I don't get it? What do you mean they aren't helping themselves? I don't know what kind of welfare or government intervention you have in your state, but in Massachusetts, you must help yourself because after a year or two, your welfare is permanently cut off. They aren't being helped too much. They are supported long enough that they can get a stable job and figure things out without having to worry about say, food.


What kind of welfare system do you have, lol? I don't know about you, but I don't actually know a single person who has a job and doesn't pay taxes.

Not what Palin said in the ABC interview .
There are a ton of weaker ones, such as Iran, Syria, Venezuela, North Korea, etc. The main point is that there aren't many allies, who really care about the US staying a superpower anymore. I can really count only two countries, Israel and the UK. Latin America is severing its ties with the United States - Brazil and Venezuela created some American organization that doesn't include the US so they can solve domestic problems. Europe is drawing away from the US because of the financial crisis - Merkel and Sarkozy have, as I said, criticized the US for how it's financial crisis created a worldwide one. Sarkozy and Brazil's man, again, as I said, want to revise the UN to include more permanent members. The US's influence is waning, and in many cases it can do no more then criticize and pout. And, tell me, how does a military stabilize an economy?
You've been successful? What exactly did you do? I'm sure being born into the right family takes a lot of skill. While on the topic, Communist China isn't even that communist.
Oh, I'd love to see you get unlucky once. Then I want to laugh at you and tell you to live with it.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Sep 28 2008, 4:39 pm by Centreri.

That sounds an over exaggeration. Because if ALL of your money was split in HALF and both halves are given away, you would be dirt poor.

They are helping themselves, they would kill just to help their sick and feed their family. And that is a literal event. Those people are desperate, angry and dirt poor. Yet they don't receive your taxes but they pay taxes for others. Obama is giving ninety five percent working Americans families that makes under $250,000 a year will get a tax cut. Those families will have the opportunity to bring themselves back to their feet and may have a chance to keep pace with millionaires but could care less about taxes since it's just a dime. There is are certain people that will turn greedy, but there should be more people helping others by then.

That's not true. And what does feeding them have to do with anything? They KNOW how to fish, basically having a job and to feed their family everyday. One week payment goes down the drain by just feeding their family. Their yearly payment would go for accessories in the house, possibly a lousy car, taxes, clothes, electricity/water bills, and much more. Certain families have to pay the cheapest of the cheapest for savings, but it will not sufficiently help them. Having a dad with at least two jobs, a mom also with two jobs and their kids will soon get student jobs as they hit the age of fifteen is still not enough.

Secondly, the middle and lower classes definitely has to pay taxes. To keep in touch with history, look what the thirteen US colonies did to Britain and look what the lower classes in France did to their King Louis XVI and the queen Marie Antoinette. Frustrated over taxes. They don't have enough to help themselves yet they have to pay taxes.

So for those who think Obama will turn us into communism. Hi, welcome to reality.

And a more socialistic approach can only help. Government intervention is good. Look at the business headlines: CONGRESS ABOUT TO ALMOST KINDA APPROVE BILL TO BUY 700 BILLION $$ OF BAD LOANS FROM FAILED COMPANIES. And Buffett says things'll only get worse without this.

If you can't find a job in two years, there's a bit of a problem, which is why I'm saying that Obama's want to increase welfare is a bad idea, he's making it even easier for people to rely on getting a handout.


http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/top_50__of_wage_earners_pay_96_09__of_income_taxes.guest.html


Nearly everyone you listed is still our allies, oh, boohoo, they don't like something we did, it's not like their little kids and immediately say "I'm not your friend anymore" they are still our allies, contrary to what you are trying to say. And how does a military stabilize an economy? By holding back Anarchy, and actually allowing a government, the Iraq government has a huge surplus due to our involvement, what do you think would happen if we left?


Many people are born into great families and still mess up, and many are born into bad families and manage to be successful, it's all about your mindset. And my point was communism, not China, if it bothers you so much, make it North Korea instead then.


As I said, it's all your mindset, what happens to you becomes your history, what you do about what happens to you becomes your legacy.


It was the same 50% I was referring to, learn to read properly, plz.


As you can see in the above link, they already have a massive tax cut. There are already systems in place to get them back on their feet, Obama is just going to make it so people who are already leaning on those systems for complete support can get an even bigger hand-out.


See the link I posted, and they need to learn how to use the fish properly, and you don't need all those things to live, sometimes you have to do without in order to eventually get up there, it's not the high cost of living, it's the cost of living high that is bringing so many people down.

Oh joy! I'm glad that's how things were hundreds of years ago, welcome to the twenty first century!


First of all, your picture had nothing to do with what you said, secondly, it simply put the things that didn't happen, there are tons of things that happened due to choosing to slowly degrade moral integrity, that picture simply took things out of context. And how does welcome to reality have anything to do with Obama going communism? He's not going to just throw us into communism, but he wants to bring us closer to it.


Yes, in a perfect world where we all tried our hardest, and we all were extremely altruistic, but that's not this world. Some people would rather mooch off of those who put serious effort into life, and why should I want to work if I don't reap the benefits of it? There is no drive for me to work harder, if I just have to give anything extra to people who just hang out and take free handouts.

I could easily continue arguing this out, but it's basically pointless, I won't convince you, you'll just keep coming back with ridiculous arguments, so, adieu.

If by allies you mean 'not enemies', I suppose you're right. By allies I mean someone who actually wants you to prosper economically and all.

Military stabilization? What about just giving Iraq some arms and training some soldiers? What's wrong with that?
Ah, so you're successful because you... didn't create a family rift and didn't get left somewhere. Is that what you meant? How the hell do you mess up, other then that, when born into a good family and being a minor? Communism has nothing to do with this discussion.

Socialism != Communism. Please learn the difference.

Socialism is just voluntary communism.

First of all, the fact that you could not connect two points does not make you look cool.

Secondly, anything that did happen due to the court rulings were not the shit that neo-conservatives were complaining about.

You know. When you have a dictator and you add a little communism, you get a democracy. Not communism. But you know, that's some political math that you guys might not get.

Shrug. You still have that a lot. Why are you complaining?
There are plentiful billionaires supporting Obama that could care less about that. In which they are paying much higher taxes than your family if Senator Barack Obama became the President of the United States.
Let's check the bullet point that I listed, eh?
* works hard and dedicated to their job and hardly reaching $100,000 a year - Their 'republican' boss can be a fucking asshole, also no promotions may be caused by stolen jobs for their share and/or taken by another individual
* have a savings plan for each kid to go to college - These are thousands of dollars per kid
* had their life savings stolen - I know someone who was a millionaire became apart of the middle class
* has a frustrating high tax payments caused by recent republican presidents in the last twenty years - Under George H. W. Bush's "No New Taxes" lie, the taxes raised high
* suffered bankruptcy - Anything stored in the bank goes down the drain, and it can be millions of dollars
* has a saddened lifestyle - Deaths, payment for hospitals, damages and may not have a chance to work happily in work. Sickness is also involved.
* suffered a natural disaster - A hurricane, earth or a tsunami is enough to cause damage to a lot of cities. Mayors have to rebuild and repair everything and while giving people a temporary place to live
* went to college but became unemployed later - Because they are declined and/or another person has taken the job, or the business has been stopped
* has children - Money is benefiting each child and has to be equal. A pair of pants and a T-Shirt already costs up to at least a hundred dollars. Food, supplies and medicine is included
* be always willingly voting the democratic/green/independent party nominee for President - Depending on the policies
* had been market crashed - You should know this
* is a liberal - You should also know this
* help others - Charity, fund raising and donations.

Rush Limbaugh: Most credible source of information, ever? This is the guy who organized Operation Chaos. This guy makes 33 million dollars a year. It's in his interest to say that the top percent pay massive amounts of taxes, now isn't it? Do you really think this is an unbiased article? You can't cite the most biased radio show on the air and pass it off as the facts. No wonder you're for McCain, you actually think Limbaugh is the real deal.

The top 50% is composed of those not in poverty (or thereabouts)? Interesting. So Rush is complaining that while the top 50% makes like 85% of the money, they pay 90+% of the taxes. That seems wildly reasonable to me.

Same here.

Obama FTW

http://www.dailymotion.com/related/x3fnu7/video/x2cg96_bill-maher-aime-les-francais_fun

I am so voting for McCain. I would love to have a milf as VP (and potentially, our president if age gets the best of McCain)


... no but seriously. As of right now, I really can't decide who to vote for yet. The news nowadays truly disgusts me. All I see are Liberals bashing McCain and Palin and Conservatives bashing Obama (omfg MSNBC really wants to make me puke. It's as bad as Fox news only that it falls on the other end of the left/right spectrum. But I never really get a chance to watch Fox News anymore because everytime I flip to their channel they always play damn commercials ). It seems to me that alot people aren't really analyzing the ideas/stances these two candidates have, but rather stubbornly (and/or ignorantly) stick with their idealogies/parties and join their respective bash-the-other-person bandwagon.

I want Obama to win simply because foreign nations want him to win, and foreigners know more about politics than Americans do.

Definitely. American liberals could be as liberal as they are though. But I agree, they know a lot better than the conservative Americans.

Would Palin being stupid enough to literally believe the bible sway your vote? What about her wanting to declare war on nuclear powers? Failing at interviews?

no. Believe what you want, but we have a thing called separation of church and state.
If by that you mean simply believing that nuclear Iran is dangerous to whole world, Russia's invading Georgia unprovoked is unacceptable, not wanting a new Cold War with Russia, not wanting to go to war over Georgia but rather pressure Russia, keeping the option to go into Pakistan to go after terrorists open, and focusing on fighting Al-Qaeda terrorists, then not necessarily. Besides, if she really does turn nuts and wants to declare war on such things, Congress wouldn't allow for another unnecessary war based on our current reasoning alone.
Source: http://www.ontheissues.org/sarah_Palin.htm
not necessarily at the moment... But, if by failing she breaks down and loses her composure as a potential VP candidate, then possibly. However I have indeed heard about this issue quite often. Both liberals and conservatives have criticized her for her i suppose lack of successful interviews.

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Oct 1 2008, 4:23 pm by MillenniumArmy.

I haven't read the 16 pages of responses to this yet (I'm avoiding getting addicted to this topic like I was to the Bush v Kerry one oh so long ago), but I'm for Obama.