Calling Obama supporters

[cornopean]

The original poster. At least, that's the conclusion I came to when he refused to answer my questions in kind.

Mrs. M.....are you referring to me? I haven't refused to answer anyone but in the blizzard of posts, I might have missed your questions.

 

But, I must add, that I started this thread with a question for Obama supporters. How are Obama's proposed tax hikes going to help our economy? If someone asnwered this, I missed it. Could you repost it. If you have questions for me, why not start a thread for McCain supporters. ?:001_smile: I will be happy to field any questions and I am a McCain supporter.

[kokotg]

okay, why not?--I'll bite. Obama is proposing a middle class tax cut and returning upper income taxes to the same levels that we had back when there was a balanced budget, a surplus, and a economy that didn't make 80% of the population think the country is headed in the wrong direction. I'm not an economist (though most economists are Democrats), but, yeah, I'll take my chances with the top 1% of American wage earners having to go back to the dark ages of 1999. Obviously, this is a fundamental difference between Republicans and Democrats--I don't know that anyone here is going to say anything new in a debate about the merits of a progressive tax structure that's been raging throughout much of the history of American politics. Here's a Wikipedia article on progressive taxation that runs through the pros and cons (and notes, incidentally, that 81% of US economists favor a progressive tax). I find the pros more convincing than the cons. The way you phrase your questions suggests that you somehow believe there's actually NOT an argument to be made for a progressive tax structure. As far as Democrats go, Obama is fairly centrist economically. He's certainly not the reincarnation of Huey Long. If Republicans really want to go back to campaigning on economic issues instead of social and foreign policy issues (Southern Strategy finally run its course, has it?), then that's fine with me, because they'll lose. I mean, they'll probably lose anyway this year. If the Republicans can't hold on to house seat in Mississippi, then they're not in good shape. Just noted that you're a McCain supporter. You are aware, then, that McCain spoke out strongly against the same Bush tax cuts that Obama has proposed rolling back? You know, until he decided to run for president.

[Mrs Mungo]

Mrs. M.....are you referring to me? I haven't refused to answer anyone but in the blizzard of posts, I might have missed your questions.

 

But, I must add, that I started this thread with a question for Obama supporters. How are Obama's proposed tax hikes going to help our economy? If someone asnwered this, I missed it. Could you repost it. If you have questions for me, why not start a thread for McCain supporters. ?:001_smile: I will be happy to field any questions and I am a McCain supporter.

 

Is there a reason we need to clutter up the forum with more political posts? Can't we discuss the pros and cons of both sides in one thread?

[Tammyla]

:lurk5:

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Shhhhh!!! Can you keep a secret?

 

 

 

 

 

This here diehard conservative is thinking about voting for him too. There is one major issue that is holding me back. I am looking for a way to come to peace with that issue. But I have no peace about the other candidates either.

 

 

And I'm a moderate who would have easily voted for McCain in 2000. With relish and fanfare and great rejoicing. But eight years later... well, I'm with Kelli. Shhhh.

[cornopean]

I'll take a shot. I'm an odd one (no surprise there! :lol:). I'm pretty sure I will be voting for Obama. I do believe he will raise taxes, hoping to grow government in order to fund jobs programs, social services, etc. Now, I'm a Libertarian/Fair Tax kinda gal, so you may ask... why would I vote for Obama? Because in spite of having some strong economic differences, I still think he is the most open, educated, thinking, and interesting choice.

what does "open" mean? this man was voted the most liberal senator.

educated? many of the worst dictators are highly educated.

same with thinking.

and why is Obama more interesting than Hillary or McCain?

 

 

 

Right now, I see little difference between the Dems and Reps, both spend too much, both are more interested in power, getting into office and staying there, than in solving the real issues that challenge us.

differences between McCain and Obama.

1. McCain supports school vouchers; Obama does not.

2. McCain will cut the corporate income tax; Obama will raise it.

3. McCain will support free trade; Obama will restrict trade.

4. McCain will fight terrorists; Obama will talk to them.

5. McCain will nominate judges who care about the Constitution; Obama will nominate judges who care about liberalism.

6. McCain will fight pork spending; Obama will not.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Is there a reason we need to clutter up the forum with more political posts? Can't we discuss the pros and cons of both sides in one thread?

 

This is actually how this board has historically operated. We just let a thread meander if the question is at least tangentially relevant. Well, that is if the person asked cares to answer. We don't typically start new threads for related questions unless it's for specific emphasis.

 

Just an idiosyncrasy of this forum, FWIW. It wouldn't have occured to me to start a new thread, either, and I've been posting here for what, six years? Something like that. No, five in August, I think.

[Mrs Mungo]

I don't fit in any neat political boxes, and I have never before voted for either a Republican or Democratic presidential candidate - I'm one of those weird, eclectic independents. :)

 

I don't think any of us fit in the neat boxes the politicos would like to put us in. I'm a hard-core Democrat who is a Christian, homeschooling, military wife! What kind of box is that to be in?! ;)

[Elaine]

 

This is the the time or place for a long spiel, but I am a passionate Obama supporter. I believe we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity here, one I had not believed possible in my lifetime.

 

 

 

 

What is the once in a lifetime opportunity? Am I missing something?

 

This is not a flame, I am truly interested.:001_smile:

[Phred]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_McKinley#Disputed_quotation

"hard to recall"... was anyone here alive in 1903?

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Ok ok... I've been slappped around appropriately... no more "retardican"-type language.

 

:smash:

 

That's what you get when you start posting on a "girly" board. Were you around when we excoriated poor Cheez Whiz? And he was a federal judge, IIRC.

 

LOL

 

(Love ya, Cheezy, if you're still lurking!)

 

 

:Angel_anim:

[cornopean]

I should go on record as saying that for the first time in my adult life, my heart *has* been 'set a fire' ...and by a candidate with a fair chance of actually winning!

 

This is the the time or place for a long spiel, but I am a passionate Obama supporter. I believe we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity here, one I had not believed possible in my lifetime.

the man attended a church with a racist pastor for 20 years. then he tells us that he can't disassociate himself from him. you are passionate about such a man?

[Phred]

what does "open" mean? this man was voted the most liberal senator.

educated? many of the worst dictators are highly educated.

same with thinking.

and why is Obama more interesting than Hillary or McCain?

differences between McCain and Obama.

1. McCain supports school vouchers; Obama does not.

2. McCain will cut the corporate income tax; Obama will raise it.

3. McCain will support free trade; Obama will restrict trade.

4. McCain will fight terrorists; Obama will talk to them.

5. McCain will nominate judges who care about the Constitution; Obama will nominate judges who care about liberalism.

6. McCain will fight pork spending; Obama will not.

You'll have to excuse me but this is what I smelled in the first post of this thread. This is a Republican looking to honk his Republican horn.

 

Would you mind supporting your contentions with links please?

[Mrs Mungo]

the man attended a church with a racist pastor for 20 years. then he tells us that he can't disassociate himself from him. you are passionate about such a man?

 

Explain yourself.

 

http://mediamatters.org/items/200802270006

 

OBAMA: You know, I have been very clear in my denunciation of Minister Farrakhan's anti-Semitic comments. I think that they are unacceptable and reprehensible. I did not solicit this support. He expressed pride in an African-American who seems to be bringing the country together. I obviously can't censor him, but it is not support that I sought. And we're not doing anything, I assure you, formally or informally with Minister Farrakhan.

 

Indeed, in his answer to Russert's initial question, the first thing Obama said was, "You know, I have been very clear in my denunciation of Minister Farrakhan's anti-Semitic comments," calling them "unacceptable and reprehensible."

 

OBAMA: It is true that my Pastor, Jeremiah Wright, who will be retiring this month, is somebody who on occasion can say controversial things. ... He does not have a close relationship with Louis Farrakhan.I have been a consistent, before I go any further, a consistent denunciator of Louis Farrakhan, nobody challenges that. And what is true is that, recently this is probably, I guess last year. An award was given to Farrakhan for his work on behave of ex-offenders completely unrelated to his controversial statements. And I believe that was a mistake and showed a lack of sensitivity to [the] Jewish community and I said so.

 

I've walked out of churches in the past during particular sermons and yet continued to attend the church. A church is made up of more than a handful of sermons with which I disagreed.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

what does "open" mean? this man was voted the most liberal senator.

 

I've been going through the voting record vote by vote, and I'm just not seeing much to quibble with. (Independent Moderate here)

 

 

educated? many of the worst dictators are highly educated.

same with thinking.

 

 

Really? That's TERRIBLE. Let's get an uneducated, non-thinking person to run for president. That should ensure our safety. After all, if we follow this logic to it's end, what was Great Britain thinking in allowing someone like Winston Churchill to be in power during WWII. A *thinking* man. *Educated.* Gosh, went to public schools over there so was probably *elite*. Horrors. They dodged a bullet. It could have ended Very, Very Badly. A miracle he didn't *turn* before he died. *shudder*

 

You've completely lost any hope of convincing me by playing the anti-intellectual card. On *this* board, of all places? No. Wouldn't be prudent.

[cornopean]

okay, why not?--I'll bite. Obama is proposing a middle class tax cut and returning upper income taxes to the same levels that we had back when there was a balanced budget, a surplus, and a economy that didn't make 80% of the population think the country is headed in the wrong direction.

 

First, the middle class is not the group that needs a tax cut. Bruce Bartlett notes that people making below 40k/yr pay virtually no income taxes at all when you factor into the equation what they get from the govt. It is the rich who need the tax cut.

 

Second, do you think Clinton's tax hikes caused the balanced budget, surplus, etc. or did the internet bubble have something to do with that?

 

 

I'm not an economist (though most economists are Democrats), but, yeah, I'll take my chances with the top 1% of American wage earners having to go back to the dark ages of 1999.

I know that it sounds so nice to raise the taxes on these people but one has to think like an economist. and raising the taxes on the most productive members of society is not economically wise. It may make us feel good but their are unintended consequences of such actions.

 

 

If Republicans really want to go back to campaigning on economic issues instead of social and foreign policy issues...

admittedly, lowering taxes on the rich isn't likely to win elections. alas. if only people could understand facts and interpret data. :(

[Kay in Cal]

 

There are many Wall Street corporations who support him, and his economic policies including:

 

Goldman Sachs, Meryll Lynch, Lehman, JP Morgan, and Citigroup

 

 

 

My sister in law is CFO at one of these corporations--she's a banker who handles billions, BILLIONS, in her day to day professional decision making. She is a huge Obama supporter, and has done lots of research into how his election will affect thier company, stockholders, and personal investers. She thinks Obama has fantastic economic policies.

 

Since I hated economic in college, and all my professional budgeting experience is at a small church with an annual budget of just over $200,000, I'm willing to defer to her experience.

 

Personally, I don't vote based on how much money I think I'm going to make, but on how the majority of people will be affected, regardless of my own situation. I'm convinced Obama has the best chance to turn this nation around in a positive direction, and not just financially.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

alas. if only people could understand facts and interpret data. :(

 

Alas, poor ignorant board. Do you have any notion of how many advanced degrees are represented in this place? Do you have any notion of the reasoning abilities of the vast majority of this board, regardless of education level or how they fall on the political spectrum? Do you know that many of us read professional journals for pleasure? I think you'll find that we do pretty well interpreting data. As to facts, please make sure the "facts" you claim we poor unfortunates don't understand are factual. I'm afraid that on both sides of the house, our B.S. meters are set to "Sensitive."

 

Alas. If only "people" could avoid the sweeping generalization. :(

[kokotg]

I wouldn't call those making below $40,000 (at least not those with families) the middle class. And, obviously, I disagree that the rich "need" a tax cut. But I've always thought our society has a difficult time grasping the difference between want and need.

 

Second, do you think Clinton's tax hikes caused the balanced budget, surplus, etc. or did the internet bubble have something to do with that?

 

I think it's complicated. Do you think Bush's tax cuts caused the recession? If a president's economic policy has nothing to do with the economy, then why are you worried about it?

 

I know that it sounds so nice to raise the taxes on these people but one has to think like an economist. and raising the taxes on the most productive members of society is not economically wise. It may make us feel good but their are unintended consequences of such actions.

 

well, again, if you think like 81% of US economists, then you support the wealthy paying a higher percentage of their income in taxes than people who make less. I guess you mean that one has to think like the 19% of US economists who disagree.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

~Takes Pam's hand and leads her out of the thread.~

 

He's not interested in our opinions, he just wants to set us up for a lecture, don't bother.

 

Thanks, Mrs. M. I've actually got stomach pain, can you believe it? Good grief. I'm not much hand for this sort of conversation.

[cornopean]

I've been going through the voting record vote by vote, and I'm just not seeing much to quibble with. (Independent Moderate here)

voted in favor of partial birth abortions

minors don't need permission to get abortions

zero percent rating from NRLC

voted against free trade agreement with Columbia

voted to allow people to sue the telecomm companies when they help fight terror.

 

 

Really? That's TERRIBLE. Let's get an uneducated, non-thinking person to run for president. That should ensure our safety. After all, if we follow this logic to it's end, what was Great Britain thinking in allowing someone like Winston Churchill to be in power during WWII.

my point was that knowing a person to be educated tells you virtually nothing about the person's character or wisdom.

[Jenny in Atl]

what does "open" mean? this man was voted the most liberal senator.

educated? many of the worst dictators are highly educated.

same with thinking.

and why is Obama more interesting than Hillary or McCain?

 

differences between McCain and Obama.

1. McCain supports school vouchers; Obama does not.

2. McCain will cut the corporate income tax; Obama will raise it.

3. McCain will support free trade; Obama will restrict trade.

4. McCain will fight terrorists; Obama will talk to them.

5. McCain will nominate judges who care about the Constitution; Obama will nominate judges who care about liberalism.

6. McCain will fight pork spending; Obama will not.

 

Hillary :tongue_smilie: (don't get me started...), McCain's temper his lack of control is an issue for me. He has also authored some horrible campaign finance reform among other things. Has he truly been a small government republican during his long career?

 

Yes, many of the most educated are some of the worst, and I find this a silly argument that folks use much like "the evil" rich is used by the Dems.

 

The whole educational system is broken, vouchers won't matter much. I know Obama will be a pro-public school president, but is McCain pro-homeschool? The whole thing need to be scraped (neither party has the cahones to do that).

 

In years past Nixon, Regan, etc nominated conservative judges who turned out to be not so conservative. This has also been the case with some so-called liberal judges. It's always been a bit of a dice game there.

 

So far as protecting us against terror. I feel there is little one can do if terrorist really want to attack us, and we still want to have civil liberties. We are too open, too sloppy to really fight off a full scale attack. I'm not foolish enough that I think talking will help either. History proves that. No easy answers here.

 

As I said, I disagree with Obama on many of his economic views but I'm also very liberal socially, so it's not one thing that pushes me towards Obama. I also recognize that what I wish for, so far as a vision for this country, will never come to fruition. Too many people want a free ride, both wealthy and poor. Freedom is scary and neither party is doing much to preserve it. I'm being honest. I'm no bette or worse than any other voter, just trying to take what I like and leave the rest at the door.

 

If I really freak out in the booth, hopefully Bob Barr will be on the ticket so I can do the third party thing like I usually do. :lol:

[Jenny in Atl]

Alas, poor ignorant board. Do you have any notion of how many advanced degrees are represented in this place? Do you have any notion of the reasoning abilities of the vast majority of this board, regardless of education level or how they fall on the political spectrum? Do you know that many of us read professional journals for pleasure? I think you'll find that we do pretty well interpreting data. As to facts, please make sure the "facts" you claim we poor unfortunates don't understand are factual. I'm afraid that on both sides of the house, our B.S. meters are set to "Sensitive."

 

Alas. If only "people" could avoid the sweeping generalization. :(

 

:D Yup, I'm bout the dullest tool in this shed... there be sum smart ladys here.

And I have a BS in Psychology! :lol: Do you want fries with that Coke?

[Angela in TN]

To answer your question: yes I am passionate about 'such a man'... even more so now than before the Wright issue arose.

 

I am tired of self-serving, simplistic responses to complex problems - and Senator Obama's response to the issues raised by Rev Wright's disturbing rhetoric amazed and impressed me. His grace, integrity, and compassion - and his willingness to risk his political future on a candid, heart-felt response - are an example to us all.

 

I sat in a shul led by a Rabbi whose political opinions greatly distressed me. I shared my opinions with him, but respected his fine qualities and the really special nature of the community he led - we were not there long, but I do not regret that choice.

 

If my pastor started preaching hate from the pulpit especially as blatant as Rev. Wright did I would be outta there. I'm sure all people (even racists) have good qualities but the hate spew can't be erased because "he's a good guy" otherwise. :confused: I think it's ridiculous to think Obama as smart and politically savvy as he is didn't KNOW what was being preached there. I think he handled the situation as any "good politician" would and played dumb. I am not an Obama supporter and am not really hyped up on McCain although I feel he is the lesser of two evils (my opinion). Truth be told I'm a bit disgusted with politics in general these days since those elected to office are just trying to make a career of it instead of doing the right thing by those that elected them there in the first place.

[Kelli in TN]

voted in favor of partial birth abortions

minors don't need permission to get abortions

.

 

Well, yeah. That is why I am having such a hard time. This is a hard election for me.

[Mrs Mungo]

If my pastor started preaching hate from the pulpit especially as blatant as Rev. Wright did I would be outta there.

 

Which comments made by Reverend Wright do you find racist?

 

One of the sermons I left (as I mentioned above) was when I had a preacher preach manifest destiny. I'm Native American and found it *extraordinarily* offensive. I left the service. However, I didn't ditch the church on that basis nor did I label the preacher a racist.

[Kelli in TN]

Thanks, Mrs. M. I've actually got stomach pain, can you believe it? Good grief. I'm not much hand for this sort of conversation.

 

Pam, why? Because people are disagreeing about politics? You and I could have some rowsing debates, could we not?

 

And so could our kids!!!;) Right?

 

You should not let a difference of opinion about politics make you so upset.

[kokotg]

voted to allow people to sue the telecomm companies when they help fight terror.

 

This should actually read "voted to stop Bush from using telecomm companies to illegally spy on Americans." you say potato....

[cornopean]

Alas, poor ignorant board. Do you have any notion of how many advanced degrees are represented in this place? Do you have any notion of the reasoning abilities of the vast majority of this board, regardless of education level or how they fall on the political spectrum? Do you know that many of us read professional journals for pleasure? I think you'll find that we do pretty well interpreting data. As to facts, please make sure the "facts" you claim we poor unfortunates don't understand are factual. I'm afraid that on both sides of the house, our B.S. meters are set to "Sensitive."

 

Alas. If only "people" could avoid the sweeping generalization. :(

I certainly had no intention of denigrating the board. Sorry if I did so.

But seriously, noone is giving facts to refute my claims here. It is one thing to simply take refuge in the fact that dozens of good economists support Obama so he must be good.

 

but answer some simply questions?

1. Does Barack want to raise taxes?
   
2. Will taxes better our economy?
   
3. have taxes ever bettered an economy?

what did taxes do for our falling economy when FDR became pres? It is well known that FDR tripled tax rates and made a depression into a GREAT depression. just years earlier, Warren Harding had a crash equally as bad as the crash of 1929. but b/c he did nothing and actually lowered tax rates, the economic distress was soon over and the economy was clicking along again. Ronald Reagan did a similar thing in 1987.

 

and we have reams of data that low tax countries prosper and in many cases see no loss in tax revenue. Read this exchange between Charlie Gibson and Barack;

 

GIBSON:

All right. You have, however, said you would favor an increase in the capital gains tax. As a matter of fact, you said on CNBC, and I quote, "I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton," which was 28 percent. It's now 15 percent. That's almost a doubling, if you went to 28 percent.

But actually, Bill Clinton, in 1997, signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent.

 

OBAMA:

Right.

 

GIBSON:

And George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent.

 

OBAMA:

Right.

 

GIBSON:

And in each instance, when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased; the government took in more money. And in the 1980s, when the tax was increased to 28 percent, the revenues went down.

So why raise it at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected?

 

OBAMA:

Well, Charlie, what I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness.

We saw an article today which showed that the top 50 hedge fund managers made $29 billion last year -- $29 billion for 50 individuals. And part of what has happened is that those who are able to work the stock market and amass huge fortunes on capital gains are paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries. That's not fair.

And what I want is not oppressive taxation. I want businesses to thrive, and I want people to be rewarded for their success. But what I also want to make sure is that our tax system is fair and that we are able to finance health care for Americans who currently don't have it and that we're able to invest in our infrastructure and invest in our schools.

And you can't do that for free.

 

OBAMA:

And you can't take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children and our grandchildren, and then say that you're cutting taxes, which is essentially what John McCain has been talking about.

And that is irresponsible. I believe in the principle that you pay as you go. And, you know, you don't propose tax cuts, unless you are closing other tax breaks for individuals. And you don't increase spending, unless you're eliminating some spending or you're finding some new revenue. That's how we got an additional $4 trillion worth of debt under George Bush. That is helping to undermine our economy. And it's going to change when I'm president of the United States.

 

GIBSON:

But history shows that when you drop the capital gains tax, the revenues go up.

 

OBAMA:

Well, that might happen, or it might not. It depends on what's happening on Wall Street and how business is going. I think the biggest problem that we've got on Wall Street right now is the fact that we got have a housing crisis that this president has not been attentive to and that it took John McCain three tries before he got it right.

And if we can stabilize that market, and we can get credit flowing again, then I think we'll see stocks do well. And once again, I think we can generate the revenue that we need to run this government and hopefully to pay down some of this debt.

 

[kokotg]

Now this is starting to remind me of when Hillary Clinton somehow got Bill O'Reilly to admit that he thinks Teddy Roosevelt was a socialist just like her. If you want to go on comparing Obama to FDR, I'm not going to stop you :lol:.

[Mrs Mungo]

but answer some simply questions?

1. Does Barack want to raise taxes?

2. Will taxes better our economy?

3. have taxes ever bettered an economy?

You cannot look at one piece of the issue in a bubble. Obama has an economic plan endorsed by many leading economists. Refute the entire plan or don't bother with it at all.

[cornopean]

Which comments made by Reverend Wright do you find racist?

 

evidently Wright believes that the black mind works differently than the white mind. wiki says this;

 

 

At a news conference the following April 29, Barack Obama decried Wright's latest remarks as "a bunch of rants that aren't grounded in the truth".

[50]

He accused his former pastor of exploiting

racism

and "giving comfort to those who prey on hate." He characterized Wright’s

National Press Club

appearance as a “spectacle†and described its content as "outrageous" and "destructive."

and what credit would you give to a pastor that believes the US govt created and spread AIDS to kill off black folk?

 

and people still believe that Obama is going to transcend racial controversies.

[Amy in NY]

You know guys, there's a reason we don't post about politics on this board. It's so hard to keep a civil tone when you feel your principles are being attacked. IMHO, we should just click over to Rush or Kos for this kind of discussion.

 

And this will be as far as I read this thread. It has the potential to get very heated.

[Jenny in Atl]

I don't want to start (another) branch off debate here, but abortion is a messy political issue - I have some very strong personal opinions on the subject, but am very leery of legislative solutions (maybe I am channeling my inner libertarian?).

 

Although I find those specific pieces of legislation personally repugnant, I do not have any legislative solutions myself which can begin to address this issue... and which do not go back to the imposing-my-faith on others dilemma we've been hashing out on the marriage thread...

 

And, in general, I do not look at any one specific policy position when choosing a candidate... unless I run myself (not in a million years!), none will match my preferences on all the issues dearest to my heart. ...but if I believe that the solution to the abortion issue were legislative, I would be as torn as you are right now...

 

This is the very reason people should be as excited and involved in who is elected to their local, state, and congressional offices, as they are in who is elected president. But unfortunately, they are not.

[Kelli in TN]

I don't want to start (another) branch off debate here, but abortion is a messy political issue - I have some very strong personal opinions on the subject, but am very leery of legislative solutions (maybe I am channeling my inner libertarian?).

 

Although I find those specific pieces of legislation personally repugnant, I do not have any legislative solutions myself which can begin to address this issue... and which do not go back to the imposing-my-faith on others dilemma we've been hashing out on the marriage thread...

 

And, in general, I do not look at any one specific policy position when choosing a candidate... unless I run myself (not in a million years!), none will match my preferences on all the issues dearest to my heart. ...but if I believe that the solution to the abortion issue were legislative, I would be as torn as you are right now...

 

 

Well, respectfully, it is a huge issue for me. I cannot even begin to say how vital I think it is that innocent life be protected.

 

I will be at odds with many on this issue and I am perfectly okay with that. I will not try to change anyone's convictions on this, but mine will not change either.

 

But I truly don't have confidence that any of the candidates will truly care about protecting our unborn citizens, so I am not sure it is even an issue this time around. Sigh.

[kokotg]

I'm not sure exactly what would satisfy you that you've gotten "an answer."

 

1. There is no yes/no answer. He wants to cut taxes for some income brackets and raise them back to the levels they were at 8 years ago for others.

 

2. Umm, yes, taxes better our economy. Which taxes do you mean? I don't think you'll find any viable candidates who are against taxes. The questions are who to tax, how much, and how. If what you're asking is, "do you think a progressive tax system is better for the economy?" then my answer (and, once again, the answer of the vast majority of economists) is yes.

 

3. Well, I imagine I would say yes and you would say no. The last time we had a president who raised taxes, the resulting economy was very strong. The last time a president lowered taxes, the resulting economy was (is) very weak. However, you have rejected this answer, replacing it with a decidedly non-mainstream theory about the Great Depression. You do realize that you are actually the one proposing a radical economic theory here?

[battlemaiden]

Imnsho, you are oversimplifying to the point of meaninglessness - and reducing complex issues to easy soundbites.

 

I'm not good at soundbites, but I will try to counter yours:

 

1. I'm not sure why you rank this as one of your top 6 issues... I, personally, support school vouchers, but I recognize that there are some compelling arguments against them. I do not think that a president's position on this issue is going to make much difference one way or another.

 

2. These economic issues are complex - I cannot trust the economic policies of a candidate who does not consult economic experts before making economic policy pronouncements. [Have you *read* the links provided to you? Are you actually familiar with Obama's economic approach and policies? You are boiling it down to tax or not tax - it *really* isn't that simple.]

 

3. One can support free trade and still impose specific restrictions. McCain does not, that I have seen, support absolutely unrestricted free trade....

 

4. One can fight terrorists and still be willing to speak with foreign heads of state - and, fyi, Obama has specifically stated he *will not* speak with Hamas unless/until they renounce terror and recognize the state of Israel.

I prefer a president who is prepared to use all the tools at his disposal... and use them with grace, intelligence, finesse, judgment, and judicial use of expert advice to one who leaps at simplistic solutions. Perhaps McCain's approach is more nuanced than I have seen - the upcoming race will, I;m sure, give me more opportunity to hear his stance.

 

5. This is over-the-top rhetoric. Each candidate would, in all probability, nominate judges whose approach and flavor best match his own...

 

6. I have seen no evidence to support this claim.

 

 

 

If you genuinely wish to have a meaningful dialogs, please provide more substantiative posts.

 

Positions are not soundbytes. Some on the list above are more opinion than position (the judge issue for instance is highly subjective), but as for number 6, this one is the most easily supported:

 

http://www.cagw.org/site/VoteCenter?page=congScorecard&congress=109&location=S&lcmd=prev&lcmd_cf=

 

That is the Citizens against Government Waste report.

 

I recognize that you are a supporter of Obama's and therefore you are more likely to overlook areas that don't jive with your personal beliefs (vouchers), but that doesn't make number 1 on the list inaccurate or a "soundbyte". These are six areas that the poster pointed out differences between the candidates. Your answers were just as subjective. Keep that in mind- I usually admire your clear thinking on issues.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

voted in favor of partial birth abortions

 

Any notion why he voted against the ban? (Note: He did not vote "in favor of" partial birth abortions.) I'm not doing an abortion conversation here, so that's all I'll say. Anyone who wants clarification *ahem, you know who you are* or wants to chat is welcome to PM me. This issue involves too many girly tears (mine) for me to use as something to answer someone who started a baiting thread.

 

 

minors don't need permission to get abortions

This for *me* is more complicated than a sound bite.

 

zero percent rating from NRLC

 

Because of his voting record, I would assume?

 

 

voted against free trade agreement with Columbia

 

Umm... I plead ignorant. What reasons did he give for voting against this? Could it be a complex issue? Could there be factors that he considered when casting his vote that are larger than being "anti-free trade"? Is it more complicated than not wanting free trade? Does he oppose, say, NAFTA? Does he propose refining those agreements? What?

voted to allow people to sue the telecomm companies when they help fight terror.

When they participated in illegal wiretaps? (That phrase "fight terror" sure covers a multitude of sins, doesn't it?)

 

 

my point was that knowing a person to be educated tells you virtually nothing about the person's character or wisdom.

 

Thank you for stating your point. McCain, for example, was educated at the high school level at one of America's top prep schools. (Sorry to my son for saying that, as he is an alum of their archrival, and I'm supposed to spit or boo when I mention them, I think.) While there, he was called "McNasty" by his classmates. While I'm certain he's matured from his early days, it proves your point that a fine education says nothing about character. (I erased more that is more important to me about his character. I will ever admire and appreciate his service to country. And I'm afraid to say more would be uncharitable. Not untrue, but uncharitable.)

[Mrs Mungo]

evidently Wright believes that the black mind works differently than the white mind. wiki says this;

 

At a news conference the following April 29, Barack Obama decried Wright's latest remarks as "a bunch of rants that aren't grounded in the truth".

[50]

He accused his former pastor of exploiting

racism

and "giving comfort to those who prey on hate." He characterized Wright’s

National Press Club

appearance as a “spectacle†and described its content as "outrageous" and "destructive."

and what credit would you give to a pastor that believes the US govt created and spread AIDS to kill off black folk?

 

and people still believe that Obama is going to transcend racial controversies.

 

So...you are complaining that Obama disagreed with some of his pastor's views and denounced those views? As I said, I have been deeply and personally offended because my own pastor said things that were against *my* race. I would *really* hate to be held accountable for anything any pastor I've ever had has said.

[battlemaiden]

While there, he was called "McNasty" by his classmates. While I'm certain he's matured from his early days, it proves your point that a fine education says nothing about character. (I erased more that is more important to me about his character. I will ever admire and appreciate his service to country. And I'm afraid to say more would be uncharitable. Not untrue, but uncharitable.)

 

Oh Pam :confused: Why? why...why...why....

[Jenny in Atl]

evidently Wright believes that the black mind works differently than the white mind. wiki says this;

 

 

At a news conference the following April 29, Barack Obama decried Wright's latest remarks as "a bunch of rants that aren't grounded in the truth".

[50]

He accused his former pastor of exploiting

racism

and "giving comfort to those who prey on hate." He characterized Wright’s

National Press Club

appearance as a “spectacle†and described its content as "outrageous" and "destructive."

and what credit would you give to a pastor that believes the US govt created and spread AIDS to kill off black folk?

 

and people still believe that Obama is going to transcend racial controversies.

 

There are no prefect candidates, and not one of them has perfect friends and/or family. Remember Billy Carter? :D I have no problems with Rev. Wright. I disagree with him, but I have not lived his life. I have not been stopped by a cop just for the color of my skin. I have not experienced the pain he has, growing-up in the 50's and 60's as a black man. I'm not scared of an angry black man. Why are you? I'm sure you can find as much bigotry in many white churches throughout this country. I have had a few friends who went to churches that preached, what I would call bigotry, even though they did not agree. They said they stayed due to tradition and family ties. I see this as much the same. Again, no easy cut and dry answers. There never are even if we wish there to be.

[Jennifer in NH]

the man attended a church with a racist pastor for 20 years. then he tells us that he can't disassociate himself from him. you are passionate about such a man?

You, know...I am very conservative and in no way will vote for Obama...I am very disenheartened this year...i just don't like canidate still running...okay, so I am probably very near you politically...but gosh, you asked a question and whenever someone wants to discuss it, you bite back with, in this case irellevent data. In my opinion this is just rather nasty.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

Oh Pam :confused: Why? why...why...why....

 

Because, Jo, he still channels the person who earned the nickname McNasty and that quick, harsh, grudge-holding temper. I do think he's brave. I do *deeply* admire his service. I HATED what Richard Hand, my former Bible teacher, did to him in 2000. HORRIBLE.

 

I don't like what he did to his first wife -- found it repugnant. (That's the uncharitable part. I feel bad, kinda, about the fact that I can't get past that. But there you have it.)

 

I would have voted for him in the past, temper or no. But he's changed his convictions in ways that seem to be for convenience. And because of what I thought of his character *then*, my disappointment was greater because of his compromises, even on issues I disagreed with him on. It didn't seem to be "walking in a greater light." It seemed more like "walking to please people who harmed him greatly in previous years."

[Angela in TN]

So...you are complaining that Obama disagreed with some of his pastor's views and denounced those views? As I said, I have been deeply and personally offended because my own pastor said things that were against *my* race. I would *really* hate to be held accountable for anything any pastor I've ever had has said.

 

You are talking about one instance with your pastor correct? If it were ongoing either about your race or others would you tolerate it? If you can't see any of the remarks Rev. Wright made as racist would you consent to race baiting? He preaches a victim mentality, blame someone else for your problems. The government killing the black community with aids?:confused: He's filling a void and creating an "us" against "them" frame of thought. This is the overall vibe this guy puts off, I got it from watching his sermons and watching him at the National Press Club. Surely Obama got that vibe in knowing him as he did all those years? Off to get my boys in the bed!

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

You, know...I am very conservative and in no way will vote for Obama...I am very disenheartened this year...i just don't like canidate still running...okay, so I am probably very near you politically...but gosh, you asked a question and whenever someone wants to discuss it, you bite back with, in this case irellevent data. In my opinion this is just rather nasty.

 

I think it might be a political ad disguised as a thread. Yet here I sit...

[Jenny in Atl]

You are talking about one instance with your pastor correct? If it were ongoing either about your race or others would you tolerate it? If you can't see any of the remarks Rev. Wright made as racist would you consent to race baiting? He preaches a victim mentality, blame someone else for your problems. The government killing the black community with aids?:confused: He's filling a void and creating an "us" against "them" frame of thought. This is the overall vibe this guy puts off, I got it from watching his sermons and watching him at the National Press Club. Surely Obama got that vibe in knowing him as he did all those years? Off to get my boys in the bed!

 

I honestly believe that the NPC appearance was payback to Obama from Rev. Wright for denouncing some of his earlier comments. I think he went out of his way, not just there, but in a number of other appearances he made that week, to do as much damage as he could to Obama. You could tell this was very painful and ugly split between the two. I agree with all you are saying. But much the same can be said for many groups in this country.

[Phred]

voted in favor of partial birth abortions

Oh come now. That's a right wing contrivance to begin with. The procedure is called "intact dilation and extraction" and should be left up to the patient's doctor to decide when and if to use. Not a bunch of old men pandering to the right wing base. Nobody votes in favor of a medical procedure... they vote in favor of allowing a doctor, who knows much more about it than you or I, to be the one to decide when to use it. Once again, a sound bite and not anything useful.

 

minors don't need permission to get abortions

Minors comfortable with talking to their parents already will. But many, upwards of 50% in some studies, face violence from their parents for having sex and coming home pregnant. So they either head for a back alley where there are other complications to deal with, head for other states... or give up and carry the child to term... which, after all, is what the pro-life side is after.

 

zero percent rating from NRLC

Something to be proud of.

 

voted against free trade agreement with Columbia

In a March 2008 speech, Obama said he would oppose a free trade agreement with Columbia, because "the violence against unions in Colombia would make a mockery of the very labor protections that we have insisted be included in these kinds of agreements."

 

voted to allow people to sue the telecomm companies when they help fight terror.

Great. Once again the banner "fight terror" should cover any and all things the government wants to do? We the People must have recourse against our government. George Bush and his ilk may not take it away from us by yelling "terror" all the time.

 

my point was that knowing a person to be educated tells you virtually nothing about the person's character or wisdom.

It tells you they're dedicated enough to be willing to spend time to focus on learning and that knowledge is important to them.

[battlemaiden]

Because, Jo, he still channels the person who earned the nickname McNasty and that quick, harsh, grudge-holding temper. I do think he's brave. I do *deeply* admire his service. I HATED what Richard Hand, my former Bible teacher, did to horrible in 2000. HORRIBLE.

 

I don't like what he did to his first wife -- found it repugnant. (That's the uncharitable part. I feel bad, kinda, about the fact that I can't get past that. But there you have it.)

 

I would have voted for him in the past, temper or no. But he's changed his convictions in ways that seem to be for convenience. And because of what I thought of his character *then*, my disappointment was greater because of his compromises, even on issues I disagreed with him on. It didn't seem to be "walking in a greater light." It seemed more like "walking to please people who harmed him greatly in previous years."

 

Still channels?

 

This is heresay, right? Buddies, who I'm sure have no political position, have brought up a nickname from prep school and you actually putting that in the "con" column?

 

His first marriage? The affair, right? Yeah, that stunk. Are we allowed to dig up marriage issues on all candidates now, because...well...that wouldn't be pretty (except maybe whatsisname, the guy from MA? He was pretty squeaky clean).

 

It just seems somewhat petty. Especially in the light of other associative flaws in Obama that we are so very, very, very willing to overlook.

 

Jo

 

edit: btw, Pam. You are one of the least petty people on this board, which is what compelled me to address the issue. Coming from another I wouldn't have bothered. It is out of deep respect that I require clarification.

[kokotg]

Seriously, can we get back to talking about how Obama is just like FDR? Because that dude's on the dime.

[Angela in TN]

Seriously, can we get back to talking about how Obama is just like FDR? Because that dude's on the dime.

 

Wasn't FDR more of a socialist leaning?