Flip, to comment on Perry's (427 SO) question I'm not sure how accurate it is or what it implies. During the debates (Clinton/Obama) the journalists were to free to ask whatever questions they had, I think that is the answer. Obama keeps asking for Hillarys tax records, I have no idea why, but the question itself implies she is hiding something. Maybe she is, maybe not, lets see the records!

You could be right, Ex - I'm always ready to stick up for my race when some other race posts goals that exclude my race in America. If that makes me a racist, sign me up. The Mexicans are trying it, black churches try it, the NAACP needs to be watched, etc. Equality will never be achieved if people like you, wimps in my book, just allow the stuff that was posted my BO's church to be posted without comment. You should be ashamed of yourself for being such a weak sister. We may have to take away your Cobra, assuming you have one.

Are you done with the personal attacks now? You feel better? Can we return to a reasonable discussion or are you going to 'pull an Evan' and get the thread shut down?

This is all very entertaining.
With all the things wrong with this country and the World, all people like C de C can do is fret about what Obama's preacher said. Just hope Hillary and Bill are not redecorating the White House a year from now. McCain doesn't stand a chance. The American people don't want another decrepid gentleman running things.

Nobody is worried about what Obama's racist pastor said...we worry about why Obama listened to it for 20 years, and chose the man spouting it to perform his marriage ceremony and baptize his kids. If McCain (the decrepit gentlemen?) had a white supremacist do the same or a neo-nazi, would you so agreeably shrug it off as media spin? If you want to investigate Obama, start with his voting record of 'present' rather than yeas or nays. It is a consistent problem in every political stage of his career. WHY? I don't know if you would like to fall under his taxation plan (read link above) to 'spread the wealth' but I certainly do not. Do you consider somebody making $75,000 per year rich...and subject to 'rich' status taxes? Obama does (read his tax proposals on his website) I can't speak for your hometown, but 75k/annum doesn't go very far in Dallas. Obama doesn't turn me off because he is black. I would endorse Colin Powell in a heartbeat. BO turns me off because he wants to tax me into the poorhouse to support other countries problems and, frankly, people that wont get off their tails to support themselves. I voted Ron Paul for beliefs (small government is the best) but I WILL vote McCain as the least objectionably candidate left standing. And that is what will get McCain elected. I VOTE. If you have been reading the polls, see how many BO supporters will support HC if she wins, and vice versa. VERY bad news for the dems in Nov.

See for your self! I pulled a record from a liberal paper, so nobody would cry 'spin'; look at the 'Not Voting'; Missed voting almost 38% of the time!?!?

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/c...o000167/votes/

And another increase to end the contributory nature that Social Sec was based on. Now it will become an entitlement, benefits regardless of what the recipient put in:

"It would be a radical change in how the program has been designed," said Robert Bixby, executive director of the Concord Coalition, a non-partisan group that advocates a balanced budget. "It would end the contributory idea of Social Security, where you get back something for what you put in."

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3638710&page=1

And yet another tax increase:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/19814.html

Wall Street Journal chimes in:

Mr. Obama has recently veered sharply left. He now proposes to solve the looming Social Security shortfall exclusively with higher taxes. …Currently, all wages below about $100,000 are subject to a 12.4% Social Security payroll tax. But all wages above that amount are not subject to the tax. Mr. Obama wants to eliminate the cap, but, in a concession to taxpayers, exempt wages between $100,000 and $200,000. …Mr. Obama’s plan would keep Social Security in the black for only three additional years. Under his proposal, annual deficits would hit in 2020, instead of 2017. By the 2030s the system would still run an annual deficit exceeding $150 billion. Mr. Obama’s modest improvements to Social Security’s financing come at a steep cost. …The top marginal federal tax rates would effectively increase to 50.3% from 37.9%, equivalent to repealing the Bush income tax cuts almost three times over. If one accounts for behavioral responses, even the modest budgetary improvements from Mr. Obama’s plan are likely to be overstated. If employers reduce wages to cover their increased payroll-tax liabilities, these wages would no longer be subject to state or federal income taxes, or Medicare taxes. A 2006 study by Harvard economist and Obama adviser Jeffrey Liebman concluded that roughly 20% of revenue increases from raising the tax cap would be offset by declining non-Social Security taxes. Assuming modest negative behavioral responses, Mr. Liebman projected an additional 30% reduction in net revenues, leaving barely half the intended revenue intact. Mr. Obama’s plan would also dramatically raise incentives for tax evasion, further degrading revenue gains. Many high-earning individuals evade the Medicare payroll tax by setting up “S Corporations,” paying themselves in untaxed dividends rather than taxable wages. John Edwards avoided $590,000 in Medicare taxes this way in the 1990s. …The U.S. already collects far more Social Security taxes from high earners than other countries do. Social Security taxes here are currently capped at about three times the national average wage — far above other developed countries. In Canada and France payroll taxes are levied only up to the average wage. In the United Kingdom, taxes stop at 1.15 times the average wage; in Germany and Japan at 1.5 times.

I don't have a clue how were going to get a handle on the social security issue, it's going in the red for sure in due time. What plans do the other candidates offer that sound better? Were going to have to do something, of that there is no doubt.

I do know this, to compare social security taxes of the foreign countries mentioned to our social security tax is grossly misleading. It suggest that taxes in general are far less than they are in the USA, which is not even close to true. Taxes are way higher in the UK, for instance, the extreme price of gas, which is mostly due to tax. There just taxing their people in a different way.

Another burning issue is Health Care. I like Hawaii's method myself. An employer is required by law to provide health insurance to it's employees. Sometimes the insurance isn't that good and might come with a big co-pay if you use it. Other plans allow the employee to pay a reasonable percentage out of his pocket to gain a much better health plan overall. There is State sponsored insurance plans with little or no cost for those who are unemployed or live below the poverty level. All in all, it seems to work pretty well. Maybe thats why our taxes are so freakin' high here! There is no free lunch.

...


Ernie,

I've got to truly admire how you can keep a cool head under fire. Seriously.

That's probably also one of Obamas' amazing traits, that he can remain so entirely rational under fire from, not only the Clintons, but also the usual political smearing from the opposite party. Barrack exhibits the actual appearance of being bullet-proof, often an elusive quality ...even on this forum. ;)

Remaining cool has been one of McCains weak spots, one he has made great effort to overcome. But in his defense, I'd be a little twitchy too, especially if I'd endured what he has, even recently from new thinkers in his own party, for cripes sakes. :rolleyes:

Somebody had earlier mentioned voting percentages on this thread. I found an interesting website that relates directly:
( http://projects.washingtonpost.com/c.../vote-missers/ )
I imagine the % record varies a bit from week to week but the gist is there.

Some examples of percent missed:
McCain 56.4% missed
Barrack 37.4%
Hillary 26.8%
Kennedy 7.8%
Kerry 4.7%
Elizabeth Dole only missed 3.6% ...nice lady whom my wife likes
Byron Dorgan 1.5% and Kent Conrad 1.3% ...both North Dakota senators. :MECOOL:

I'm sorry if I earlier made it look like I took advantage of Rons' offer to sacrifice you. I know he was kidding. I like your posts, just had to thow in my 2 cents. :o


...

McCains % is high because he was out 3 months with medical problems...
I am not 'smearing' the opposition or 'firing' at Ernie. I engaged in a rational debate because I do not envision my government continuing to be a nanny for people too lazy to do for themselves. As for SSN, I do not anticipate it being there when I retire, so I see my 'investment' as a lost cause. Hence, I PLAN FOR MYSELF. I just want others to do the same. I refuse to fall into the belief that the government can make anything better for me & mine than I can for myself. As for taxing the US population @ 7% GDP for global poverty relief.....well, BO can read my avatar on that one! :D
And Ron and Wes both dodged the central issue of my post: how much of YOUR money are you willing to give to the feds?
A interesting side note, in BO's plan, he envisions the IRS doing your taxes for you and forwarding them for your signature (and a check, I suppose...). Another nail in his candidacy for me....

:confused:

Wes,

I agree with Ernie on his points. I don't see how just raising taxes is going to save Social Security as they will just take the money and use it for their own projects anyway. That is what happened to a huge amount of what used to be in the Social Security fund. Congress moved it into the General fund so they could use it for pay raises or anything else they wanted. And I also don't think just trying to make the wealthy pay more is any solution. All they should do is have to pay their fair share which many of them do already. I wish I had some kind of idea of how to start solving the mess the country is in, but it can't be done by any one person and certainly not in a year or so.
And as for the percentage of people voting, they published the percent for Shasta County yesterday and I was completely surprised. I know this is a sparsely populated area, but I think only 40 some percent of the REGISTERED voters voted and there are many who don't even register. And the ones who don't vote are the ones doing most of the loud crying.

Ron :)

Is their a solution that Obama offers that doesn't include raising taxes and bigger government? Education, soc sec, health care, race relations,its all the same fix more money, more government.

It's kinda odd that that has become the post-FDR democratic way...Jackson must be spinning in his grave!

===========

I don't have a problem with the percent but I thought the link I passed as interesting. I would be more concerned with a single particular issue that someone avoided. I agree you are rational.

...I guess technically a government is a nanny for people and they, as the governed people are the nanny, taking care of one another. But you, like I, are probably concerned more with some people doing all the work and slackers taking benefit. My contention is the top financial 5th of population, slackers, cost us way more than the bottom 5th, also slackers.

No pile of money is safe. But SS is a lot more secure than your 401K as you may have noticed lately. Actually SS is a lot more stable than propaganda would have you believe. Perhaps someone has their eye on your share of the pile and wants you to help move it to a more accessible venue such as 401K. Ever cross your mind? Where do you think is a safe place for retirement money? Where do you feel you have the most control over it? The top 5th can be pretty tricky sometimes.

Not sure. I wouldn't want to send money without sending birth control. Otherwise it's like throwing food over the fence to rabbits ...to keep them out of the garden. At first there is enough food to go around... :eek:

P.S. Someone posted a full size copy of your avatar amongst motivational posters at work. It really blended in and it was there for well over a month before management found it. I've worked in management off and on in the past and I still thought it was funny as H. :LOL:

Being part of the working class, I already pay all the taxes. People above and below the working class don't pay any. Well how could they, they don't create anything. So I'm OK for paying whatever percent of taxes that it takes as long as it's all paid back out to the working class. Wouldn't matter if it were 100% as long as I get it all back now, would it? Who do you think should get your money? Any of it. That is the question. ;)

The IRS already pays people to do (or calculate) my taxes and there is nothing I can do about it. Makes sense to me to just wait until they send me a bill with no further effort on my part necessary. Saves a stamp.

Now, personally, I would like a chance to audit what they did of course. Maybe call them in for it, my choice. There would be a penalty for them making an error. :D

And then I would like everybody to pay their tax bill out of their Special Mandatory Tax Savings Account instead of having it quietly with-held all year. For one thing I would like to collect the interest; for another, I think everybody would be less tolerant of government spending if everybody had to suddenly part with the money that seemed like it was really theirs to start with. Hey! It was theirs... :LOL:

I would like you to regard all this as tongue and cheek. I'm only semi-serious, but it's nice to think differently sometimes. :JEKYLHYDE


...

I do...I am not as radical as my typing sounds. :LOL:

A few rough spots, but excellent points all.

BTW, McCain will win.

Yes, McCain will win and we also get to be entertained by liberal democrats all the way to November.

The interesting bottomline is this: a pure conservative cannot win, but McCain isnt' one; a pure liberal cannot win, but hillary and obama are both pure liberals with Obama the most liberal Senator. At the end of the day, a pure liberal will not be able to find the middle from that far left. Life is good.

By the way, go to Google, key in "Find Chuck Norris" and click on I'm feeling lucky.

Don't worry - Chuck will find you!

It will be interesting to see just how much horse product is thrown at each
other by Hillary and Obama before November and just how covered up they
are by it when it is time to pull the lever. I'm waiting with eager anticipation!

The dems are already living in fear of this...a knock down drag out right to and thru the convention floor. HC/BO will pull more skeletons out of closets than McCain ever could (but he'll be happy to use them!). I see the dems doing what the rep's (Reagan/Ford) did in 1976. Beat each other senseless and bloody, spend all too much $ in the nominating process and lose. Thank God JIMMY CARTER hasn't made a comeback!!!!!!! :eek:

It was Jimmy Carter that started the fight I got into in Washington D.C. This guy says thats Carters car your working on, I'm like, "Is it really?". He says, "Yeah, check the trunk for peanuts and 'crackers' ", and it all went downhill from there... :LOL:

cracker being a reference to white folks that might have gotten into the work area.