- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 11, 2008 at 7:48 am #618597
JanSParticipantdoes anyone think this is the least bit important?
http://video.on.nytimes.com/?fr_story=64156491896b3c1fcf6d37c2c56a415e2372adef
for those who aren’t familiar with this particular minister, click on the link to the right of this little video that says “video of Rod Parsley”
as an aside, how does one take someone named Rod Parsley seriously? :p
May 11, 2008 at 9:32 pm #618598
JoBParticipantJanS,,
thanks for sending me once again to blogging heads… there are some incredible conversations there.. well worth the time i takes to listen.
May 12, 2008 at 3:01 am #618599
TrickParticipantI found these graphs quite interesting.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/104494/Democrats-Significant-Identification-Image-Advantage.aspx
May 12, 2008 at 11:30 pm #618600
WSMomParticipantThis assessment of McCain’s tax proposals from the Tax Policy Center:
http://taxvox.taxpolicycenter.org/blog/_archives/2008/4/17/3644448.html
“These estimates make one thing clear. Senator McCain plans a radical downsizing of government. Slashing pork, earmarks, and underperforming programs would offset only a fraction of the revenues. Cuts the size of those he proposes will require slashing discretionary spending and entitlements, and probably even reining in defense spending. Small wonder he has backed away from his earlier pledge to balance the budget—meaning that these tax cuts, like the ones signed by President Bush, will be paid for by our children.”
From the Huffingtonpost, Jared Bernstein:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jared-bernstein/the-most-important-piece_b_101237.html
“The revenue loss to the Federal government from McCain’s proposed tax cuts (10-year total): -$5.7 trillion.”
“People deride the Republican candidate as “McSame,” implying a continuation of Bushonomics as well as the president’s foreign policy. But from the perspective of domestic policy, it’s much worse. Sure, McCain extends the Bush tax cuts but that’s the least of it. At $1.7 trillion they amount to less than a third of the damage.
Note also that the big ticket tax cuts-eliminating the alternative minimum tax and lowering the corporate tax-both follow on another Bush tradition of exacerbating market-driven (i.e., pre-tax) inequalities by cutting high-end taxes the most.”
“For seven long years, we’ve tried entrusting our government to those who discredit it, defund it, and fundamentally disbelieve in its role, except when they seek a lucrative contract or a bailout. We gone down the road-and it is a crumbling road, with potholes and failing bridges — where the solution to every problem is a tax cut, where critical agencies are staffed with cronies at best and opposition lobbyists at worst, where secrecy trumps transparency and cynicism rules, where budget resources are never available for expanding children’s health care, but always there for war.”
May 13, 2008 at 12:15 am #618601
AnonymousInactiveWSMom, @post 241 I asked the republicans what they think of McCain’s tax plan and how it’s going to result in a bigger deficit than either dem. by quite a large margin. Not a single person responded. I’m beginning to think they don’t really care what their candidate stands for.
May 13, 2008 at 2:35 am #618602
beachdrivegirlParticipantJT-That is one thing I have realized the most about this election process. This is the first election (since 4th grade when we held a mock election) htat I have paid this much attention too. i have never identified with one party over the other becuase I would rather take a look @ which canidate is best. I find it beyond silly that so many people decide that they have just elect their party rather than who is right for the job.
May 13, 2008 at 3:16 am #618603
AnonymousInactiveIt’s disappointing isn’t it? I know some on here post just to argue, or lecture. That’s fine. But I genuinely would like to talk about what going on and see what other people think.
And BDG, I think it’s great that you are paying attention. I see you get jumped on, but I feel you should be encouraged for participating. That’s the whole point of the process. Learning, sharing, debating and then deciding on what’s important to you.
May 13, 2008 at 1:49 pm #618604
AnonymousInactiveWell, I think if you consider the fact that there are only 2 (maybe 3) Republicans on this forum (that post any thoughts, anyways), it’s not so strange.
Hard for one person to keep up with everything! I’m doing my best. Bear with me.
May 13, 2008 at 2:35 pm #618605
AnonymousInactiveSee, always with the excuses:)
May 13, 2008 at 3:56 pm #618606
charlabobParticipantNR, I used to post on the Sharkansky blog (www.soundpolitics.com) so I know only too well the feeling of aloneness. I did that mostly because it was so easy to stir up the right-wing hornets who started out yelling at me and very quickly ended up yelling at each other. Hmmmmm — that happens a lot here too, doesn’t it?
May 13, 2008 at 4:20 pm #618607
AnonymousInactiveJT – I don’t particularly like McCain’s tax plan. There are some things Republican that I do not agree with and, therefore, will not argue an opposing position than your own.
Furthermore, I have stated before, as I believe the other Republican on this forum has stated, I am not thrilled about our candidate.
However, I would never vote Democrat. In my eyes, the worst Republican candidate is the better choice than any Democratic candidate.
May 13, 2008 at 4:38 pm #618608
AnonymousInactiveAre you saying party allegiance is more important than best person for the job? How do you justify that position?
May 13, 2008 at 4:47 pm #618609
AnonymousInactiveI wouldn’t say that I am expressing that party allegiance is the most important factor.
I simply think that any Republican is the best person for the job. Just like, I’m sure, you would feel that any Democrat is the best person for the job.
May 13, 2008 at 5:08 pm #618610
AnonymousInactiveIt’s true, that in this election I do feel that way. Republicans have gotten so far away from their core principles, it would take an extraordinary candidate to make me even look. However, I could not make the statement that the worst democrat would be better than ANY republican. To me, that’s not in the best interest of the country.
I don’t like that the religious right is setting the agenda for the entire party. I want stem cell research. I want equal rights for gays and lesbians. I do not want roe v wade overturned. I want medical marijuana de-criminalized on a federal level so that states can apply the laws they’ve over-overwhelmingly voted for. I do not like faith based initiatives. I want environmental protections. I want education and healthcare to be a priority, not pre-emptive wars.
I know there are republicans that want some of these things, but until a candidate has the cojones to stand up and say so, I can’t support them. Too much pandering to the loud voices on your side.
I don’t feel the democrats pander quite as much to specific issues because the party is so diverse. To me, that means many have a voice at the table, not just a few.
May 13, 2008 at 5:18 pm #618611
AnonymousInactiveI agree with a lot of your points.
I just don’t understand, and probably never will, how so many people can have so much confidence in such a wishy-washy candidate. I believe he is untrustworthy, but no one will hold him to it. Not yet anyways.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2008/04/15/a_living_lie
May 13, 2008 at 5:55 pm #618612
AnonymousInactiveJT – This thread is showing that you were the latest poster, but I do not see your post. I apologize if you think I am not responding, but my last post (#265) is the last one I see.
If you have posted a new one, maybe post it again?
May 13, 2008 at 6:48 pm #618613
AnonymousInactiveNR, I did wonder where you went, but I didn’t see your #265.
The op-ed piece you linked to doesn’t capture the full picture, I don’t think. My understanding is Obama wasn’t trying to put any one down with the guns/religion comment. I accept his explanation that he said what he meant, poorly. He was trying to point out that some voters get attached to single issue voting preferences because they don’t think Washington pays any attention or cares about the rest of their lives in any way. Why should they become invested in the *best* tax plan, etc. when no one is listening. I felt his whole point was, we need to listen to people who feel disenfranchised.
May 13, 2008 at 6:53 pm #618614
rs261MemberTaken out of context Obama’s bitter remarks do seem worse then they actually were. If you read the whole paragraph its not nearly as “offensive” as some might think.
I agree with JT that you vote for the person you think can make the biggest difference (doing the best job) I voted for my wife last election…she lost.
Oh and for him not being bi-partisan…
Fact: Obama actually has worked across party lines on a couple of bills since he won his U.S. Senate seat back in 2004.
Specifically, Obama worked with Republican Sen. Dick Lugar to get the Lugar-Obama bill passed. According to Obama’s Senate website, the bill “enhances U.S. efforts to destroy conventional weapons stockpiles and to detect and interdict weapons and materials of mass destruction throughout the world.”
In addition, Obama worked with Oklahoma Republican Sen. Tom Coburn on the Coburn-Obama bill. The bill set up a database that tracks where federal dollars are being spent and which contractors receive federal funding.
May 13, 2008 at 6:59 pm #618615
TrickParticipantNR,
I read that article, and there’s always going to be the simple knee jerk reaction to Obama’s statements, unless you really look at what his statements mean.
For example about people being bitter, clinging to guns and religion.
My interpretation is that some people don’t like change or progressive idea’s. They fall back into the past of what makes them feel comfortable, something they are use to.
But as in every neo-con article they will always associate Obama as a Marxist rebel.
It’s so convenient to instill fear then to discuss issues that are more pressing in the debate such as jobs, education and health care.
If Obama is so untrustworthy (hypotheticallly), then why is it Bush and this administration gets a “get out of Jail” card when the majority of Republicans supported him up until just recently?
Mcain talks about the size of Washington, the influence of special interests, however his campaign advisors are majority all Lobbyists?
“The man picked by the John McCain campaign to run the 2008 Republican National Convention resigned yesterday after a report that his lobbying firm used to represent the military regime in Myanmar. … Doug Goodyear, DC Lobbyist.”
Obama might be young, so be it. I’m willing to take that risk rather than all the results we’ve seen from experienced, dishonest,misleading,swiftboating talking heads that aren’t discussing the real issues that affect the majority of americans.
Keep talking about rev Wright while our economy is in a sink hole causing us to be incredibly vulnerable from a security issue.
May 13, 2008 at 7:08 pm #618616
AnonymousInactiveNR, if you get the chance, read the first 2 comments here.
http://community.comcast.net/comcastportal/board/message?board.id=cityhall&message.id=466464
It is the transcript of his speech and his follow up comments on the controversy.
May 13, 2008 at 9:50 pm #618617
AnonymousInactiveI’ve got to hand it to the Obama supporters! It’s never what he *meant* to say.
If I see Obama saying one thing, there are about 10 people on this forum that will say “well, what he *meant* was….”.
I’m tired of him getting away with everything and I honestly hope, come fall, the Rep party won’t stand for it anymore.
What about what Ferraro said about Obama and the fact that, if he were white, would not be where he is today. That was considered “racist” and she was subsequently fired because of that statement (falsely, I believe).
It just seems to me that everyone handles Obama, who he associates with (and I have not mentioned Wright for a long time, remarkably), what he says, etc. with kid gloves. I’m tired of it. What would be “presidential” is for him to address some of the more uncomfortable, personal issues head on.
May 13, 2008 at 9:56 pm #618618
beachdrivegirlParticipanthttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/13/before-bitter-gate-what-o_n_101493.html
this sums it up quite well on what was meant to have been said and how the media misinterpeted it for the ratings. I would much rather support Obama and his misrepresnted facts any day then to support some one who wants 100 years of war.
May 13, 2008 at 10:01 pm #618619
AnonymousInactiveI’ve got to hand it to the McCain supporters. If they respond at all it’s with a link to a blog or opinion piece, never the original source in context.
May 13, 2008 at 10:04 pm #618620
TrickParticipantNR,
Indirectly you did raise the race issue, by linking to that article. And the Wright issue as well. FOX and Rush are always bringing it up for obvious reasons.
I don’t think he’s been handled with kid gloves in my opinion. He’s been pretty scrutinized, but if you’re the candidate on top, it comes with the territory.
I find the “race” issue a moot point from my reasons for supporting anyone.
He’s addressed those issues over and over.
But I don’t hear McCain address his reluctance on Hagee,his lobbyist advisors…if we’re going to be fair, then let’s be fair.
May 13, 2008 at 10:04 pm #618621
AnonymousInactive*I’m tired of him getting away with everything* Awfully vague statement. Can you list what he’s gotten away with that has any bearing on running the country?
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.