Now the extreme right refrain is 'Repubs are throwing the election,' after seeing their incompetent, clueless party and horses crumble into a pile of shit! Too fucking funny!!! You are true dipshits of epic proportions. Obama is charitable as he has to clean up after the retard you voted for twice in the last 8 years. But he'll pull it off.
Now relax you guys. I'm sure both major parties are happy to put their disagreements and THEIR MAD LUST FOR POWER AND MONEY. . . ahem. . . and anything else behind them while encouraging a free market solution that rewards those who make intelligent choices and punishes those who are corrupt and/or very foolish. Fortunately we can rely on the majority of intelligent voters who see through all the nonsense and recognize the need for short term pain. They know government is not the answer to all our problems. I'm also hoping the Fed Fairy puts a cool billion under my pillow tonight. I think it was absolutely hysterical for both candidates to talk about a smaller government last night! With a straight face! Glad I don't work at SNL - I'd be saying "We can't parody this, it's already a #@!%@& parody!" They must think voters are really, really stooopid. And as far as I can tell, they're right.
Damn, the old cranky walnuts guy may really be a Democrat. Look at what Palin did in Alaska: "Republicans in Congress this June united to defeat a proposed windfall tax on oil companies, deriding it as a bad idea that would discourage investment in U.S. oil exploration. Things worked out far differently in the GOP stronghold of Alaska, a state whose economic fate is closely tied to the oil industry. Over the opposition of oil companies, Republican Gov. Sarah Palin and Alaska's Legislature last year approved a major increase in taxes on the oil industry â a step that has generated stunning new wealth for the state as oil prices soared. At a time when Americans are feeling the pinch at the gasoline pump and oil companies are racking up record profits, Alaska's choice foreshadows one of the sharpest debates in the upcoming presidential election. Democrat Barack Obama supports a national windfall-profits tax, while Republican John McCain opposes it." http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008103325_alaskatax07.html Palin hits big oil with a windfall profit tax that the old guy opposed. Maybe she is a closet Demo too...... S..., everbody running is a Democrat#### Seneca
Campbell Brown No bias, No bull. Fact check on McCain's plan to bailout home owners. FOREMAN (voice-over): You heard him outline his plan. He's saying use $300 billion of that giant $700 bailout to directly help homeowners who are in trouble, not Wall Street. He believes by using government money to help those people refinance their bad home loans, we can shore up housing prices, stabilize the mortgage market and keep people off of the street. Problems? Well, first, this is not original to McCain. The bailout plan already allows for something like this, although it does not spell out the process so precisely or order it the way McCain would. And second, well, Barack Obama was talking about a similar idea in Florida a couple of weeks ago. SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: We should consider giving government the authority to purchase mortgages directly instead of simply purchasing mortgage-backed securities. It's doubtful that the economy as a whole can recover without the restoration of our housing sector, including a rebound in the home values that have suffered dramatically in recent months. Conservative estimates are placing the price tag at between one and two trillion dollars compared to McCain's 300 Billion figure - CNBC's Dylan Ratigan .
ByLowSellHi you are so entirely oriented on making the democrats sound amazing and making the republicans sound horrible that I am sure you have no ability to judge an issue with any degree of accuracy. Any chemically balanced person can see that democrats and republicans are both to blame for the mess with the economy. By the way, if Obama proposed the buying of bad mortages you would be all over his nuts. At the least try to be a little more sutle with your extremely vocal, emotional and one sided views. By the way the democrats were the ones that suggested buying back the bad mortages anyways.
I appreciate your viewpoint, Neo, but it's not accurate. I do like Obama, though. Fiscal conservatives really gun for Obama, while completely giving a free pass to Bush and the current crop of Republicans, on the basis of excess, rampant government spending. They may say 'Bush and the Republicans spend like a drunken sailors,' and things to that effect, but what import does that have if they don't do anything to punish that behavior. The way that I see things is that Obama is an intelligent and flexible progressive candidate, I tend to think that he's extremely deliberative and methodological in addressing any problem, and given how Bush and the Republicans have handled fiscal matters, I honestly would be hard pressed to think he'll do any worse on that front. So, if I can't get a true fiscal conservative from either party anymore, I'll vote for the presidential candidate whom I perceive as the most clinical, intelligent, thorough, comprehensive and, well, sharp in general. I'll pay more tax under Obama, but it is not a massive hike, and most people will pay less under his economic plan. I very much support the idea of ending the war in Iraq and the expense associated with it. It is and was money very badly spent. I am sick of Republicans. They actually spend as much, if not more, than Democratic leaders, in general, despite their complete claims to the contrary. My only other option is to not vote, but then I don't think I'd have a right to complain or petition my government in case I continue to see massive problems. If you think Republicans are 'fiscal conservatives,' I think you are in denial. Since there are no more true fiscal conservatives that can seem to be viable candidates for POTUS, I might as well discount that factor and go with the guy whom I think is better overall in the other areas, and Obama simply has more productive qualities than McCain, IMO.
There is no fiscal conservative party in US anymore. They both know that if they mortgage our kids' future, they will get votes. That is just a reflection on the selfish nature of voters.
Yes, Individually Obama has those qualities. More than anything you are electing a party not an individual. So I look at what the party stands for, who do they represent? There is no question the democrats constituents are working class, non-business owners. About 50K a year is the cutoff, a majority making over that go Republican, and a majority making less then that go Democratic (2004 election). With the Democrats in charge your going to find a program of expanding worker privileges. Union growth, mandated insurance programs, living wages, paid family leave, alien rights, and many other issue the Liberals have been pushing for years. So what, all this will help many people and those on the fringe. Problem is it really hurts small business, raises the cost of doing business, reduces competition and that helps the large established mega-corporation. The rich get richer. The poor worker making under 50K get a small boost. But the entrepreneur gets squeezed.
They don't even claim to be for less government. That plank has was missing from the party platform during the last presidential election. We like to think that most people are like us and would like less government, but that's clearly not the case. Oh sure, everybody talks about less government and how much they'd like it. Then they talk about going to the gym every day. But when push comes to shove and government programs are not going up, voters get very grouchy. Neither party will reduce government spending. It's as silly to believe Obama or McCain when they say they will as to believe in the Easter Bunny. Obama seems to make more of a point to say he's going to reduce spending, so one could say maybe that means he's more aware of the issue than McCain. OTOH, one could say that makes him a bigger liar than McCain, because government spending will go up. But it doesn't really matter that much. Obama or McCain will mean more federal debt, bigger government and higher taxes.