Great answer :slap:
ralph nader anyway >*
Watch the USS Liberty video man. I’m not a pessimist about government for no reason. I mean, Obama supporters who oppose Bush’s exercise of unauthorized powers should be aware of the dangers of having too much power in a central government.
LBJ was a crook who had American’s executed by Israeli forces as part of a political stunt in 1967. Hitler had the Riechstag burned down to blame it on Communist terrorists and executed a retarded boy who was known to be a patsy. Google the Gulf of Tonkin, it was a complete lie broadcast on American TV to get the population behind the Vietnam war.
None of those 3 situations are theories, they are all confirmed historical facts.
If anyone wants to show that a larger government with more power will reduce the occurrence of such abuses, I would love to see any time in history that has been true. Bigger government has always yielded more egregious abuses. As the case of the Soviet Union shows us, a collapse of such an empire is far more disastrous. Most of the AK47s and nuclear weapons that are scattered around the planet in the hands of unscrupulous individuals came from the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Smaller governments that have less power are our only hope of survival.
So, how the fuck has the Bush administration made our Government smaller? How is McStain going to make it smaller? Bush lied to us of why we went to war. He lied to us about a ton of stuff! Most of them listed above by Shaggy. The issue isn’t your examples, nor is it bigger Gov at this point. We have a financial crisis, not a big government crisis. We need to slow down on spending, and if you check your facts, the Rep’s are the ones that do this the best! The dumbest thing I heard McStain say is how he wants an across the board spending freeze, get real old man!!!
So now you are down to name calling (McStain?) Really bolsters your arguments!
VOTE FOR MCAIN
You completely missed my point. Bush did NOT make the gov smaller. He and the congress are rogue forces exercising power they don’t have, and we are unable to stop them. Obama wants government to be bigger and more powerful. That’s fine for everyone if you have a benevolent Mother Theresa type in power. Unfortunately the kind of people that bust their ass for half a century to get into the White House are usually sociopaths. I’ll spare you the full definition but I’ll tell you this much. They have no problem lying, and don’t care about any other human beings any further than that person can promote their own cause.
Make government bigger, and giving leaders more power will destroy this nation.
Get off the tired old Repub/Dem BS man. It’s a smoke-screen, and you’ve fallen right into it.
Replace one bad leader, with another bad leader with a different party affiliation behind his name…good solution.
No I didn’t miss your point, because you didn’t clearly make one. How can you honestly generalize like this? If you want, I’ll go down the same path. McCain voted 90% of the time with Bush, which will lead me to think that everything that has happened will only continue to follow suit, so within the next 4yrs, we are going to increase our national debt, continue this war in Iraq, continue to spend money like crazy, and be even more roguer 
The current administration has already expanded enough, fiscally and governmentally as we both identify. At least, Obama will have some different ideas, instead of freezing the spending of the government. Both are liars, both will do whatever it takes to get to the top. Both will skew numbers to present themselves in a good light. So, both are politicians. I am still missing the point of how McCain will be the better of both evils…Please stop using the Soviet Union and it’s collapse and compare it to Obama and what ‘might’ happen in the USA. It’s not even remotely the same thing, or time or government. We are beyond just survival, it’s a matter of action at this point, and hopefully the winner of this will take the appropriate actions instead of pad their own pockets as they both do. (Earmarks/pork barrels, call them whatever, they all find ways to make a little extra for themselves…it’s politics)
I’m being beat90tsi for halloween; anyone know how to make a proper tinfoil hat?
Very funny Shalerpunk…
I’m going to be an Obama supporter, my costume will be the Kool-Aid man.
Kilmerpothead, I never said McCain would be better.
4/20 is my b-day you jackass and if you didn’t say the opposition was better then you said nothing at all, so stop your generalizations as they lead to nowhere!
Nice statement! This is right out of Obama Socialism 101.
Start playing the race game when you have no real facts to substantiate your agenda.
Sorry, I have no white guilt. I am descended from immigrants not slave owners.
I guess I never went to see Rev Wright for twenty years to get any “racial Training”.
I voted for Lynn Swann for Governor. Did you?
What is Social Democracy? Is this the 21st century work for socialism? You quote that Marxist Trotsky like anything he ever said real meant anything. I know, he is the guy who came up with Trotshyism.
Trotskyism is the theory of Marxism as advocated by Leon Trotsky. Trotsky considered himself an orthodox Marxist and Bolshevik-Leninist, arguing for the establishment of a vanguard party. Is this where the “social democracy” comes from? A early 20th Century Marxist?
I can see how capitalism would be something Obama followers would not feel strong for. Why take control of your own life and work hard for what you want when you could follow Obama and hope for him to save all his followers. I know, it’s about sharing the wealth. So what potential is there for a society that has the crap taxed out of the people who work for a living?
What faith should we have in a “Social Democracy” (love that Socialist buzzword) when people are punished for producing? It will be like FDRs reign during the depression.
That’s why Obama’s people are called followers instead of leaders.
Then there is FDR. FDR basically kept the US in the depression years longer then we should have been. The attached Tax foundation site shows the tax rate for someone making $200,000 in 1933 was 58% and went up to his beyond excessive taxes in 1944 to 1945 to a rate of 94% taxes on income greater then $200.000.
Yes, I do mean 94% taxes for $200,000 and up. Pretty Pathetic.
Checking the timeline of the Great Depression, Roosevelt was almost overthrown in 1933 because of his “plan to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor”. Gee, who has said something lately about “Redistributing the wealth”?
No wonder the depression lasted so long. So this one of the greatest president? Sounds like a 1930-1940s version of OBAMA.
But what about the previous administrations?
If you all want to compare the last Democrat President Clinton to Republican President Bush, here is the breakdown:
Based again on using actual tax tables; http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html
here are some examples on what the taxes were/are on various incomes/filing status under Clinton and Bush:
Taxes under Clinton 1999 Taxes under Bush 2008
Single @ 30K Tax $8,400 Single @ 30K Tax $4,500
Single @ 50K Tax $14,000 Single @ 50K Tax $12,500
Single @ 75K Tax $23,250 Single @ 75K Tax $18,750
Married @ 60K Tax $16,800 Married @ 60K Tax $9,000
Married @ 75K Tax $21,000 Married @ 75K Tax $18,750
Married @ 125K Tax $38,750 Married @ 125K Tax $31,250
This was posted in another website and has been an excellent way to illustrate the differences in financial distribution past President’s administrations.
The Tax Foundation - U.S. Federal Individual Income Tax Rates History, 1913-2008 http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html
Timeline of the Great Depression : Timeline of the Great Depression
Socialism involves state ownership of the means of economic production and state-directed sharing of the wealth. America’s democratic capitalist system is neither socialist nor pure free market; rather, it mixes the two, and it has at least since the progressive income tax was introduced 95 years ago. Under it, the wealthy pay higher income tax rates than those who are less fortunate do. (McCain agrees with this, remember the Michigan State debate and a girl asked him a specific question of why her Dr. of a father should pay more taxes? C’mon you Right Wingers, you love blaming Liberal Media, but this isn’t all over the media now is it?)
Government intervenes in U.S. “free markets” all the time. The deduction homeowners get for mortgage interest is one form, because it subsidizes housing. The government contracts that sustain U.S. weapons makers such as Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics are another.
For that matter, President Bush and a lot of other Republicans, including McCain, backed a massive federal government rescue of ailing financial institutions this fall, one that’s committed more than $1 trillion so far to “private” banks, even taking partial ownership of the nine biggest.
While such ideas are associated with the left, it was Bush and McCain who pushed a trillion-dollar government plan to save ailing financial institutions. If we’re moving toward socialism, it’s a bipartisan event.
This makes you think…written by a economics professor at RMU
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribunereview/opinion/columnists/reiland/s_596337.html
Obama vs. jobs
By Ralph R. Reiland
Monday, November 3, 2008I interviewed two plumbing company owners over the weekend about Barack Obama’s economic proposals for small business.
One has 15 employees and 12 trucks. The other has 52 employees and 34 trucks. They’re Joe the Plumber, writ large.
Both owners had the same reaction to Obama’s proposed new taxes and mandates. To not have their bottom lines reduced by government fiat, both said they’d be forced to lay off employees.
story continues below
Specifically, here’s what the owner of the larger firm said regarding six of Obama’s key proposals for the small-business sector: The average wage at his company, figuring the 52 paychecks of his office staff, installers and service workers, is $31,200, $15 an hour.
First, “Barack Obama and Joe Biden will require that employers provide seven paid sick days per year,” states the Obama campaign’s Web site. “I give three paid sick days,” explained the business owner. His extra cost for this one new regulation would be $24,960 (4 extra days, 52 employees, at an average of $120 per day). “That’s one of the women in the office,” he said. “I can make up that cost by letting one of the office people go.”
Second, Obama states that employers will be required to pay 100 percent of the cost of health insurance premiums for 100 percent of their employees or face a tax penalty. “I pay 75 percent of their coverage,” explained the owner. “The family policy is about $11,000. For single guys, it’s about $5,000.” At an average annual cost of $7,000 per policy, his additional cost for 52 employees to cover the 25 percent of the premiums that he currently doesn’t pay is $91,000. “That’s the price of three installers,” he said. “Just to stay even with where I am, I’d have to fire three more people or raise some prices and fire two.”
The result is more unemployment or more inflation, or both.
Third, with the estate tax, Obama is calling for a top tax rate of 45 percent on estates valued above $3.5 million, producing an estimated “death tax” of $675,000 on an estate of $5 million. “You’re kidding,” he said. “They took half my income on the way up and now they want another half when I die?” He estimated that his business is already valued at more than $3 million, in addition to the value of his home and investments. “Why,” he asked, “would I want to grow to 100 employees? What’ll stop them from changing it to 75 percent?”
The cost in jobs that will never be created in the U.S. economy because of this single disincentive to growth? Incalculable.
Fourth, Obama’s economic plan calls for a hike in the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour within three years. The business owner’s reaction? “That’s bad for two reasons. I don’t have anyone at minimum, but raise the bottom by $3 and a guy making $15 wants $18. Plus it’s bad for productivity when people think their pay raises are coming from government instead of from their own individual effort.”
Fifth, saying he’ll “play offense for organized labor,” Obama is proposing that workers should be denied the right to a private ballot at work in deciding whether to unionize. “That’ll never be,” said the plumbing entrepreneur. “I’m in business because I’m independent, not to take orders from a grievance chairman. I’d shut down.”
Sixth, the increase in taxes on this small business owner from Obama’s proposed hike in the income tax rate from 36% to 39.8% on incomes above $200,000 and the proposed increase in Social Security taxes comes to $32,000 per year. “That’s another employee,” he said, referring to the termination of another installer in order to just stay even.
And the jobless plumbers? They can be re-socialized to work for ACORN.
As Obama explained in July: “We cannot continue to rely on our military to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded.”
As “well funded” as our Armed Forces personnel comes to $119 billion per year in paychecks for “community activism,” a lot of money for registering dead voters, caulking windows, making sure that all the guns are locked up at the municipal buildings, and monitoring the airways to make sure that conservatives don’t have too many talk shows.
Bottom line, Obama’s economic plan doesn’t hold water. Neither will our pipes.
Ralph R. Reiland is an associate professor of economics at Robert Morris University and a local restaurateur. He can be reached at rrreiland@aol.com.
To increase the Great Depression by 6-7 years by Government stupidity. Got a great book on that asshat and his attempts to crush the Constitution.
We can elect a dick or a pussy, but either way, we’re all fucked. When I saw who was running for election (while in Iraq), a BRITISH soldier told me we were screwed. How lame is that? Next 4 years here we come!