pop_haines wrote:It won't be the last try, either.Michael wrote:Obama assassination plot thwarted: report
And I think my job is stressful. I can't imagine being in his shoes.
Hopefully McCain will tone down his terrorist rhetoric.
pop_haines wrote:It won't be the last try, either.Michael wrote:Obama assassination plot thwarted: report
And I think my job is stressful. I can't imagine being in his shoes.
There was a great WSJ article hitting on this very point a couple of weeks ago, but my brain is too fried right now to remember who it was.pop_haines wrote:Bam.Richie Allen wrote:The American Dream is still alive. We'll do anything to associate with the upper class.Popeye_Card wrote:I'm perpetually amazed by the Republican party's ability to prod middle and lower class citizens to jump under the bus for the upper class.
If I was making over $250,000/year, I'd be much less stingy about where my money goes. But I would want it to be my choice. Why should government decide who gets it? Why should I be punished for making good decisions in my life?PujolJunkie wrote:If I was making over 250,000 dollars a year, I'd be much less stingy about where my money goes. And if that means it goes to the family that has to eat chicken noodle soup every night for a week because they can't afford anything else, then consider me a commie.letsgocards89 wrote:I've got some bills that need paying too. I'll be expecting your check within the week. Thanks.PujolJunkie wrote:What was it when Bush gave tax cuts to the wealthy? Was that not a handout? Was that not wealth redistribution? Don't act like changes to the tax code = socialism. There's a difference.letsgocards89 wrote:There's a big difference between a help up (college grants, Job Corps) and a handout (wealth redistribution).pop_haines wrote:I'm not sure I understand why this is such a concern.BW23 wrote:Okay, then how about this one that's not taken out of context.
[/youtube]
It boils down to wanting to help people.
You want to talk about redistributive economics?
Let's look at that financial sector bailout again.
95% of all Americans will either be unaffected or pay
less in taxes with Obama's plan. Of the remaining 5%,
a few (like that old socialist Warren Buffett) are totally
supportive. The rest are hopping up and down and
calling him a Commie (wrong), a Marxist (wrong),
and a Socialist (wrong again). This country has a
slew of social programs already in place that are
extremely beneficial. Does that mean we're a
socialist nation? No, of course not.
Speaking as someone who was almost homeless 6 months ago because my parents couldn't afford to pay a double house payment and had two vehicles out on a title loan, I don't think having the wealth redistributed is such a bad idea. I guess helping the people who actually need help by cutting their taxes is too socialist and unAmerican to imagine.
What I heard in that video was an intellectual discussion about past failures and Obama's opinion that the courts would not become activists due to the impracticality of enforcing any laws appearing to be written by the courts. This was a discussion of constitutional interpretation not the Marxist boogieman you want to make it out to be.
If discussing opinions of constitutional intent has become frightening to you, then you missed the point of an open and free democratic society.
And maybe Palin will start calling out people who yell stuff at her rallies.Michael wrote:pop_haines wrote:It won't be the last try, either.Michael wrote:Obama assassination plot thwarted: report
And I think my job is stressful. I can't imagine being in his shoes.
Hopefully McCain will tone down his terrorist rhetoric.
I've also said more than that that I don't believe him. He's given me no reason to believe him. None other than a plan that won't go into place.PujolJunkie wrote:You just said not but a couple of pages ago that you'd save X amount of dollars under Obama's plan. And then you said "Ah well, I'm still not voting for him."BW23 wrote:Okay, so how am I jumping under the bus for the rich, then?Popeye_Card wrote:I'm perpetually amazed by the Republican party's ability to prod middle and lower class citizens to jump under the bus for the upper class.
I'll say it again. It's called the tax system. All Obama is doing is reverting the tax rates to where they were when Clinton was in office. That isn't taking money from someone and giving it to someone else, that's changing the tax code. Why can someone not raise taxes and lower taxes without being considered a socialist? I'll ask once again; should we just abolish taxes so nobody is misinterpreted as an evil, socialist pinko?BW23 wrote:If I was making over $250,000/year, I'd be much less stingy about where my money goes. But I would want it to be my choice. Why should government decide who gets it? Why should I be punished for making good decisions in my life?PujolJunkie wrote:If I was making over 250,000 dollars a year, I'd be much less stingy about where my money goes. And if that means it goes to the family that has to eat chicken noodle soup every night for a week because they can't afford anything else, then consider me a commie.letsgocards89 wrote:I've got some bills that need paying too. I'll be expecting your check within the week. Thanks.PujolJunkie wrote:What was it when Bush gave tax cuts to the wealthy? Was that not a handout? Was that not wealth redistribution? Don't act like changes to the tax code = socialism. There's a difference.letsgocards89 wrote:There's a big difference between a help up (college grants, Job Corps) and a handout (wealth redistribution).pop_haines wrote:I'm not sure I understand why this is such a concern.BW23 wrote:Okay, then how about this one that's not taken out of context.
[/youtube]
It boils down to wanting to help people.
You want to talk about redistributive economics?
Let's look at that financial sector bailout again.
95% of all Americans will either be unaffected or pay
less in taxes with Obama's plan. Of the remaining 5%,
a few (like that old socialist Warren Buffett) are totally
supportive. The rest are hopping up and down and
calling him a Commie (wrong), a Marxist (wrong),
and a Socialist (wrong again). This country has a
slew of social programs already in place that are
extremely beneficial. Does that mean we're a
socialist nation? No, of course not.
Speaking as someone who was almost homeless 6 months ago because my parents couldn't afford to pay a double house payment and had two vehicles out on a title loan, I don't think having the wealth redistributed is such a bad idea. I guess helping the people who actually need help by cutting their taxes is too socialist and unAmerican to imagine.
What I heard in that video was an intellectual discussion about past failures and Obama's opinion that the courts would not become activists due to the impracticality of enforcing any laws appearing to be written by the courts. This was a discussion of constitutional interpretation not the Marxist boogieman you want to make it out to be.
If discussing opinions of constitutional intent has become frightening to you, then you missed the point of an open and free democratic society.
What I heard in that video was that "political and economic justice" is the redistribution of wealth. Justice, both politically and economically, is taking from the rich and giving to the poor. It's exactly what his "church" stands for.
I also heard that he's not in favor of less government. The Constitution has "constraints". He has an open road to more (and more and more and more) government.
1.) I guess if you view paying taxes as "punishment", then you would be right. I don't view it that way.BW23 wrote:Why should I be punished for making good decisions in my life?
What I heard in that video was that "political and economic justice" is the redistribution of wealth. Justice, both politically and economically, is taking from the rich and giving to the poor. It's exactly what his "church" stands for.
I understand that.Richie Allen wrote:Well, that's an easy mistake to make when you assume that someone is voting on the single issue you think they are. I've heard for years now that "middle America" is stupid for backing Republican candidates because their income bracket doesn't benefit from the right being in power. But in reality, middle America may be considering something other than taxes when voting. I know I am this election.PujolJunkie wrote:You just said not but a couple of pages ago that you'd save X amount of dollars under Obama's plan. And then you said "Ah well, I'm still not voting for him."BW23 wrote:Okay, so how am I jumping under the bus for the rich, then?Popeye_Card wrote:I'm perpetually amazed by the Republican party's ability to prod middle and lower class citizens to jump under the bus for the upper class.
I view paying taxes for certain programs a punishment, yeah.Popeye_Card wrote:1.) I guess if you view paying taxes as "punishment", then you would be right. I don't view it that way.BW23 wrote:Why should I be punished for making good decisions in my life?
What I heard in that video was that "political and economic justice" is the redistribution of wealth. Justice, both politically and economically, is taking from the rich and giving to the poor. It's exactly what his "church" stands for.
2.) Isn't that what most churches stand for? Didn't Jesus tell a parable about the poor woman who gave all she had, vs. the rich man who merely gave his tithe?