Dac Bailu
Fringe
The Thread Reaper
-10,350-
Posts: 2,551
|
Post by Dac Bailu on Nov 5, 2008 14:51:19 GMT -8
I'd like to point something out right now:
With our economy as poor as it is right now, hitting the lower and middle classes the hardest, the only way to revamp it, IS TO REDISTRIBUTE THE WEALTH FROM THE WEALTHY. McCain and Palin would have had to do the exact same thing, because it's the only thing that will work right now. But the only reason everyone jumped at Obama, is because someone used the word "Socialism" in relation to his policy; which yes, it is Socialism, but that doesn't automatically mean it's evil. If regulated, it can work.
But anyway: I called it. In your face Mel.
I voted on the 31st, my birthday. I made history on my birthday. It's pretty awesome.
|
|
|
Post by darthdodo on Nov 5, 2008 21:16:35 GMT -8
I'd like to point something out right now: With our economy as poor as it is right now, hitting the lower and middle classes the hardest, the only way to revamp it, IS TO REDISTRIBUTE THE WEALTH FROM THE WEALTHY. McCain and Palin would have had to do the exact same thing, because it's the only thing that will work right now. But the only reason everyone jumped at Obama, is because someone used the word "Socialism" in relation to his policy; which yes, it is Socialism, but that doesn't automatically mean it's evil. If regulated, it can work. But anyway: I called it. In your face Mel. I voted on the 31st, my birthday. I made history on my birthday. It's pretty awesome. China, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Benin, Bulgaria, Congo, Czechoslovakia, Ethiopia, Finnish Republic, German Democratic Republic, Greece, Grenada, Hungary, North Korea, Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Venezuela There's a very small list of the counties that have tested socialism of any kind. Now I know these countries have problems besides socialism that have either corrupted their economy completely, or at least sent it down the road to do so, but socialism is a big factor in most countries. The country having ownership of what the people have has NEVER fixed ANY economy. Capitalism is slowly being ripped to shreds in this country by the likes of democratic liberals. Be prepared people, I'm about to inform you the problem with Barrack Obama's tax cut plan... so fasten your seat belts and please refrain from saying "that's not true, Obama is smartz" because beleive me, it's been used already... by every other Obama supporter... Obama wants to cut taxes for those middle class workers who make an income of less than $200,000 (a number which he and Biden continually lower as the months go by). Then he's going to tax the higher class citizens more, taking away their hard-earned money. Essentially buying votes for those who "want a check in the mail". The "Lord Messiah" Barrack Obama also proposes new spendings in health-care, education, energy and infrastructure programs while making no bones about it; he does not want to reform the growth of the Social Security system, thus loosing more money in entitlement programs (a program that many democrats just love). So where will all this money come from, I ask? Largely from raising other taxes: the ones that have the greatest impact on economic growth. Obama would let key parts of the Bush tax cuts expire, causing the top tax rate on ordinary income to go back to 39.6 percent, up from 35 percent today. The capital gains and dividend tax rates would rise to 20 percent from today's 15 percent. Obama might also impose Social Security tax at a rate of up to 4 percent on wages and self-employment income above $250,000, starting in 2019. These tax increases are not as bad as some Obama statements during the Democratic primaries suggested they would be, and they fall well short of what some of his conservative critics claim. For example, Obama does not propose to tax dividends at 40 percent or to impose the full 12.4 percent Social Security tax on high earners. His real proposals, however, would still be plenty damaging. If rewards for America's entrepreneurs and firms are reduced through higher marginal tax rates, their incentives to earn, invest and create jobs will be diminished. Americans will have less incentive to save, and firms will have less incentive to pay dividends. Tax avoidance will become more profitable. A smaller capital stock will mean a less productive economy and lower wages for middle-class and other workers. These disincentive effects also mean that the revenue gain is likely to be smaller than Obama envisions. In sum, Obama may very well give Joe the Plumber a tax break, but only if Joe does not become too successful. Obama is offering real tax favors for the middle class, but not real benefits for the economy. But... too late now, we've elected him. Not to mention Obama wants to take out any restrictions on abortion. The man refuses to answer when life "begins" by saying it's above his pay-grade. If you care anything about a baby being born, grasping for breath, fighting for life right before being born as an abortionist rips the precious living creature from the selfish mother's womb then you would not have voted for this man. If you don't want sodomite marriages a norm in EVERY state, then you would not have voted for this man. How about being able to buy guns and ammunition without the tax rate going up 500%? That's right. Obama, back in his days in the senate, proposed the 500% increase on guns and ammunition. How about that man who killed a burglar in his home to protect his family? He was charged with murder! Many were against his being charged but Barrack Obama was for it. In Barrack Hussein Obama's eyes, if a burglar comes into your home and you kill the man to protect your family, you are now a guilty felon. It's much more than money us conservatives are worried about. And I still have not gotten an answer on Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayres, Tony Rezco, Obama defending ACORN for voter fraud back in his lawyer-days, Said-Khalidi, his unknown over seas funding for his Campaign. I expect to get a logical answer for this. And no, that doesn't mean "I trust Obama... shut up Mel." He's eloquent, he looks good, he's good at speeches, he's young, he's hip, but we know nothing about this man. I guess you trust him because he lied in his book when he said he sat on his grandpa's shoulders as the astronauts landing on the coast of Hawaii. Did he also happen to mention that from where the shuttle actually landed, nobody would have even been able to see the men who apparently "waved at him".
|
|
|
Post by jmcmatt on Nov 6, 2008 7:03:27 GMT -8
I got about halfway through your post before I got curious, and found out that you copied and pasted most of that from statesman.com. Bravo.
Also, your post doesn't deserve an actual reply. It doesn't matter now anyway, the fundamentalists lost.
|
|
|
Post by darthdodo on Nov 6, 2008 12:13:53 GMT -8
I got about halfway through your post before I got curious, and found out that you copied and pasted most of that from statesman.com. Bravo. Also, your post doesn't deserve an actual reply. It doesn't matter now anyway, the fundamentalists lost. 1: I copied and pasted one paragraph from that site. (I didn't feel like typing it out in my own words) The other I typed in my own words, after researching various other sources. 2: Why doesn't it deserve an actual reply? Because liberals can't explain issues like Bill Ayres, Tony Rezco, his unknown funding sources, Said-Khalidi, etc... they refuse to answer because they can't. If they were to, it would go against common sense. If John McCain were to accept unknown funding sources, then refuse to give out information when he was caught, then the liberals would get ALL over him. If he were to be a past friend with an unrepentant terrorist like Ayres, he wouldn't have even made it past the primaries. The only thing worse than ignorance is forced ignorance...
|
|
|
Post by TFE on Nov 6, 2008 20:58:27 GMT -8
I'd like to point something out right now: With our economy as poor as it is right now, hitting the lower and middle classes the hardest, the only way to revamp it, IS TO REDISTRIBUTE THE WEALTH FROM THE WEALTHY. McCain and Palin would have had to do the exact same thing, because it's the only thing that will work right now. But the only reason everyone jumped at Obama, is because someone used the word "Socialism" in relation to his policy; which yes, it is Socialism, but that doesn't automatically mean it's evil. If regulated, it can work. But anyway: I called it. In your face Mel. I voted on the 31st, my birthday. I made history on my birthday. It's pretty awesome. Actually, what we really need is another World War II, but that comes with its own set of problems, as you may well expect.
|
|
Dac Bailu
Fringe
The Thread Reaper
-10,350-
Posts: 2,551
|
Post by Dac Bailu on Nov 8, 2008 10:32:38 GMT -8
I got about halfway through your post before I got curious, and found out that you copied and pasted most of that from statesman.com. Bravo. Also, your post doesn't deserve an actual reply. It doesn't matter now anyway, the fundamentalists lost. 2: Why doesn't it deserve an actual reply? Because liberals can't explain issues like Bill Ayres, Tony Rezco, his unknown funding sources, Said-Khalidi, etc... they refuse to answer because they can't. If they were to, it would go against common sense. If John McCain were to accept unknown funding sources, then refuse to give out information when he was caught, then the liberals would get ALL over him. If he were to be a past friend with an unrepentant terrorist like Ayres, he wouldn't have even made it past the primaries. The only thing worse than ignorance is forced ignorance...Or: these things have been tiredly explained before, and ignored by you. Obama was 8 when Ayers was blowing up buildings, which, I might add, no one was ever hurt or killed in (this was no accident either). This has been stated several times by any credible news source. So really, any of those issues you could just look up yourself and find the truth, but you'd rather continue stretch this out as long as possible. You're just stirring rice dude.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi Knight Taeris on Nov 8, 2008 10:46:28 GMT -8
I'd like to point something out right now: With our economy as poor as it is right now, hitting the lower and middle classes the hardest, the only way to revamp it, IS TO REDISTRIBUTE THE WEALTH FROM THE WEALTHY. McCain and Palin would have had to do the exact same thing, because it's the only thing that will work right now. But the only reason everyone jumped at Obama, is because someone used the word "Socialism" in relation to his policy; which yes, it is Socialism, but that doesn't automatically mean it's evil. If regulated, it can work. But anyway: I called it. In your face Mel. I voted on the 31st, my birthday. I made history on my birthday. It's pretty awesome. Actually, what we really need is another World War II, but that comes with its own set of problems, as you may well expect. rofl, too true my friend As for obama's socialist plans, it wont work becuase of the trickle down affect. Charging a corporation more money has two consequences One: You risk the high possibility that even more corps will outsource, worsening our economy by diverting jobs AWAY from those of the middle and low classes that need those jobs. Two, When you take away money from people who are used to having more money, they look for ways to make up the difference, this means that they will (if like most the are in charge of a big business or even a smaller business) they will raise prices to account for A: inflation bc the USD sucks lately, and B: to make up for lost profit. So really you arent really helping the middle class, youre just screwing them over. Now, as for Obama, I honestly think he is going to do a terrible job, I seriously hope that isnt what happens, but =\
|
|
|
Post by darthdodo on Nov 9, 2008 17:39:11 GMT -8
2: Why doesn't it deserve an actual reply? Because liberals can't explain issues like Bill Ayres, Tony Rezco, his unknown funding sources, Said-Khalidi, etc... they refuse to answer because they can't. If they were to, it would go against common sense. If John McCain were to accept unknown funding sources, then refuse to give out information when he was caught, then the liberals would get ALL over him. If he were to be a past friend with an unrepentant terrorist like Ayres, he wouldn't have even made it past the primaries. The only thing worse than ignorance is forced ignorance...Or: these things have been tiredly explained before, and ignored by you. Obama was 8 when Ayers was blowing up buildings, which, I might add, no one was ever hurt or killed in (this was no accident either). This has been stated several times by any credible news source. So really, any of those issues you could just look up yourself and find the truth, but you'd rather continue stretch this out as long as possible. You're just stirring rice dude. I don't care if he was not even born yet. If George W. Bush, who was born in '46 turned around and sat in Adolf Hitler's living room (assuming he'd be alive, which he wasn't, of course, when Bush was in his 20's) and Bush jumpstarted his political start there, then endorsed his book then he wouldn't even have a career (unless he was a Democrat, in which case he'd get away with it). While Bill Ayres is no Adolf Hitler, William Charles Ayres still planted bombs, even though he knew they could have killed some people. If a guy puts a gun to an innocent citizen's head and shoots only to figure out it's jammed... he still didn't care of the man's life, but circumstances held that the innocent lived to see another day. Another man holds a meeting with this "someone in the neighborhood" and later runs for President. But because he can eloquently make a bunch of promises he doesn't intend to keep, he gains trust from those who see him as the Lord Messiah Barrack Obama. And because he is black, a dominant group of the black people in America vote for him JUST because they want a black President SO badly. The young vote for him because they've been going to liberal colleges. "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened."~ Norman Thomas, six-time Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America. These socialists realize something. Introducing socialism ever so slowly through the education system will breed a bunch of socialists who will one day inherit the nation from their grandparents who fought the socialists over seas. (there are small exceptions to my next statement) Barrack Obama got the black vote because he's black. The young vote because their socialistic-education. The 40-some percent of the white because he made empty promises about the economy. The Latino because he promises amnesty. The Liberals in general because their liberal. If you want this country left to your children and grandchildren as a Communist country, then you give up your freedoms which your parents and grandparents fought and died for!
|
|
|
Post by jmcmatt on Nov 9, 2008 19:44:05 GMT -8
I kind of hope he turns out to be a Communist Muslim just to see your reaction.
|
|
|
Post by darthdodo on Nov 9, 2008 20:16:36 GMT -8
Leave the country and go to Ireland...
|
|
|
Post by Jango Reiss on Nov 9, 2008 20:52:55 GMT -8
Have I said how much I love this thread?
|
|
Dac Bailu
Fringe
The Thread Reaper
-10,350-
Posts: 2,551
|
Post by Dac Bailu on Nov 13, 2008 15:05:34 GMT -8
I suddenly feel myself regretting my Irish heritage...
|
|
|
Post by darthdodo on Nov 13, 2008 15:09:31 GMT -8
I suddenly feel myself regretting my Irish heritage... Why? Because there's another Irish descendant who values the way America used to be before liberalism, feminism, homosexuality and socialism? Let me remind you that back in the 1800's most of everyone was WAY more conservative than I am.
|
|
Dac Bailu
Fringe
The Thread Reaper
-10,350-
Posts: 2,551
|
Post by Dac Bailu on Nov 13, 2008 15:18:51 GMT -8
I suddenly feel myself regretting my Irish heritage... Why? Because there's another Irish descendant who values the way America used to be before liberalism, feminism, homosexuality and socialism? Let me remind you that back in the 1800's most of everyone was WAY more conservative than I am. And let me remind you that in the 16 and 1700s people were quick to stone someone to death just because they heard the word "witch." And let me also remind you of a little thing called slavery, which was in place over 100 years before our nation was established and lasted until the 1860s. Eventually, we as a society figure out the stupid things we're doing, and change them. It's happening now. Get over it.
|
|
|
Post by darthdodo on Nov 13, 2008 15:19:19 GMT -8
I'd like to point something out right now: With our economy as poor as it is right now, hitting the lower and middle classes the hardest, the only way to revamp it, IS TO REDISTRIBUTE THE WEALTH FROM THE WEALTHY. McCain and Palin would have had to do the exact same thing, because it's the only thing that will work right now. But the only reason everyone jumped at Obama, is because someone used the word "Socialism" in relation to his policy; which yes, it is Socialism, but that doesn't automatically mean it's evil. If regulated, it can work. But anyway: I called it. In your face Mel. I voted on the 31st, my birthday. I made history on my birthday. It's pretty awesome. I may not be an eloquent speaker, but I have just one thing to say to this. Any society that would give up a little liberty, to gain a little security will deserve neither and loose both. ~ Benjamin Franklin We, as Americans, have lived so long with so much security that now when the bane of many other nations comes right to our front door (socialism), we are willing to give up our liberty, even if it is a little right now, so that we may gain a little economic security. And any man that believes socialism can be regulated is ignorant of history. Another good one from Ben: A small leak can sink a great ship. I think that can fit any subject. One I wish the democrats could hear (in regards to their "Messiah): Applause waits on success. ~ Ben
|
|