Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin

[Grains]

On January 1st 2006 was an important day for baby boomers. It begins an extended cycle of a baby boomer turning 60 every 7.7 seconds. Now that the largest group in America is heading into retirement and only about 60% of these individuals feel "retirement ready" we have to examine Obamas' intended increase of the capital gains rate.

 

The market is hurting. Financials and real estate are down. Yield curves in the fixed income market are in disarray and two of the largest holders of mortgages and providers of fixed income are financially tapped.

 

Now is not the time to be raising capital gains Mr. Obama. You would send the economy into a depression and hurt millions of baby boomers retirements in the process. Which means increased taxes for the generations to come which would fiscally break America in years to come for future generations. Investment and funding in the equity markets would pull back tremendously which obviously would create a downtrend only reenforcing the current down market.

 

I urge you all to read or listen to this letter to Obama from Bill Miller, one of the best fixed income managers in the world.

 

PIMCO - Investment Outlook - July 2008 "Dear President Obama:"

 

I used to thing hands down Obama was going to be president. I now think that will not happen and here are my reasons why.

 

1) Clinton is against him. I know your looking at the screen saying did you watch that democratic convention and my answer is, "yes, did you."

I urge you to go to youtube and re-listen to Bill's speech. He talks about how Obama made his greatest choice yet by choosing experience. Hmmm. Think about that. By choosing Biden it was his greatest choice because he choose experience. Is that not what McCain has that Obama lacks. Clinton then goes on to say with Biden's experience, connections, etc comes Obama's "imagination" and "wishful thinking" or something like that. Think about these words. Bill Clinton is the greatest politician I have seen. By the way, I do not like him. He is amazing the way he can swoon America and his political stamina is unmatchable. In the back rooms of this election I believe Hilary and Bill are telling their supporters this is what I am worried about with Obama and it will filter through their ranks. You can call me crazy and think this is completely ridiculous and that is fine. But I know Bill and Hillary and they want an 2012 Hillary ticket.

 

2) You guys can continue to smash Palin all you want she did a great job in her speech. The polls indicate that by a long shot. First she had higher ratings as well she had an outstanding approval rating. Higher then her counterpart. Here are the links for you fact buffs.

 

Rasmussen Reports: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election.

 

Palin Nabs Highest '08 Broadcast TV Convention Ratings - TVWeek - News

 

I hope the media continues to pounce on her and talk about how she has no chance against Biden in debate. I remember similar comments from the Gore/Bush campaign when they said Bush has no chance against Gore. Well during the debate Bush did great (even democrats said he won the debate) and pushed him into the lead. So keep on talking her down media, I love it. They currently hold the lead but should give a larger spread if she wins the debate.

 

As well, Palin is frequently compared to Obama on her experience. Hello anyone out there? Does anybody else see something very fundamentally wrong with this? They are smashing Palin (a VP candiate!!!) for having less experience (2 years) then Obama (Presidential Candidate!!!). Do you see what I am driving here? If Palin is not qualified based on experience then what does that make of Obama folks?

 

3) Obama has not track record. He talks of change. That's great! What kind of change. What are you going to do? What have you done in the past? What is change? Besides raising taxes on the upper class Kind of brings back memories. Anybody remember this one. "It depends on what the definition of is, is" Well Mr. Obama what is your definition of change.

 

4) People continue to tell me well Obama is leading the polls. Well first, not anymore. Second, even with his trips to other countries and all of this hype around him he has been tied for a very long time with McCain. That does not bode well for him.

 

Obama wants to increase taxes on the upper middle class. News flash for people out there! Just in case you don't consider yourself upper middle class or "upper class" or "rich", here is a little barometer. If you are married and filing jointly and make over $90,000 combined, or you are filing single and make $62,500, and have college education you are the upper middle class. The same class he is talking about taxing. Do no think that if you are skating right around those numbers it doesn't through you into the pot. Well one might say wait a second. I'm not rich, I don't feel rich, what do you mean I am apart of the upper middle class. Exactly folks. When he says tax the upper class he means you. Don't think that when he says he is going to tax the upper class that does not mean the upper limits of the middle class as well. About $35,000-$40,000 individual income.

 

I seriously hope that this man does not get elected. We all are in for one hell of a "CHANGE" in deed if he does.

 

In closing. Why should you vote for Obama?

 

Because he stands for change, he fist bumps, and looks damn good in a speedo. :singer:

[paigetheoracle]

Speaking from the UK my reaction was the same as Whoopi Goldberg's 'Oh Christ, here we go again - George Bush in a Bra and Panties!' She said what she said to impress others as you'd expect of a political novice or a gang member trying to prove their worth to the gang - all tough talk and bullshit I'm afraid. As if GW hasn't done enough harm to the USA and the world, without the possibility of an elderly McCain kicking the bucket or retiring on ill health and being replaced by a clone of his. Tough talk from a nutcase as per usual.

[Buffy]

Y'all are going to go nowhere with this "what Republicans/Democrats think/do": everyone is different. questor has proven he's a real liberal with his open attitude about gays and creationism in schools. Zythryn has shown how conservative a liberal can be by supporting the study of Comparative Religion in schools. Etc. etc. etc.

 

What this thread is all about is how *these specific* candidates would run this country, so why not get back to that?

 

There are some interesting issues here that are being discussed in *isolation*. Yes, keeping taxes down to levels that promote investment or encourage consumption is a good thing, but if you're going to promote a position that we should stay in Iraq "for a hundred years" then it behooves you to explain how its going to be paid for: more taxes, weakening dollar due to foreign borrowing, or just crossing your fingers and hoping to God that Arthur Laffer was right?

 

If you must tell me your opinions, tell me what you believe in. I have plenty of doubts of my own, :singer:

Buffy

[Moontanman]

On January 1st 2006 was an important day for baby boomers. It begins an extended cycle of a baby boomer turning 60 every 7.7 seconds. Now that the largest group in America is heading into retirement and only about 60% of these individuals feel "retirement ready" we have to examine Obamas' intended increase of the capital gains rate.

 

The market is hurting. Financials and real estate are down. Yield curves in the fixed income market are in disarray and two of the largest holders of mortgages and providers of fixed income are financially tapped.

 

Now is not the time to be raising capital gains Mr. Obama. You would send the economy into a depression and hurt millions of baby boomers retirements in the process. Which means increased taxes for the generations to come which would fiscally break America in years to come for future generations. Investment and funding in the equity markets would pull back tremendously which obviously would create a downtrend only reenforcing the current down market.

 

I urge you all to read or listen to this letter to Obama from Bill Miller, one of the best fixed income managers in the world.

 

PIMCO - Investment Outlook - July 2008 "Dear President Obama:"

 

I used to thing hands down Obama was going to be president. I now think that will not happen and here are my reasons why.

 

1) Clinton is against him. I know your looking at the screen saying did you watch that democratic convention and my answer is, "yes, did you."

I urge you to go to youtube and re-listen to Bill's speech. He talks about how Obama made his greatest choice yet by choosing experience. Hmmm. Think about that. By choosing Biden it was his greatest choice because he choose experience. Is that not what McCain has that Obama lacks. Clinton then goes on to say with Biden's experience, connections, etc comes Obama's "imagination" and "wishful thinking" or something like that. Think about these words. Bill Clinton is the greatest politician I have seen. By the way, I do not like him. He is amazing the way he can swoon America and his political stamina is unmatchable. In the back rooms of this election I believe Hilary and Bill are telling their supporters this is what I am worried about with Obama and it will filter through their ranks. You can call me crazy and think this is completely ridiculous and that is fine. But I know Bill and Hillary and they want an 2012 Hillary ticket.

 

2) You guys can continue to smash Palin all you want she did a great job in her speech. The polls indicate that by a long shot. First she had higher ratings as well she had an outstanding approval rating. Higher then her counterpart. Here are the links for you fact buffs.

 

Rasmussen Reports: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election.

 

Palin Nabs Highest '08 Broadcast TV Convention Ratings - TVWeek - News

 

I hope the media continues to pounce on her and talk about how she has no chance against Biden in debate. I remember similar comments from the Gore/Bush campaign when they said Bush has no chance against Gore. Well during the debate Bush did great (even democrats said he won the debate) and pushed him into the lead. So keep on talking her down media, I love it. They currently hold the lead but should give a larger spread if she wins the debate.

 

As well, Palin is frequently compared to Obama on her experience. Hello anyone out there? Does anybody else see something very fundamentally wrong with this? They are smashing Palin (a VP candiate!!!) for having less experience (2 years) then Obama (Presidential Candidate!!!). Do you see what I am driving here? If Palin is not qualified based on experience then what does that make of Obama folks?

 

3) Obama has not track record. He talks of change. That's great! What kind of change. What are you going to do? What have you done in the past? What is change? Besides raising taxes on the upper class Kind of brings back memories. Anybody remember this one. "It depends on what the definition of is, is" Well Mr. Obama what is your definition of change.

 

4) People continue to tell me well Obama is leading the polls. Well first, not anymore. Second, even with his trips to other countries and all of this hype around him he has been tied for a very long time with McCain. That does not bode well for him.

 

Obama wants to increase taxes on the upper middle class. News flash for people out there! Just in case you don't consider yourself upper middle class or "upper class" or "rich", here is a little barometer. If you are married and filing jointly and make over $90,000 combined, or you are filing single and make $62,500, and have college education you are the upper middle class. The same class he is talking about taxing. Do no think that if you are skating right around those numbers it doesn't through you into the pot. Well one might say wait a second. I'm not rich, I don't feel rich, what do you mean I am apart of the upper middle class. Exactly folks. When he says tax the upper class he means you. Don't think that when he says he is going to tax the upper class that does not mean the upper limits of the middle class as well. About $35,000-$40,000 individual income.

 

I seriously hope that this man does not get elected. We all are in for one hell of a "CHANGE" in deed if he does.

 

In closing. Why should you vote for Obama?

 

Because he stands for change, he fist bumps, and looks damn good in a speedo. :singer:

 

I am a little bit burnt out with hearing all this BS about taxes, I am 53, I've been paying taxes since I was 16 I have never seen a tax increase or tax decrease that made any real difference in my life style or wages. I know that a little bit at a time can take it all away but the government has to have taxes to operate. I am more worried about how my taxes are spent than in how much I might have to pay. I didn't even get my so called incentive check this year much less the several thousand dollars i should have gotten back. It's a straw man argument for anyone who makes anything under several thousand dollars a year. Why should I care if I pay an extra hundred this year get a extra hundred back? Over the long term it's meaningless.

[Thunderbird]

During a speech, Palin also promoted a $30-billion natural gas pipeline project, stating, 'God’s will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built.

 

Examine this statement above and the video below....Anything telling in this statement. "God's will has to be done" She is a Pentecostal kook that actually believes she is a divine messenger of god's will .

 

Unlike Grains ramblings of what bill Clinton is really saying. this statment needs no convoluted interpretation. Just read it..... If this does not scare the hell out of you,...:singer:..What the hell does.

 

 

 

 

 

pallin utube vidio - Google Video

[Moontanman]

these people are just pandering to the religious right, I once thought they religious right was being scammed but lately I ma starting to think the religious right really has a firm grip on the republicans and want to set up a theocracy. As thought a Christian theocracy would be any better than a Muslim one or any other for that matter. religion un chained is dangerous, it's bad enough when it has to implore people to follow, it's a horror when people have to follow.

[Grains]

Examine this statement above and the video below....Anything telling in this statement. "God's will has to be done" She is a Pentecostal kook that actually believes she is a divine messenger of god's will .

 

Unlike Grains ramblings of what bill Clinton is really saying. this statment needs no convoluted interpretation. Just read it..... If this does not scare the hell out of you,.....What the hell does.

 

pallin utube vidio - Google Video

 

So if Obama now supports the pipeline in Alaska and Obama is sent from God, then it really is God's will..:singer::hyper::singer::hyper::D:hihi:

 

Sorry I had to throw in a little humor!

[Buffy]

... lately I ma starting to think the religious right really has a firm grip on the republicans and want to set up a theocracy.

Its quite clear they do have a lock on it:

And McCain’s detachment from the platform of his party hardly ends there. On same-sex marriage, immigration and stem cell research as well, the GOP bucked McCain each and every time.

 

As it turns out, McCain’s acquiescence doesn’t merely reflect his weakness (which it surely does) as much as his disinterest. As McCain himself admits, he just doesn’t care about details of policy; his campaign is about putting winning, and not country, first.

 

As my old pappy used to say, a man does what he has to do - if he can't get out of it, :singer:

Buffy

[Grains]

I am a little bit burnt out with hearing all this BS about taxes, I am 53, I've been paying taxes since I was 16 I have never seen a tax increase or tax decrease that made any real difference in my life style or wages. I know that a little bit at a time can take it all away but the government has to have taxes to operate. I am more worried about how my taxes are spent than in how much I might have to pay. I didn't even get my so called incentive check this year much less the several thousand dollars i should have gotten back. It's a straw man argument for anyone who makes anything under several thousand dollars a year. Why should I care if I pay an extra hundred this year get a extra hundred back? Over the long term it's meaningless.

 

I am sorry but your comment really astonishes me.

 

First, personally I care about a hundred dollars. A hundred dollars compounded annually at 8% over 30 years adding an additional $100 each year comes out to over $12,000. That is one hell of trip traveling the world when I retire. :singer:

 

Second, the overall impact is what we have to look at not just if you care as an individual about losing $100. The overall tax revenue from the government increases filtering it into a lost system instead of keeping it in the hands of Americans who could pump it back into the economy. It is not just the impact on you its the impact as a whole.

[Zythryn]

The republicans have proven to me that they will continue spending money we don't have. Asking the next generation to pay for the luxuries of today.

There is a quote by someone (Buffy, perhaps you can help??) that goes something like:

'Stupidity is doing the same thing expecting different results'.

I am not saying that I know for a fact that the Democrats will stop the damage, or even help fix things. What I am saying is I am convinced that the republicans will not.

[Moontanman]

The republicans have proven to me that they will continue spending money we don't have. Asking the next generation to pay for the luxuries of today.

There is a quote by someone (Buffy, perhaps you can help??) that goes something like:

'Stupidity is doing the same thing expecting different results'.

I am not saying that I know for a fact that the Democrats will stop the damage, or even help fix things. What I am saying is I am convinced that the republicans will not.

 

Exactly:hihi: The neocons have had eight years to show their stuff and it isn't pretty.

[Thunderbird]

Speaking from the UK my reaction was the same as Whoopi Goldberg's 'Oh Christ, here we go again - George Bush in a Bra and Panties!' .

:hyper:

[jackson33]

I am a little bit burnt out with hearing all this BS about taxes, I am 53, I've been paying taxes since I was 16 I have never seen a tax increase or tax decrease that made any real difference in my life style or wages. I know that a little bit at a time can take it all away but the government has to have taxes to operate. I am more worried about how my taxes are spent than in how much I might have to pay. I didn't even get my so called incentive check this year much less the several thousand dollars i should have gotten back. It's a straw man argument for anyone who makes anything under several thousand dollars a year. Why should I care if I pay an extra hundred this year get a extra hundred back? Over the long term it's meaningless.

 

You should care!! The folks that back, support, invest and maintain industry will (in short) stop.

 

Any person, family or small business person making 1 million dollars today pays about 40% of that million, 35% in income taxes and 5% in SS. They already pay the Medicare Tax on the entire million. Under Obama, they will pay 39% of that same million (+40K) and on everything over 250K an added SS tax of 15% if self employed (+105K). Remembering they may also pay State Taxes based usually on what their Federal is, this could be an addition 10-25K. Most are also already paying local City, School, Property taxes based on their investments and/or home. The average budget for these folks is not much different than any person and in the case of a any small business the investment and/or budget is subject to surprise shock.

 

If you did NOT file a tax return or a proper form, your incentive check could not be mailed. It was all based on a reaction to those task.

[Moontanman]

 

If you did NOT file a tax return or a proper form, your incentive check could not be mailed. It was all based on a reaction to those task.

 

Thanks jackson! WOW who'da thought it, I knew I was doing something wrong! File income taxes, Wow, reality what a concept:doh:

[modest]

Examples of liberal logic:

It is OK for Clinton to have sex in the oval office because Larry Craig solicited sex in a toilet stall.

It is OK for Obama to increase the size of government because George Bush did it.

It is OK for William Jefferson to continue as congressman after receiving thousands in bribes because some Repubs are also dishonest...

<etc>

It is wrong to criticise people for being criminal, too lazy to work, disruptive

in school, playing ugly music too loudly, not respecting others property,or being poor role models. This may hurt their feelings...

<etc>

 

Can you cite a single source of a 'liberal' stating this?

 

I ask you once more, do you honestly believe that this is the average 'liberal' viewpoint?

 

You realize, I hope that discussions of this type are not science and are subjective, therefore links to ''scientific'' articles are not usually available.

 

Neither political discussions nor the social science forum are immune from the site rules. Besides being purposefully inflammatory and trollish, your post above is also unsupported. Hypography is a science forum. Regardless of how unscientific you claim your post to be, it still requires scientific support. Regardless of your intention, the above post is baiting a flame war.

 

Mold can be eradicated by the tenant and clorox.

 

Mold is a health risk and should be properly irradiated. Bleach is not always effective and is advised against.

 

MOLD ACROSS AMERICA - BLEACH WARNING

 

There is a quote by someone (Buffy, perhaps you can help??) that goes something like:

'Stupidity is doing the same thing expecting different results'.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

- Einstein

 

~modest

[Zythryn]

Neither political discussions nor the social science forum are immune from the site rules. Besides being purposefully inflammatory and trollish, your post above is also unsupported. Hypography is a science forum. Regardless of how unscientific you claim your post to be, it still requires scientific support. Regardless of your intention, the above post is baiting a flame war.

 

This and the fact that my pursuit of clarification was indeed taking us off topic are the reasons I dropped it. If Questor wishes to pursue any of his positions from the post you quoted, I would be happy to discuss those topics in another thread.

 

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

- Einstein

 

~modest

 

Thank you modest! I knew I had the wording not quite right. I appreciate the reminder of the quote and who it came from:)

[REASON]

I am sorry but your comment really astonishes me.

 

First, personally I care about a hundred dollars. A hundred dollars compounded annually at 8% over 30 years adding an additional $100 each year comes out to over $12,000. That is one hell of trip traveling the world when I retire. :hyper:

 

Second, the overall impact is what we have to look at not just if you care as an individual about losing $100. The overall tax revenue from the government increases filtering it into a lost system instead of keeping it in the hands of Americans who could pump it back into the economy. It is not just the impact on you its the impact as a whole.

 

You know, I understand not liking to pay taxes, but I also don't like a government that spends excessively beyond it's means. I can't imagine that enormous budget deficits and a national debt spiraling out of control to the tune of nearly ten trillion dollars would be having no effect on the state of our economy. Not to mention trade deficits. I expect the government to exhibit fiscal responsibility whether being managed by Democrats or Republicans, and I don't think it can be denied that the current administration and congress has been horrible in this regard. I'd like to see some change here. I bet we can agree on that.

 

Also, while I hear your point about taxes, I do believe it would be worthwhile to apply your math to other household expenditures that have been hammered by rampant inflation such as energy costs, food, insurance of all flavors, etc., and much of this money goes to private industry which is either located, or has relocated abroad, and is being lost to foreign investment. At least I can expect my tax dollars to be spent here at home. The problem always is, will the government use good judgement with how they spend it. Well, considering this bogus Iraq endeavor is expected to top three trillion dollars, and we don't seem to be getting anything worthwhile out of it, it ends up looking like a pretty stupid investment of our tax dollars, not to mention all the money we've had to borrow from China and Japan to help fund it, which has helped to weaken the dollar. This doesn't even come near the moral and ethical problems that this invasion has generated as well.

 

Once again, I'm looking for a different approach.

 

Essentially, I want to elect the Orkin Man to go in with pesticide and rid our government agencies and departments of the Neo-con infestation that has run rampant for the last two cycles. Neo-cons aren't conservative, they are really more like Neo-liberals, and they're just as bad. I'll take a traditional Republican like Teddy or Ike or even Reagan over these imperialist Jacobin ideologues any day. All they really care about is agressively and forcefully expanding their notion of American Exceptionalism around the world, and massive profitability for segments of the private sector which they are closely tied financially. It doesn't matter who gets hurt in the process.

 

Do you think I can rely on John McCain to thoroughly flush them out of the Justice, State, and Defense Departments? I think there's a chance, but unfortunately, he's had to sound too much like them recently in order to secure the conservative base who has been transformed by their rhetoric, and I worry he may have been converted. He really hasn't sounded much like the "Maverick" he once was through the course of this campaign. He seems to have changed his tune on a number of issues. But maybe he realizes it's the role he must play in order to get elected, and the real maverick of the Senate will show up again once he is sworn in. If he gets elected, I sure hope that happens.

 

At least with Obama, I can count on the fact that there will be some serious flushing going on.

 

One thing I think is important when considering candidates for president is whether they are likely to make sound judgements about who to surround themselves with - their advisors, cabinet, and staffers. While presidents do make the final decision, offen their decision can only be as good as the information and advice they receive. So far, we have seen how each of the current candidates have made decisions in this regard, and in the matter of selecting a Vice President, I think Obama has demonstrated better judgement that is more substantive, and less political. To be honest, I think McCain was pressured into selecting Palin, and that she was not his first choice. While it concerns me that he may have succumbed to that pressure, it may also be proven to have been good advice. But there's still much to learn about Sarah Palin. :singer: