Glad to see the discussion is so intelligent and mature tonight. :rolleyes:
notice how it wasn't even a real debate? they agreed on too many issues for them to engage in any real institutional analysis, on anything really. they resorted to personal attacks and calling each other out on the issues more often than actually discussing the issues.
When they talk about nothing, they leave us with nothing to talk about. so I am going to make fun of them.
I think McCain did better than other debates but I found him more repellent this time around. Odd facial expressions, excessive blinking, interrupting, and smug looks when he thought he did a good job bothered me. Obama was a bit flatter this debate in the beginning, but he stayed on message and had better answers overall than McCain.
"Where there is sacrifice there is someone collecting the sacrificial offerings."-- Ayn Rand
"Some of my friends sit around every evening and they worry about the times ahead,
But everybody else is overwhelmed by indifference and the promise of an early bed..."-- Elvis Costello
I think McCain did better than other debates but I found him more repellent this time around. Odd facial expressions, excessive blinking, interrupting, and smug looks when he thought he did a good job bothered me.
So WHAT??!!
I don't get it. How can you people be so fucking superficial? It's insanity. All I heard from most of you a few weeks ago is that they need to address the issues. Now, when they are addressing the issues, you start talking about how they look and how many times they blinked. You're seriously gonna let the fate of the country lie in the balance of who reacted nicer or who blinked less?? Are you clinging that desperately to Obama that now the only way you can justify why you still support him is because he didn't blink as much?
The guy's a fricken socialist, Obama that is. "Spread the wealth around." Direct quote. If that's not Socialism, I don't know what the fuck is!! And if you think people's money should be taken for no reason and given to other people for no reason you're insane. That's the most un-American thing I've ever heard a politician say. It doesn't matter what the reason is, people still have a right to their own property, and the government has no right to take it and give it to others, no matter how poor those others are. We are violating basic rights here.
I pledge to you a government that will not only work well, but wisely, its ability to act tempered by prudence, and its willingness to do good, balanced by the knowledge that government is never more dangerous than when our desire to have it help us blinds us to its great power to harm us.
-Reagan
I don't get it. How can you people be so fucking superficial? It's insanity. All I heard from most of you a few weeks ago is that they need to address the issues. Now, when they are addressing the issues, you start talking about how they look and how many times they blinked. You're seriously gonna let the fate of the country lie in the balance of who reacted nicer or who blinked less?? Are you clinging that desperately to Obama that now the only way you can justify why you still support him is because he didn't blink as much?
The guy's a fricken socialist, Obama that is. "Spread the wealth around." Direct quote. If that's not Socialism, I don't know what the fuck is!! And if you think people's money should be taken for no reason and given to other people for no reason you're insane. That's the most un-American thing I've ever heard a politician say. It doesn't matter what the reason is, people still have a right to their own property, and the government has no right to take it and give it to others, no matter how poor those others are. We are violating basic rights here.
You are one angry dude ... a misinformed angry dude as well.
How can you seriously look at McCain's home buyback plan, one that would allow banks to get off scott free, take NONE of the losses and pass on all the losses to the public, and shout at Obama at being a Socialist?
"You're one of the few Red Sox fans I don't mind." - Newch91
"I don't believe in damn curses. Wake up the damn Bambino and have me face him. Maybe I'll drill him in the ass." --- Pedro Martinez
I don't get it. How can you people be so fucking superficial? It's insanity. All I heard from most of you a few weeks ago is that they need to address the issues. Now, when they are addressing the issues, you start talking about how they look and how many times they blinked. You're seriously gonna let the fate of the country lie in the balance of who reacted nicer or who blinked less?? Are you clinging that desperately to Obama that now the only way you can justify why you still support him is because he didn't blink as much?
The guy's a fricken socialist, Obama that is. "Spread the wealth around." Direct quote. If that's not Socialism, I don't know what the fuck is!! And if you think people's money should be taken for no reason and given to other people for no reason you're insane. That's the most un-American thing I've ever heard a politician say. It doesn't matter what the reason is, people still have a right to their own property, and the government has no right to take it and give it to others, no matter how poor those others are. We are violating basic rights here.
If wealth has been concentrating into the hands of the upper class for the last 40 years (which it has been doing) shouldn't a leader put that money back where it belongs? fuck yeah "spread the wealth around".
unless you think the rich should have it all, in that case my bad,
I don't get it. How can you people be so fucking superficial? It's insanity. All I heard from most of you a few weeks ago is that they need to address the issues. Now, when they are addressing the issues, you start talking about how they look and how many times they blinked. You're seriously gonna let the fate of the country lie in the balance of who reacted nicer or who blinked less?? Are you clinging that desperately to Obama that now the only way you can justify why you still support him is because he didn't blink as much?
The guy's a fricken socialist, Obama that is. "Spread the wealth around." Direct quote. If that's not Socialism, I don't know what the fuck is!! And if you think people's money should be taken for no reason and given to other people for no reason you're insane. That's the most un-American thing I've ever heard a politician say. It doesn't matter what the reason is, people still have a right to their own property, and the government has no right to take it and give it to others, no matter how poor those others are. We are violating basic rights here.
How can you seriously look at McCain's home buyback plan, one that would allow banks to get off scott free, take NONE of the losses and pass on all the losses to the public, and shout at Obama at being a Socialist?
McCain is certainly not the best choice, either. But he's the better choice. He still supports Federally-run education which is ridiculous. I have my qualms with McCain. Although I don't see what else we can do about the bank situation. We have to do what we have to do. It's the losses that would cause banks to go under and people to lose their money. It's a small price to pay for the large price we may have to pay if we don't do it.
I pledge to you a government that will not only work well, but wisely, its ability to act tempered by prudence, and its willingness to do good, balanced by the knowledge that government is never more dangerous than when our desire to have it help us blinds us to its great power to harm us.
-Reagan
unless you think the rich should have it all, in that case my bad,
They should have what is rightfully theirs.
My father grew up in very shitty circumstances in the projects in New York City. Mind you, we are White, not Black or any other minority. Were he still in that position today he'd benefit very much from Mr. Obama's plan. But he still doesn't support Obama. My dad worked his ass off, went to law school, made his way into the mid to upper Middle Class. He's not rich by any means, even now. But he understands how capitalism and free enterprise works. As regrettable as it is that people have to suffer in poverty, people's money is still their property, and, therefore, theirs to own. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the government has a right to seize anyone's property and give it to others. In fact, after my dad worked as hard as he did, he may wind up now paying higher taxes on the money he worked hard to earn. That's just not right. Everyone has an equal opportunity to advance in our society. People who don't take advantage of the opportunity should not be bailed out by the government.
I pledge to you a government that will not only work well, but wisely, its ability to act tempered by prudence, and its willingness to do good, balanced by the knowledge that government is never more dangerous than when our desire to have it help us blinds us to its great power to harm us.
-Reagan
McCain is certainly not the best choice, either. But he's the better choice. He still supports Federally-run education which is ridiculous. I have my qualms with McCain. Although I don't see what else we can do about the bank situation. We have to do what we have to do. It's the losses that would cause banks to go under and people to lose their money. It's a small price to pay for the large price we may have to pay if we don't do it.
It's just a point you need to remember when you yell "socialist" ... it's too late ... there is already a partial nationalization of several financial institutions ...
Car companies, airlines ... they are all lining up for government help ... we can say no and let them all go under one by one ... and watch all those companies and econmic sectors be dominated by other countries ... or, we can make an investment in them to get them back on their feet, one that they will have to pay back. But one that keeps jobs in America ...
it's a tough choice, one that needs to be scutinized ... but, we are in no position to just yell "socialism" and "less government" when it comes to these things becuase we ARE in a crisis.
"You're one of the few Red Sox fans I don't mind." - Newch91
"I don't believe in damn curses. Wake up the damn Bambino and have me face him. Maybe I'll drill him in the ass." --- Pedro Martinez
"Spread the wealth around." Direct quote. If that's not Socialism, I don't know what the fuck is!!
Well, direct government intervention, ownership and undertaking of every program by the government, for one. That means, for example, that universal health care government-run would be close to socialist. Which Obama doesn't support. He doesn't support solely government-run education, either. Socialism is defined as a little more than an income tax, no matter how inflamed you are about it.
it's a tough choice, one that needs to be scutinized ... but, we are in no position to just yell "socialism" and "less government" when it comes to these things becuase we ARE in a crisis.
I'm yelling socialist about his "spreading the wealth around" nonsense. I understand that the measures needed to fix the economy will be slightly socialist. It's what needs to be done. But let me also make this point, we should get rid of them as soon as we are able. Certainly, the market needs to be regulated, I'm not at all saying it shouldn't. But any programs we put into place should be removed if necessary once they have served their purpose.
I pledge to you a government that will not only work well, but wisely, its ability to act tempered by prudence, and its willingness to do good, balanced by the knowledge that government is never more dangerous than when our desire to have it help us blinds us to its great power to harm us.
-Reagan
Respectfully, MattyJoe you are mis-informed and drawing the wrong conclusion about "spreading the wealth around" indicating that Obama is a Socialist. Not true and wrong economically.
I watched Warren Buffett on Charlie Rose last week. Buffett is one of the greatest capitalist success stories ever and a free market kingpin. He directly stated that he pays too little in taxes and that his secretary pays a much higher percent of her income to the government (mostly due to the 100,000 dollar cap on payroll taxes, ie he doesn't pay them on most of his income, and the Bush dividend tax cuts ie no tax on dividends).
He said this is both not fair and BAD economics. Buffett flat out said "the government SHOULD tax me more and give that money to the families struggling to make it on 20 grand a year." He went on to state that this family would then buy things, thereby stimulating the economy and benefiting the rich owners of these companies like himself.
Wealth trickles up, not down. Buffett wants to spread the wealth around and is backing Obama. That's not called socialism, it's called common sense.
We all walk the Long Road...
Charlotte & Raleigh Lollapalooza 1992, Charlotte Memorial Stadium 1996, Tibet Freedom Concert 1998, Raleigh & Greenville 1998, Greensboro 2000, Raleigh & Camden 2003, Asheville 2004, Camden 2006, DC 2008, Atlanta 2012 Charlottesville 2013, Charlotte 2013 Greenville, (XRaleighX) and Hampton 2016, London Hyde Park, Quebec City and Ottawa 2022, St Paul X2 2023, Raleigh 2025 X2, Florida (hopefully)...
I'm yelling socialist about his "spreading the wealth around" nonsense. I understand that the measures needed to fix the economy will be slightly socialist. It's what needs to be done. But let me also make this point, we should get rid of them as soon as we are able. Certainly, the market needs to be regulated, I'm not at all saying it shouldn't. But any programs we put into place should be removed if necessary once they have served their purpose.
and as for the "spread the wealth" comment, well, it's a poorly taken sound bite ...
Did you think we were socialist under Clinton? Becuase that's what the tax %s will be under Obama's plan ... it's a few percentage points ... we're not talking about government ownership of all businesses and a full scale, equal to everyone, redistribution of wealth ...
Indeed, the rich will pay a higher % to make things like educaiton, infrastucture improvement, defense spending, healthcare, etc a little better ... but, believe me, the rich folks in this country are not going to be stuggling to get by with a few more points of taxes ... and it's not going to cost thousands of jobs ... unless, that is, CEOs and high level execs can't get by with $45M salaries when they were getting $50M salaries.
"You're one of the few Red Sox fans I don't mind." - Newch91
"I don't believe in damn curses. Wake up the damn Bambino and have me face him. Maybe I'll drill him in the ass." --- Pedro Martinez
I don't get it. How can you people be so fucking superficial? It's insanity. All I heard from most of you a few weeks ago is that they need to address the issues. Now, when they are addressing the issues, you start talking about how they look and how many times they blinked. You're seriously gonna let the fate of the country lie in the balance of who reacted nicer or who blinked less?? Are you clinging that desperately to Obama that now the only way you can justify why you still support him is because he didn't blink as much?
I agree about the blinking. (Although I think people are just talking shit, not saying their vote is dependent on this.)
But I think the way they reacted IS important. We need a President who can stay cool, calm, and collected, who is respectful to other world leaders, and who can think clearly in times of crisis.
The guy's a fricken socialist, Obama that is. "Spread the wealth around." Direct quote. If that's not Socialism, I don't know what the fuck is!! And if you think people's money should be taken for no reason and given to other people for no reason you're insane. That's the most un-American thing I've ever heard a politician say. It doesn't matter what the reason is, people still have a right to their own property, and the government has no right to take it and give it to others, no matter how poor those others are. We are violating basic rights here.
You're talking as if Barack Obama invented taxes. News flash: we already take people's money and give it to others, and neither of the candidates is suggesting that we stop. Obama just wants to do it a little bit more.
And I think that's fair. People act like CEOs earned their millions fair and square, due entirely to working harder than their workers who make less. But that's total BS. CEOs become obscenely rich through the EXPLOITATION of workers. Just because they are in positions of power which enable them to take more than their fair share of the money doesn't make it right. Not only is Obama right to want to spread the wealth a little more fairly, but it just makes good economic sense for our whole country to invest in healthcare, education, etc.
(There's already a whole other thread about this, ya know.)
I watched the debate tonight and I guess McCains advisors told him to be nicer and more relaxed.
This is the first debate where he actually LOOKED at Obama at any time
BUT
I don't think the tactic worked because as much as he was trying so hard so suck it up and be likeable you could see the steam coming out of his ears many times. Also it was quite evident in some of McCains responses that he was not really listening to Obama all that carefully at times. Obama would spell something out pretty clear then McCain would fire back with either the opposite or a misconception his partys been feeding the people. Obama corrected him a couple of times and took the high road at others.
I wanted to jump through my screen and punch McCain when he was talking about some of the negative things being said about himself while seeming to act ok with what his camp has said about Obama....hello pot this is the kettle speaking!!! (I admit Obama kind of did the same thing but he didn't keep going on and on about it the way McCain was)
I think McCain did better than he did in the other 2 debates BUT I don't think he did better than Obama. I found Obama to be more clear, calm and concise in both his answers and his demeanor.
I also don't think his answers will garner him any more votes. Those who have decided to vote for him I'm sure were going HELL YA for his points all night....but I can't see an undecided voter being swayed to vote for McCain tonight...the economy is collapsing and he's saying less government involvement and less spending. How is that going to resonate with AVERAGE Americans??? Can't imagine that well.
"Rock and roll is something that can't be quantified, sometimes it's not even something you hear, but FEEL!" - Bob Lefsetz
I don't get it. How can you people be so fucking superficial? It's insanity. All I heard from most of you a few weeks ago is that they need to address the issues. Now, when they are addressing the issues, you start talking about how they look and how many times they blinked. You're seriously gonna let the fate of the country lie in the balance of who reacted nicer or who blinked less?? Are you clinging that desperately to Obama that now the only way you can justify why you still support him is because he didn't blink as much?
The guy's a fricken socialist, Obama that is. "Spread the wealth around." Direct quote. If that's not Socialism, I don't know what the fuck is!! And if you think people's money should be taken for no reason and given to other people for no reason you're insane. That's the most un-American thing I've ever heard a politician say. It doesn't matter what the reason is, people still have a right to their own property, and the government has no right to take it and give it to others, no matter how poor those others are. We are violating basic rights here.
Everyone has an equal opportunity to advance in our society. People who don't take advantage of the opportunity should not be bailed out by the government.
REALLY?? Everyone has an equal opportunity?? What about a person who has an IQ of 25 living in a State Hospital because their family abandoned them at birth? Or a person with an IQ of 60 who lives in their own apartment, unable to hold down a job because of Mental Health issues, whose only support is their caseworker who has 90 other people in the same situation on their caseload?
Respectfully, MattyJoe you are mis-informed and drawing the wrong conclusion about "spreading the wealth around" indicating that Obama is a Socialist. Not true and wrong economically.
I watched Warren Buffett on Charlie Rose last week. Buffett is one of the greatest capitalist success stories ever and a free market kingpin. He directly stated that he pays too little in taxes and that his secretary pays a much higher percent of her income to the government (mostly due to the 100,000 dollar cap on payroll taxes, ie he doesn't pay them on most of his income, and the Bush dividend tax cuts ie no tax on dividends).
He said this is both not fair and BAD economics. Buffett flat out said "the government SHOULD tax me more and give that money to the families struggling to make it on 20 grand a year." He went on to state that this family would then buy things, thereby stimulating the economy and benefiting the rich owners of these companies like himself.
Wealth trickles up, not down. Buffett wants to spread the wealth around and is backing Obama. That's not called socialism, it's called common sense.
Best post in the thread.
I'm also glad to see more Charlie Rose fans out there.
I had a lot of respect for John McCain, and he lost me tonight. If that's how he reacts to pressure, I do not want him to be president.
drivingrl: "Will I ever get to meet Gwen Stefani?"
kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.
Respectfully, MattyJoe you are mis-informed and drawing the wrong conclusion about "spreading the wealth around" indicating that Obama is a Socialist. Not true and wrong economically.
I watched Warren Buffett on Charlie Rose last week. Buffett is one of the greatest capitalist success stories ever and a free market kingpin. He directly stated that he pays too little in taxes and that his secretary pays a much higher percent of her income to the government (mostly due to the 100,000 dollar cap on payroll taxes, ie he doesn't pay them on most of his income, and the Bush dividend tax cuts ie no tax on dividends).
He said this is both not fair and BAD economics. Buffett flat out said "the government SHOULD tax me more and give that money to the families struggling to make it on 20 grand a year." He went on to state that this family would then buy things, thereby stimulating the economy and benefiting the rich owners of these companies like himself.
Wealth trickles up, not down. Buffett wants to spread the wealth around and is backing Obama. That's not called socialism, it's called common sense.
Buffet is completely full of shit on this issue. If he wants to pay more taxes, he is certainly welcome to. In fact, he is allowed to write that check for any amount equal to or greater than the amount he owes. So what stops him? Why doesn't he write out a check to the feds for whatever amount he feels would be his fair share?
If he wants to spread HIS wealth, that is certainly her perogative. But to suggest that the government should take more of peoples' money just because Buffet can afford it is complete horshit. And taking peoples' money by force to give it to others isn't charity, it is extortion. So you may be fooled by Buffet and Obama, but many of us see it for what it is.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
Respectfully, MattyJoe you are mis-informed and drawing the wrong conclusion about "spreading the wealth around" indicating that Obama is a Socialist. Not true and wrong economically.
I watched Warren Buffett on Charlie Rose last week. Buffett is one of the greatest capitalist success stories ever and a free market kingpin. He directly stated that he pays too little in taxes and that his secretary pays a much higher percent of her income to the government (mostly due to the 100,000 dollar cap on payroll taxes, ie he doesn't pay them on most of his income, and the Bush dividend tax cuts ie no tax on dividends).
He said this is both not fair and BAD economics. Buffett flat out said "the government SHOULD tax me more and give that money to the families struggling to make it on 20 grand a year." He went on to state that this family would then buy things, thereby stimulating the economy and benefiting the rich owners of these companies like himself.
Wealth trickles up, not down. Buffett wants to spread the wealth around and is backing Obama. That's not called socialism, it's called common sense.
Thank you so much. Common sense seems to be needed most and desperately these days.
Two readers with access to the Ohio voter file say that Joe Wurzelbacher's inluence on this cycle will be limited in one way: He doesn't appear to be registered to vote.
(And yes, the freelance opposition research on Joe began before the debate ended.)
"You're one of the few Red Sox fans I don't mind." - Newch91
"I don't believe in damn curses. Wake up the damn Bambino and have me face him. Maybe I'll drill him in the ass." --- Pedro Martinez
Comments
When they talk about nothing, they leave us with nothing to talk about. so I am going to make fun of them.
JEFFREY ROSS ROGERS 1975-2002
9.10.98 NYC / 8.23.00 JONES BEACH /4.30.03 UNIONDALE / 7.9.03 NYC /5.12.06 ALBANY/ 6.1.06 E.RUTHEFORD/ 6.3.06 E. RUTHEFORD/ CAMDEN 6.19.08/ NYC 6.24.08/ NYC 6.25.08/ HARTFORD 6.27.08/ CHICAGO 8.24.09/ PHILLY 10.31.09/ HARTFORD 5.15.10/ NEWARK 5.18.10/ NYC 5.20.10/ CHICAGO 7.19.13/ BROOKLYN 10.18.13/ BROOKLYN 10.19.13/ HARTFORD 10.25.13/ NYC 9.26.15/ 4.8.16 FT. LAUDERDALE/ 4.9.16 MIAMI / 5.1.16 NYC/ 5.2.16 NYC / 8.5.16 BOSTON / 8.7.16 BOSTON/ 8.20.18 CHICAGO/ 9.2.18 BOSTON/ 9.4.18 BOSTON/ 9.18.21 ASBURY PARK
finally, FUCK TICKETMASTER
"Some of my friends sit around every evening and they worry about the times ahead,
But everybody else is overwhelmed by indifference and the promise of an early bed..."-- Elvis Costello
So WHAT??!!
I don't get it. How can you people be so fucking superficial? It's insanity. All I heard from most of you a few weeks ago is that they need to address the issues. Now, when they are addressing the issues, you start talking about how they look and how many times they blinked. You're seriously gonna let the fate of the country lie in the balance of who reacted nicer or who blinked less?? Are you clinging that desperately to Obama that now the only way you can justify why you still support him is because he didn't blink as much?
The guy's a fricken socialist, Obama that is. "Spread the wealth around." Direct quote. If that's not Socialism, I don't know what the fuck is!! And if you think people's money should be taken for no reason and given to other people for no reason you're insane. That's the most un-American thing I've ever heard a politician say. It doesn't matter what the reason is, people still have a right to their own property, and the government has no right to take it and give it to others, no matter how poor those others are. We are violating basic rights here.
-Reagan
You are one angry dude ... a misinformed angry dude as well.
How can you seriously look at McCain's home buyback plan, one that would allow banks to get off scott free, take NONE of the losses and pass on all the losses to the public, and shout at Obama at being a Socialist?
"I don't believe in damn curses. Wake up the damn Bambino and have me face him. Maybe I'll drill him in the ass." --- Pedro Martinez
unless you think the rich should have it all, in that case my bad,
McCain is certainly not the best choice, either. But he's the better choice. He still supports Federally-run education which is ridiculous. I have my qualms with McCain. Although I don't see what else we can do about the bank situation. We have to do what we have to do. It's the losses that would cause banks to go under and people to lose their money. It's a small price to pay for the large price we may have to pay if we don't do it.
-Reagan
They should have what is rightfully theirs.
My father grew up in very shitty circumstances in the projects in New York City. Mind you, we are White, not Black or any other minority. Were he still in that position today he'd benefit very much from Mr. Obama's plan. But he still doesn't support Obama. My dad worked his ass off, went to law school, made his way into the mid to upper Middle Class. He's not rich by any means, even now. But he understands how capitalism and free enterprise works. As regrettable as it is that people have to suffer in poverty, people's money is still their property, and, therefore, theirs to own. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the government has a right to seize anyone's property and give it to others. In fact, after my dad worked as hard as he did, he may wind up now paying higher taxes on the money he worked hard to earn. That's just not right. Everyone has an equal opportunity to advance in our society. People who don't take advantage of the opportunity should not be bailed out by the government.
-Reagan
It's just a point you need to remember when you yell "socialist" ... it's too late ... there is already a partial nationalization of several financial institutions ...
Car companies, airlines ... they are all lining up for government help ... we can say no and let them all go under one by one ... and watch all those companies and econmic sectors be dominated by other countries ... or, we can make an investment in them to get them back on their feet, one that they will have to pay back. But one that keeps jobs in America ...
it's a tough choice, one that needs to be scutinized ... but, we are in no position to just yell "socialism" and "less government" when it comes to these things becuase we ARE in a crisis.
"I don't believe in damn curses. Wake up the damn Bambino and have me face him. Maybe I'll drill him in the ass." --- Pedro Martinez
Well, direct government intervention, ownership and undertaking of every program by the government, for one. That means, for example, that universal health care government-run would be close to socialist. Which Obama doesn't support. He doesn't support solely government-run education, either. Socialism is defined as a little more than an income tax, no matter how inflamed you are about it.
I'm yelling socialist about his "spreading the wealth around" nonsense. I understand that the measures needed to fix the economy will be slightly socialist. It's what needs to be done. But let me also make this point, we should get rid of them as soon as we are able. Certainly, the market needs to be regulated, I'm not at all saying it shouldn't. But any programs we put into place should be removed if necessary once they have served their purpose.
-Reagan
I watched Warren Buffett on Charlie Rose last week. Buffett is one of the greatest capitalist success stories ever and a free market kingpin. He directly stated that he pays too little in taxes and that his secretary pays a much higher percent of her income to the government (mostly due to the 100,000 dollar cap on payroll taxes, ie he doesn't pay them on most of his income, and the Bush dividend tax cuts ie no tax on dividends).
He said this is both not fair and BAD economics. Buffett flat out said "the government SHOULD tax me more and give that money to the families struggling to make it on 20 grand a year." He went on to state that this family would then buy things, thereby stimulating the economy and benefiting the rich owners of these companies like himself.
Wealth trickles up, not down. Buffett wants to spread the wealth around and is backing Obama. That's not called socialism, it's called common sense.
Charlotte & Raleigh Lollapalooza 1992, Charlotte Memorial Stadium 1996, Tibet Freedom Concert 1998, Raleigh & Greenville 1998, Greensboro 2000, Raleigh & Camden 2003, Asheville 2004, Camden 2006, DC 2008, Atlanta 2012 Charlottesville 2013, Charlotte 2013
Greenville, (XRaleighX) and Hampton 2016, London Hyde Park, Quebec City and Ottawa 2022, St Paul X2 2023, Raleigh 2025 X2, Florida (hopefully)...
and as for the "spread the wealth" comment, well, it's a poorly taken sound bite ...
Did you think we were socialist under Clinton? Becuase that's what the tax %s will be under Obama's plan ... it's a few percentage points ... we're not talking about government ownership of all businesses and a full scale, equal to everyone, redistribution of wealth ...
Indeed, the rich will pay a higher % to make things like educaiton, infrastucture improvement, defense spending, healthcare, etc a little better ... but, believe me, the rich folks in this country are not going to be stuggling to get by with a few more points of taxes ... and it's not going to cost thousands of jobs ... unless, that is, CEOs and high level execs can't get by with $45M salaries when they were getting $50M salaries.
"I don't believe in damn curses. Wake up the damn Bambino and have me face him. Maybe I'll drill him in the ass." --- Pedro Martinez
Obama stood his ground.
http://qudecide.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/the-final-debate-mccain-threw-punches-but-didnt-get-a-knockout/
Mansfield II '08
EV Solo Shows:
NYC I
NJPAC
I. LOVE. YIELD.
*shudder*
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jmgphotos/4731512142/" title="PJ Banner2 by Mister J Photography, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1135/4731512142_258f2d6ab4_b.jpg" width="630" height="112" alt="PJ Banner2" /></a>
I agree about the blinking. (Although I think people are just talking shit, not saying their vote is dependent on this.)
But I think the way they reacted IS important. We need a President who can stay cool, calm, and collected, who is respectful to other world leaders, and who can think clearly in times of crisis.
You're talking as if Barack Obama invented taxes. News flash: we already take people's money and give it to others, and neither of the candidates is suggesting that we stop. Obama just wants to do it a little bit more.
And I think that's fair. People act like CEOs earned their millions fair and square, due entirely to working harder than their workers who make less. But that's total BS. CEOs become obscenely rich through the EXPLOITATION of workers. Just because they are in positions of power which enable them to take more than their fair share of the money doesn't make it right. Not only is Obama right to want to spread the wealth a little more fairly, but it just makes good economic sense for our whole country to invest in healthcare, education, etc.
(There's already a whole other thread about this, ya know.)
This is the first debate where he actually LOOKED at Obama at any time
BUT
I don't think the tactic worked because as much as he was trying so hard so suck it up and be likeable you could see the steam coming out of his ears many times. Also it was quite evident in some of McCains responses that he was not really listening to Obama all that carefully at times. Obama would spell something out pretty clear then McCain would fire back with either the opposite or a misconception his partys been feeding the people. Obama corrected him a couple of times and took the high road at others.
I wanted to jump through my screen and punch McCain when he was talking about some of the negative things being said about himself while seeming to act ok with what his camp has said about Obama....hello pot this is the kettle speaking!!! (I admit Obama kind of did the same thing but he didn't keep going on and on about it the way McCain was)
I think McCain did better than he did in the other 2 debates BUT I don't think he did better than Obama. I found Obama to be more clear, calm and concise in both his answers and his demeanor.
I also don't think his answers will garner him any more votes. Those who have decided to vote for him I'm sure were going HELL YA for his points all night....but I can't see an undecided voter being swayed to vote for McCain tonight...the economy is collapsing and he's saying less government involvement and less spending. How is that going to resonate with AVERAGE Americans??? Can't imagine that well.
Been to any rallies lately.
REALLY?? Everyone has an equal opportunity?? What about a person who has an IQ of 25 living in a State Hospital because their family abandoned them at birth? Or a person with an IQ of 60 who lives in their own apartment, unable to hold down a job because of Mental Health issues, whose only support is their caseworker who has 90 other people in the same situation on their caseload?
I'm also glad to see more Charlie Rose fans out there.
EV- 08/09,10/2008.06/08,09/2009
kevinbeetle: "Yes. When her career washes up and her and Gavin move to Galveston, you will meet her at Hot Topic shopping for a Japanese cheerleader outfit.
Next!"
I still have a lot of respect for the man, based on the experiences he's gone through. I don't feel he's presidential material, though.
Buffet is completely full of shit on this issue. If he wants to pay more taxes, he is certainly welcome to. In fact, he is allowed to write that check for any amount equal to or greater than the amount he owes. So what stops him? Why doesn't he write out a check to the feds for whatever amount he feels would be his fair share?
If he wants to spread HIS wealth, that is certainly her perogative. But to suggest that the government should take more of peoples' money just because Buffet can afford it is complete horshit. And taking peoples' money by force to give it to others isn't charity, it is extortion. So you may be fooled by Buffet and Obama, but many of us see it for what it is.
Thank you so much. Common sense seems to be needed most and desperately these days.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/The_Joe_file.html?showall
October 16, 2008
Categories: Debates
The Joe file
Two readers with access to the Ohio voter file say that Joe Wurzelbacher's inluence on this cycle will be limited in one way: He doesn't appear to be registered to vote.
(And yes, the freelance opposition research on Joe began before the debate ended.)
"I don't believe in damn curses. Wake up the damn Bambino and have me face him. Maybe I'll drill him in the ass." --- Pedro Martinez