Disastro

BWHAHAHAHHA!!!! I love it! The thought has crossed my mind to do that, but then I say to myself "Nahhh...why bother? It's probably not going to change their vote anyway..."

Heh! That's what I think... Just pick your poison: Marxist Obama or Liberal McCain?

So what yer sayin' is..."they ig-nert"!

Yeah...I know... Wait! What's that sound I hear coming from Kali-forn-ia? "Baaaaa...Baaaaa..."

Yeah, that's the truth!

Oh those nasty conservatives! And for such a "racist" country...there sure are a lot of white Obama supporters. How did this happen?

Good stuff, LF!

I make $250,000 a year...and I'm a plumber when I'm not being a "hater". Shee-ah!!! As-if!!!

According to Democrat John Murtha...you must be a racist. He said there's a bunch of racists up there in PA. You're either that or one of those gun-toting religious freaks that Obama was referring to? No?

LOL!! Joe doesn't claim to make that much -- he just doesn't think those that do should get taxed by Obama. Saying it's working out for Obama doesn't make it so...on what do you base this? Speaking of Obama...he's the guys that thinks a flat tax should be 40% and a SALES tax. This idiot doesn't even know that there's a difference between a flat tax and a consumption tax! This is the guy you want to vote for? Maybe his running mate who thinks the word J-O-B-S is a three letter word? These people are a (frightening, yet somehow amusing at times) joke on every level. I can't believe they aren't at 20% in the polls. Seriously. If you are "po"...punishing those with the capital to create jobs is NOT the way to help lower income individuals and families. And don't forget, there's a healthcare factor in this too. Currently, employers provide healthcare. Lose your job...lose your healthcare. We need to be rewarding corporations and their owners -- not punishing their success. They are the drivers and movers and shakers of the economy -- as they hire and provide bennies.

I won't defend Bush on the things he doesn't deserve defending on (because, believe me, I am no Bush fan) but I'm not going to sit by and let a Democrat whitewash of the economic situation go unchallenged. We all know Barney Frank and Chuck Schumer had a lot to do with the imposition on financial institutions of granting mortgages and loans to people based on socio-economic status. The practice was put in place to make it easier for lower-income people to get loans. Many of these defaulted as they should never have had loans they were unable to pay. Also, the Democratic insiders at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac said all along they fine. Now, either they were lieing about that or incredibly incompetent. Either way, the Democrats were in bed with these people and had the blankets pulled up over their heads. With regard to income taxes, you seem to be saying "well, they have enough money -- they can afford it". Well, what you don't seem to recognize is the basic fact that it's not the governments business to decide who can afford what and it's not the government's business to dip into our wallets. And it doesn't matter if you make 10K a year or a million a year -- that still holds true. Taking from the so-called rich and giving to the government machine is socialism. And this kind of aggressive pursuit of business owners is going to HURT the economy even more -- again, through layoffs. By no means is this going to stimulate the flow of capital >> which stimulates spending >> which stimulates job creation/growth. Families making $250,000 a year are NOT rich either. Also, what is not included or considered are geographic factors. $250,000/year in Texas is a lot of money...still not "rich"...but in California it's chickenfeed because money doesn't go as far there. So, how will the "messiah" Obama adjust for these factors? Yeah, as I've said repeatedly since 9/11, why is Bush an S.O.B. for defending this country? You can't defend the national security of the US in a courtroom! Bush took the war to the terrorists (albeit, ineptly in my opinion) and I APPLAUD and CONGRATULATE him on that -- and to hell with any of the other countries that don't like it! Don't give a rat's bottom what they think! And neither should any of us. A LOT of the so-called "lack of respect" comes from subversive agents from Russia, brainless MoveOn.org types and their willing accomplices in the US media (borderline or full-fledged communists who don't even know from whence the their own thinking comes from due to indoctrination) who thrive on generating anti-US propaganda and building anti-US concensus. American lives come before those in countries that harbor terrorists or even other countries that plot aggression against us. History has proven talking doesn't accomplish anything. Smack em (terrorist states and others that plot aggression) down and smack em down hard (tactical nukes) at the first sign of trouble, I say...particularly those with a historical record of mischief and aggression. Whatever it takes to defend and preserve the citizens of the US...and NO apologies for it! If Europe wants to be sitting ducks...that's their business. Well, I'm not a "gun nut" but I recognize the need for them and the right to have them. When the Constitution talks about the right to bear arms, it's not referring to your right to go deer or duck hunting. It is, in part, a kind of built in national security measure for a worst case and unthinkable scenario in which, say, a dictator came to power in the US and the people themselves had to resort to historical measures to end the oppression. Well, as I suspect will become the norm (as has already been displayed in the media recently) in an "Obama era", any criticism or pointing out of record will be considered "hateful". We're seeing that already just during this campaign. Here, we've got John McCain REGULARLY saying he's going to have a respectful campaign (to the point of FAULT in my opinion) and there has been no discussion from either Palin or McCain about race. Obama's past has been pointed out as a matter of discussion. His voting record has been pointed out as a matter of discussion. Etc. These things are not "hateful". Pointing out a record and past associations is FAIR GAME. As I've said, certainly if McCain had KKK connections (for example) that would be all the rage in the press -- we'd never hear the end of it and McCain would give up his candidacy in shame ("I'm sorry my friends, but because I have friends in the KKK I am unfit to serve as your President -- my friends"). But, this is how the power mad insidiously begin to turn society into an "online forum" with "moderators". This is the same thing that happened in Nazi Germany and in the Soviet Union. As Goebels said, (paraphrasing) "If you repeat the lie often enough it becomes the truth". This is the philosophy and thinking of the far-left, socialist Democrats. So, knowing this...calling the truth a lie does not change it from being the truth. Nor is the truth a matter of "hate". You may not like what you hear because it's about "your man" but it's not hate and it's not automatically a "lie" -- if there is evidence to support the claims. At any rate, I've never heard a talk show personality embrace wild-eyed, conspiracy theory nonsense (AM Coast-to-Coast being the exception). All the ones I have heard quickly reject such nonsense. Now, the multi-source stuff with some "meat" on the story are different matters. I fully expect Obama and his minions to try to snuff out any criticism during his reign -- should he get in there.

Niche, Why would you want to "distance yourself"? The truth is the truth and I don't think we're that far apart on the issues. You may not always agree with my method of delivery or the exact words I choose but I think we are close to agreement on some things. True, we disagree on some though...and at the risk of starting another heated exchange, I will refrain from pointing those out. Give me a break...I am trying to "reach across the aisle"...are you gonna chop my hand off when I do?

That post was the equivalent of you putting your hands over your ears and saying "blah! blah! blah! blah! I'm not listening to you" or the ever popular "Liar, liar, pants on fire". Highly intellectual stuff, that...

On this, we agree Niche! Look, I think BOTH parties have failed us on this issue...as they have on more than one issue! I just firmly believe a drastic REDUCTION of taxes at all levels is what is called for to spur economic growth. I've always believed that and it's a simple economic truism that our government REFUSES to accept or impliment. Cut and eliminate programs (Government just can't give up it's "crack" of sticking it's hand into your wallet!) and go to either a consumption tax or a FAIR and binding flat tax. I am convinced that's the only way to go, but government has to give up its addiction to YOUR income. They've even got some of our citizens indoctrinated into thinking the government has a right to dip it's paws into our income...that was never the intent of the founding fathers and it's a patently FALSE belief that such a right exists. We all pay taxes, but we all do so under duress. Nobody likes it or the current system but nobody seems to want to "kick the habit". Why? Taxation is the means by which the wealth is redistributed, so YES -- I do blame it on the socialists. Please don't try to muddy up the waters Crunch... If you can believe tanks are going to roll through the streets I know you can accept this simple concept.

No, it IS redistribution of wealth. And I most certainly CAN pin it on Obama and the larger Democratic party. As for the Obama tax cut: It's a LIE. There's no way he can pay for all those socialist programs he wants without raising taxes and he knows that. Again, Democrats and higher taxes are like peanut butter and jelly. Bill Clinton promised a tax cut during his campaigns and it didn't happen. In fact, again...in true Democrat form...he raised them. Nevertheless, taxing the so-called "rich" who make $250,000 a year is only going to help crash the economy. Companies WILL lay people off if the Marxist Obama goes after them...and when they do, it will be OBAMA's fault -- not businesses. Joe the plumber was quite correct about Obama and his tax scheme. Diplomatic relations with the countries Obama wants to sit down with do not work. An example of that is how Bill Clinton and Madeleine Albright pandered to North Korea and a few years later was discovered to have cheated on the agreement and then even tested a nuclear bomb. Bush also resorted to this kind of pandering and it failed for him as well. The reason? These people have their agenda and no amount of begging and pandering will change their agenda. Begging and pandering only gives them more time to develop and test their weapons. Iran should be given an ultimatum -- not the prestige of meeting with a US diplomatic attache and given more time to threaten to wipe Israel off the map (as they've vowed to do almost weekly). This sort of thing will become the norm under Obama -- who will be perceived as weak and will not hold any credibility. Russia is on the march. NOT because of anything the West has or has not done (or has proposed doing) but because Russia is still the same old Russia. McCain was quite correct when he said he saw a K, a G, and a B when looked in Putin's eyes. Now we have Medvedev, Putin's puppet, but the strategic goals of Russia have never changed. Last weekend they tested THREE ICBMs and landed them in the Pacific (which they had not done since the Cold War "ended"). Obama is naive and weak. Our enemies know that as well as I do. I don't want the guy in there. He'll put us all at risk from a national security standpoint. It might seem like a good idea to you (it might SOUND good, but it's not reality) -- and to me -- but our enemies will never agree to it -- or at least cheat on it. Russia has never signed a treaty it didn't cheat on. Neither has North Korea as I pointed out above. And this is why Russia would prefer Obama in the White House over McCain. They know McCain will be tougher. Here's one of Obama's naieve diatribes on disarmament: Some words from Obama on illegal immigration: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUDGjchVNtM McCain is just as bad on this subject, so by no means am I singling out Obama on this issue. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WN3ab-dY2E0 We have a constitutional right to bear arms. Period. There are no excuses for Obama's views on gun ownership...and particularly his condescending comment about the people of Pennsylvania. There haven't been any false claims about Obama on talk radio. All the claims can be substantiated or at least merit investigation. But, unfortunately, Obama feeds many of these claims himself by avoiding the topics or using deflection -- or providing half-explanations. Where there is smoke, there is fire. Obama seems to have a lot to hide -- particularly with regard to his past associations with rather nefarious individuals. Can you imagine the uproar if McCain had served on a committee or launched his political career from the home of Timothy McVeigh? Such is the nature of Obamas past with Ayers. Definitely of no less import! Or if McCain had spent time hanging out with the KKK. But there have been plenty of bogus false racism claims by the Obama camp with regard to statements by Sarah Palin, etc. Additionally, secret service has said today that his claim that someone at a McCain rally called for "killing Obama" were false or at least unsubstantiated. Bogus claims coming from talk radio listeners are quickly shot down on talk radio...at least by the hosts. Remember, when Obama cracks down on free speech (as his minions have) with regard to his infamous "truth squads" in Missouri -- it won't be long before the USA under an Obama administration will see things such as the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" implemented. That will be just the beginning. Do you believe free speech should be protected (in ALL instances -- not just when liberals speak.) or not? What you give up now will come back to bite you in the butt later.: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/0...h_squads_2.html

Editor, Read post #75. We've moved on. If we can't agree, then perhaps I should just voluntarily close my membership here right now. Post #75 is the best you're going to get from me. I am trying to be reasonable. End of subject.

Cool...agreed on your second point...

Yeah, let's get an early start on the "thought policing" that will go "warp ten" once Obama gets in office... I'll pass. I find censorship and thought policing to be *beyond* rude myself. Look, since I am going to call em as I see em, maybe it's best I not post here at the political threads (at least). My (fact based) views aren't changing anymore than the earth is going to stop orbiting the sun.

Yeah, you're right Sarah. I promise to chill. I'm sorry. Honestly. Will you (and the others) forgive? Seriously...sorry about the namecalling. It was uncalled for. With regard to Obama, let's just agree to disagree... Dis

Well, if it truly is "probable" as you say, then you and the rest of us will have MUCH more to worry about than harmless (albeit emotional) me. Besides, chin up! McCain can still win. It's not over until the fat lady sings... I'm trying to be positive. Do you really think tanks will be rolling in the streets?

Well, I support you in your efforts! LOL!!! I don't really know Toggle...I haven't read any of his posts but I'm not into that Aryan thing you mention either...

Well, it's the redistribution of wealth...gah! I've been through all that. Obama supporters aren't interested. Nothing will deter them from supporting their "Messiah". It's just like the 90's all over again when they were brainwashed with Clinton. He could do no wrong. Same for Obama now.

True, TJ. However, If one is armed with the facts and then chooses to ignore them then they are part of the problem as well. But I guess that's no surprise. I've always said these MoveOn.org/Marxist types were seditionists and traitors...and I hold to that. People who vote based on looks and superficial things should have their voting priviledge removed. There used to be a time in this country where you couldn't vote unless you owned property. I think we might need to return to that...but given the braindead nature of about 40% - 50% of our populace, I won't hold my breath.

Don't try that "terroristic threats" bull---- on me. My comments were made in reference to a purely hypothetical situation (a Marxist takeover of America) and nothing specific was outlined or described. That hypothetical situation has not come to pass and no threats have been made. I don't care who reads my words. Until there is a Marxist takeover, my rights are still protected under the Constitution. Believe me, no one will ever take those away.