. So, take away their checks and they either get motivated to get a job, or they can get motivated to go live in a van.....down by the river !

Oh, and as soon as I see the video of Bin Laden saying that he bombed the WTC and Pentagon because he didn't get his Govt. cheese, I will agree with you about "expanding our domestic social programs". You obviously haven't the faintest clue why terrorists try to "martyr" themselves. I'll let you in on a little secret though, it ain't about money.