Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

President Obama

small business is going to pay and so are we

NateWA said:
I highly doubt all you republicans whining about increased taxes are making the amount of money where you would get increased taxes. Are you all really making like over 150K?? cause if you are quit your whining. You really dont have much to worry about. You think its fair for you to be making that much when there are people who have lost their homes and are living in tents and on the street? oh and you may say

"well I worked hard for what I have so **** everyone else"

But Im sure you've all had a help up along the way. Whether it was growing up in a family that was financially comfortable, got scholarships, got hooked up with a job by somebody you knew or whatever. We dont all start out at the same level on the same playing field. Where you end usually depends a lot on where you start. I just don't think that If I am fortunate and benefitted because of what family I was born into or how much money my parents had or who I knew that I have any more right to live in a house than any other person. You all piss me off.
Click to expand...


I agree with those people worried about the tax increases and I am one that will actually benefit from his supposed tax cuts for the middle class. The reason I agree in this area is that his tax increases are going to hurt a lot of small businesses which is what this country was and is still built upon. My parents own a small business and even though they "GROSS" over 250 k they are in no way pulling that in. Obama is not considering the higher costs that business owners are now paying and how their overhead has grown leaps and bounds.

All of those people that are banking on receiving some tax cut because they make less than 250, 200, or 150k depending on which democrat is talking at the time, are not considering the cause and effect of the small business industry. Prices are going to go up across the board for our everyday items, and jobs are going to be lost because these businesses already are having a hard time and increasing taxes on them or forcing health care on them is only going to hurt them that much more.
 
They just interviewed this chick on TV at a gas station. And her response to how she felt about Obama winning the presidency is below...

"I'm really happy he won, because now I don't have to worry about my car payment or my other bills because he's gonna help me out."

Are you kidding me?
 
Mulletsoldier said:
No, here are the most indicative numbers:

Average donation:
Obama - $68 - $80 (depending on source)
McCain - $150 - $350 (depending on source)

Obama ran a smart campaign which garnered massive amounts of ground-level support; the complete divergence of donation averages speaks to this.
Click to expand...

there is still a lingering question of legitimacy of those donations of Obamas, particularly the actual number of donors. Having collected much of it as internet donations with NO error or other checking, and no reporting requirements for donations under $200 the possibility for individuals to have made multiple donations of smaller amounts is quite real. Among the names used for donations in that under $200 are included Jesus Christ and Mickey Mouse (by people who actually made donations under those names).

The worst piece of the money portion of it is that it has killed public financing for elections in the US, and if this whole cycle (including primaries) was a $2 billion cycle, you can bet that next time will be a 3 or 4 billion cycle....
 
Mulletsoldier said:
From an outsider's perspective, it is disappointing to see the amount of cynicism, and skepticism, and and doubt on one hand; and the amount of revelry, and gloating, and arrogance on the other. In this, an historic moment, I find it disconcerting that at a time in your country's history where unity and tact is a necessity, you all choose to squabble and bicker yet again. Republicans need to push their cynicism and doubt aside for a moment and embrace the reaching power of the desire and capacity for change - both politically and culturally and; the Democrats need to step forward with cautious humility and an ability to cast aside the resentment of the past eight years. If this new government decides to conduct itself along the same lines of this thread, we are all fucked; Americans and others alike.
Click to expand...
Yes, this country has just made some history on the grandest scale. To have a black man even run for office was unfathomable let alone conceivable 50 years ago. Then to have him win is groundbreaking. Then you add in the female candidate it is even more tremendous.

Obama may or may not be as bad as his history shows and that is to be seen. To give him an automatic approval simply because he is not a Republic is foolish. Everyone is responsible for the mess this country is in while Bush was in office...Democrat and Republican alike.

My biggest issue is with the mentality that this new, young voter class, and even the older voters have about how the well off should be taxed more so the less off can get theirs. That is bullshit. This is a land of equal opportunity and equal obstacles for all people.

To take away from the successful to give to those who are not is wrong, period...and I'm saying this and don't make anyway near $150k a year. I earned what I have as little as it may be. I could not and would not want a hand out from my brother (literally) who makes 3 times my income just because I make less. That is wrong.
 
SicTib said:
All of those people that are banking on receiving some tax cut because they make less than 250, 200, or 150k depending on which democrat is talking at the time, are not considering the cause and effect of the small business industry. Prices are going to go up across the board for our everyday items, and jobs are going to be lost because these businesses already are having a hard time and increasing taxes on them or forcing health care on them is only going to hurt them that much more.
Click to expand...

that has been the issue all along - those people in those income ranges as well as corporations aren't going to just say "gee I guess I have 3-10% less in my pocket now but i'll spend the same" they are going to either raise their prices if they can, or lower their costs if they can. raising prices affects people who use their services, lowering costs usually means layoffs....
 
SicTib said:
I agree with those people worried about the tax increases and I am one that will actually benefit from his supposed tax cuts for the middle class. The reason I agree in this area is that his tax increases are going to hurt a lot of small businesses which is what this country was and is still built upon. My parents own a small business and even though they "GROSS" over 250 k they are in no way pulling that in. Obama is not considering the higher costs that business owners are now paying and how their overhead has grown leaps and bounds.

All of those people that are banking on receiving some tax cut because they make less than 250, 200, or 150k depending on which democrat is talking at the time, are not considering the cause and effect of the small business industry. Prices are going to go up across the board for our everyday items, and jobs are going to be lost because these businesses already are having a hard time and increasing taxes on them or forcing health care on them is only going to hurt them that much more.
Click to expand...

The Tax Policy is a little more clear cut than that. In 2010, if you make more than 50k, you will pay more taxes.

Cutting taxes a little after the Bush tax cuts expire, does not equate to tax cuts.

Invalid Link Removed
 
If Obama raised so much more money than McCain, why didn't he stand by his principles and give 40% of what he bilked people out of to the McCain Train?

Sounds hypocritical to me.
 
Mulletsoldier said:
No, here are the most indicative numbers:

Average donation:
Obama - $68 - $80 (depending on source)
McCain - $150 - $350 (depending on source)

Obama ran a smart campaign which garnered massive amounts of ground-level support; the complete divergence of donation averages speaks to this.
Click to expand...

Its all speculation at this point as to how much these donations netted Obama, but I will tell you that as recently as yesterday, you could have done this:

-go to a gas station
-buy 200 preloaded Visa cards with 100 dollars on each
-donat each to Obama's campaign under a different fictional name
-you just donated 20 grand that can't be tracked!

Obama's website took the preloaded credit cards, McCain's did not. For all we know, half of Obama's donations could have came from foreign nationals (illegal), and the other half could have came from individuals donating over the maximum donation (illegal).

I'm not saying Obama perpetuated the fraud, but he certainly did not take the very minor steps needed to deter the fraud.
 
but now you make the assumption Rob that there was fraud. Remember, innocent until proven guilty
 
Reaper329 said:
but now you make the assumption Rob that there was fraud. Remember, innocent until proven guilty
Click to expand...

I didn't make that assumption. I just said that Obama.com does not have the basic security features in place that McCain.com had to deter illegal donations.

Also, how would you even go about trying to prove that he was an accessory to that. You could not. This is a way to bypass campaign finance laws.
 
Reaper329 said:
but now you make the assumption Rob that there was fraud. Remember, innocent until proven guilty
Click to expand...

nobody made that assumption, we merely bring up the possibility which questions the legitimacy of the claims of "massive grassroots support". No address verifications were done, no name validation. you could have entered

Obama Rocks
123 Obama Street
Obama, Il 00000

as your address for those prepaid cards.... By setting up a system that allows for fraud while knowing and having available the means to block that fraud at NO cost (actually with address verification you have a lower cost in credit card transaction fees) you are complicit in the fraud.
 
keep in mind that by saying that is all ok, you just allow the next republican candidate to do the same....
 
NateWA said:
You think its fair for you to be making that much when there are people who have lost their homes and are living in tents and on the street? oh and you may say

"well I worked hard for what I have so **** everyone else"

But Im sure you've all had a help up along the way. Whether it was growing up in a family that was financially comfortable, got scholarships, got hooked up with a job by somebody you knew or whatever. We dont all start out at the same level on the same playing field. Where you end usually depends a lot on where you start. I just don't think that If I am fortunate and benefitted because of what family I was born into or how much money my parents had or who I knew that I have any more right to live in a house than any other person. You all piss me off.
Click to expand...

NateWA said:
And don't give me that "when you get some money you'll become a republican" Bull$h!t either. My grandparents were multi millionaires and were some of the biggest democrats Ive ever known. They gave away a **** ton of money to those less fortunate than them so that argument is a fallacy.
Click to expand...

so when you inherit, you're planning on giving away all your grandparents made to help the less fortunate right? you don't need any of that inheritance, and its unfair to everyone else right?

when that happens, and you've donated all those millions, and you're broke like those "less fortunate", send us a link of your donations.

give me a break.
 
I dont disagree that there were little to no verification safeguards in place, however, it still does not mean that fraud took place.

Also, as you all know, McCain was battling up hill as it was. 3 major reasons:
1. He was a republican, when it is unpopular to be one, and when you follow W.
2. He is 72
3. In line with #2, he offered his VP slot to an unproven 45 year old named Sarah Palin.

She did not deliver what she was meant to
 
EasyEJL said:
keep in mind that by saying that is all ok, you just allow the next republican candidate to do the same....
Click to expand...

Its just frustrating. McCain was one of the people that fought hardest for campaign finance reform. It was not a popular cause in congress, but he fought for it anyways.

There's no way he'd even ignore the spirit of the law and find a workaround. Just another reason why McCain is too nice of a guy to run for president.
 
suncloud said:
huckabee would have been a much better candidate, even with his extreme biblical views.
Click to expand...
I couldnt disagree more. He and Palin together would have been the religious wonder pairing, but most if not all independants would have walked away
 
Reaper329 said:
I dont disagree that there were little to no verification safeguards in place, however, it still does not mean that fraud took place.
Click to expand...

Fraud did take place. The question is how much. I believe it was the LA Times that made a 20 dollar Mickey Mouse donation for an article they wrote.

Also, as you all know, McCain was battling up hill as it was. 3 major reasons:
1. He was a republican, when it is unpopular to be one, and when you follow W.
2. He is 72
3. In line with #2, he offered his VP slot to an unproven 45 year old named Sarah Palin.

She did not deliver what she was meant to
Click to expand...

Given all those points, and additionally an unpopular war and a plummeting stock market, this election should not have been anywhere near as close as it was.

One question you have to ask is, how many dollars equal a point in a battleground state. Obama spent 2 to 1 what McCain spent. If Obama had spent the same amount as McCain, would he have won?
 
Reaper329 said:
I couldnt disagree more. He and Palin together would have been the religious wonder pairing, but most if not all independants would have walked away
Click to expand...

not a huckabee/palin ticket. i think huckabee/mccain would have been pretty decent.
 
RobInKuwait said:
Fraud did take place. The question is how much. I believe it was the LA Times that made a 20 dollar Mickey Mouse donation for an article they wrote.
Click to expand...
just curious, why was this not a bigger deal then? why was foxnews not shooting it from the rooftops

BTW, just a few posts ago, you said that you dont claim fruad took place. Just and FYI



RobInKuwait said:
Given all those points, and additionally an unpopular war and a plummeting stock market, this election should not have been anywhere near as close as it was.

One question you have to ask is, how many dollars equal a point in a battleground state. Obama spent 2 to 1 what McCain spent. If Obama had spent the same amount as McCain, would he have won?
Click to expand...

Close? In what regard? This was a mandate. Obama was the first dem to go over the 50% mark in the popular vote in decades. It was the largest dem electoral vote victory since 64, so how was this close?
 
RobInKuwait said:
Guilliani would have blown Obama out.
Click to expand...

guilliani bothers me. i like how he cleaned up NYC, but his platform was terrible. he couldn't make a speech without saying september 11 in it, as if he NEEDED to garner public sympathy to be taken seriously.

i respect him, i respect what he's done, especially in cleaning up all the corner porn stores that used to advertise very brazenly. i was 13 years old, and i remember NYC in the 90's very vividy. if he talked about what he's done instead of referencing a tragedy on multiple occasions, i would have liked him more.
 
Reaper329 said:
just curious, why was this not a bigger deal then? why was foxnews not shooting it from the rooftops
Click to expand...

They had reports on it, nobody really cared.

BTW, just a few posts ago, you said that you dont claim fruad took place. Just and FYI
Click to expand...

Nope. This is what I said:
I'm not saying Obama perpetuated the fraud, but he certainly did not take the very minor steps needed to deter the fraud.

Close? In what regard? This was a mandate. Obama was the first dem to go over the 50% mark in the popular vote in decades. It was the largest dem electoral vote victory since 64, so how was this close?
Click to expand...

You have to look at the battleground states that McCain lost. These are where Obama spent most of his money. If McCain got 5 out of 6 of these, he would be president.

Florida: 51-49 (1%)
North Carolina: 50-49 (1%)
Virginia: 52-47 (3%)
Pennsylvania: 55-44 (6%)
Ohio: 51-47 (2%)
Indiana: 50-49 (1%)
 
Reaper329 said:
that is downright laughable, he ran one of the worst campaigns of both parties primaries. :lol:

He is not a national candidate
Click to expand...

He would've been able to attack Obama like he needed to be attacked. Just imagine him in a debate, the whole thing would have been a series of sound bytes attacking Obama's plans. This guy was a prosecutor. That's just what you need when your opponent is running on feelings and emotions. Just think, every defense attorney ever tries to win with feelings and emotions...how good are prosecutors at dealing with that?

I agree tho, less 9/11 talk would have done him well.
 
RobInKuwait said:
Fraud did take place. The question is how much. I believe it was the LA Times that made a 20 dollar Mickey Mouse donation for an article they wrote.



Given all those points, and additionally an unpopular war and a plummeting stock market, this election should not have been anywhere near as close as it was.

One question you have to ask is, how many dollars equal a point in a battleground state. Obama spent 2 to 1 what McCain spent. If Obama had spent the same amount as McCain, would he have won?
Click to expand...

With the inept way the McCain campaign was run, it may not have been as decisive but yes he would have still won.

:bruce3:
 
Reaper329 said:
I dont disagree that there were little to no verification safeguards in place, however, it still does not mean that fraud took place.

Also, as you all know, McCain was battling up hill as it was. 3 major reasons:
1. He was a republican, when it is unpopular to be one, and when you follow W.
2. He is 72
3. In line with #2, he offered his VP slot to an unproven 45 year old named Sarah Palin.

She did not deliver what she was meant to
Click to expand...

Mccain with those disadvantages split the independent vote evenly with Obama, which is pretty impressive. You left out the disadvantage of excessively unfair media reporting
 
EasyEJL said:
Mccain with those disadvantages split the independent vote evenly with Obama, which is pretty impressive. You left out the disadvantage of excessively unfair media reporting
Click to expand...

Bingo. Overtyly biased media coverage FOR Obama, but wait, lets have a fairness doctrine on talk radio so the republican shows can have a fair democratic perspective. Fairness me arse.
 
It's unreal how NateWA got ANY support for his asinine "it's not fair that you have this and that and I don't!" garbage. I didn't come from a rich family and 10 years ago, at 27 years of age, I was walking miles to work in the rain because I didn't have money for a car. Nowadays, I'm in the top 5% of incomes in America and I've worked hard and made major sacrifices to achieve this.

I wasn't handed anything. I was intelligent enough and had enough drive/motivation to read, study and practice what I wanted to achieve until I became successful at it. Now I basically do NOTHING for a living and earn enough to drive multiple fancy cars and live in an extravagant home in a neighborhood with people LIKE ME who've worked hard to achieve success.

I don't owe YOU anything. If *I* can do it, ANYBODY can do it. So enjoy my ****ing handout, you P.O.S. (whoever gets it) - you're still not going to live my great, extravagant life without putting in some serious time and making serious sacrifices just like I did, genius.

B5150 said:
After you invest 4 years in college to get your BS and then another 3 to 4 years to get your MS in Engineering and land that job making $120k per year I want some of it. As a matter of fact I'm going to have my government take it from you. After another 15 years of busting your ass in the filed and you are a manager making $200k I want some more of it.

It's not fair that YOU got to bust YOUR ass all of YOUR life for ME to get nothing for it...give ME what's OURS!!!
Click to expand...
 
Zero Tolerance said:
It's unreal how NateWA got ANY support for his asinine "it's not fair that you have this and that and I don't!" garbage.

Nowadays, I'm in the top 5% of incomes in America and I've worked hard and made major sacrifices to achieve this.
Click to expand...
In NateWA's system of redistribution I should get a cut of yours just because you have it.

B5150
Socialism Way
Communist, USA

...let me know when the check is in the mail.
 
Just out of curiosity what line of work are you in? (Zero Tolerance)

And I admit you guys do have good points.

I Just see time and again that rebuplicans blame poor people for being lazy. Thats not true in all cases, some of the hardest working people I have ever known are poor people.

And with Nabisco's post about the People down in Georgia being on welfare when then are driving Escalades. I highly doubt they bought their cars with your tax money.
 
Im not saying I think the rich should be taxed heavily and that money given to the poor. Im saying I dont think it is right for the rich to be getting tax cuts that are LARGER (percentage wise) than what the middle class is getting. There is a big difference.
 
NateWA said:
I Just see time and again that rebuplicans blame poor people for being lazy. Thats not true in all cases, some of the hardest working people I have ever known are poor people.
Click to expand...

That's because many of them are. But for the ones that aren't, I suggest you look at the historical tax rates in the last 80 years because then you will see that they are paying the least amount of taxes they ever have since 1912....

....under George Bush.


Invalid Link Removed


And with Nabisco's post about the People down in Georgia being on welfare when then are driving Escalades. I highly doubt they bought their cars with your tax money.
Click to expand...

No, they borrowed that money that was made available by amendments made in the last 90's under Clinton that eased credit restrictions that ultimately caused that nice little housing bubble that is effecting the economy the way it is.
 
BTW - I called this months ago!!! I get a tax cut!!! :lol:




I hope Obama does make a great President. I hope he governs from the middle and believe he does have enormous potential.....

....if he doesn't let Congress run wild.
 
My earlier posts came from a standpoint of very little knowledge about the candidates' policies. I am going to admit that right now. I was only trying to say that I think there is something fundamentally wrong with the republican "F-u-ck everybody else" attitude. There a lot of people that because of the situation they are born in can not possibly achieve what many of you have achieved. I just think that not giving a F-u-ck about these people is wrong. Im not saying you need to give them your money, but it really seems like a lot of you dont give two shits about anybody but yourselves.
 
NateWA said:
My earlier posts came from a standpoint of very little knowledge about the candidates' policies. I am going to admit that right now. I was only trying to say that I think there is something fundamentally wrong with the republican "**** everybody else" attitude. There a lot of people that because of the situation they are born in can not possibly achieve what many of you have achieved. I just think that not giving a **** about these people is wrong. Im not saying you need to give them your money, but it really seems like a lot of you dont give two shits about anybody but yourselves.
Click to expand...



And this idea that you think all Republicans feel this way is nonsense.

I find more poor people with the "fckin everybody else" attitude than Republicans.

Look at the man that was just elected. If that itself doesn't show you that anything can be accomplished then nothing in this world will.

I just looked at my property tax bill and I paid $2300 in public school taxes alone and I don't have any kids in school. I already pay through the nose and I don't need people saying I don't give a **** because I'm registered with an "R".

I put my money where my mouth is. Do you?
 
NateWA said:
My earlier posts came from a standpoint of very little knowledge about the candidates' policies. I am going to admit that right now. I was only trying to say that I think there is something fundamentally wrong with the republican "F-u-ck everybody else" attitude. There a lot of people that because of the situation they are born in can not possibly achieve what many of you have achieved. I just think that not giving a F-u-ck about these people is wrong. Im not saying you need to give them your money, but it really seems like a lot of you dont give two shits about anybody but yourselves.
Click to expand...

you're drank so much media kool-aid about republicans it's disgusting. Why don't you learn something about a party and their beliefs before you smack them around.
 
natew,

there's a problem with handing out people money. i understand they need it, or feel entitled to it. i understand that some people just don't have the ability or time to go to school.

the problem is this : where will the money go? cigarettes? beer? pot? i ask this because my neighbor can't feed her kids, but she got some 300 dollar shades from the economic stimulus package... the kids come over to borrow milk, cereal, ketchup, etc. they never end. you can't blame them - they're starving and their mom is a douche.

the problem with giving poor people money, is the same problem giving money to panhandlers - you don't know if the money goes for food or drugs.

there's nothing wrong with giving the less fortunate money. the problem remains that when you do so, you are enabling poor people to be wasteful with what they are given, because they can simply get more. as a government, its impossible to distinguish the truly needy from the stupid and greedy.

if handing out money was a good idea, or made sense, they should enact it similar to a college loan - here' your money for 4 years - now get a job and pay us back.

furthermore, the biggest problem with government handouts is it diminishes the things that sets us apart from animals : drive and ambition.

if you have neither, you never will become what you want, or be in a position to be taxed to give it to others. without drive or ambition, you might as well be living in former USSR, where these were considered the norm.

thats my 2 cents. sorry if i'm not eloquent at the moment.
 
NateWA said:
My earlier posts came from a standpoint of very little knowledge about the candidates' policies. I am going to admit that right now. I was only trying to say that I think there is something fundamentally wrong with the republican "F-u-ck everybody else" attitude. There a lot of people that because of the situation they are born in can not possibly achieve what many of you have achieved. I just think that not giving a F-u-ck about these people is wrong. Im not saying you need to give them your money, but it really seems like a lot of you dont give two shits about anybody but yourselves.
Click to expand...

Nate, you are so wrong here, and therein lies the entire problem. The republicans don't have an FU attitude, they have a "put some effort in yourself attitude". If you are a lazy sack of crap, then maybe it does sound like FU. you say "There a lot of people that because of the situation they are born in can not possibly achieve what many of you have achieved." but that is just defeatism, which is exactly what keeps people there. Hellooooooo Obama just won the presidency. He came from a mom who had a first gen immigrant father who abandoned him, had to live with his grandparents, work his way thru college, etc. Tell me that those lazy bastards can't at least pay their own rent and food. No, not eveyone can be spectacularly successful, but using that as an excuse to not even make the attempt doesn't obligate anyone else to just throw money at you.

The difference is that we care MORE about you than the democrats do. They are more than happy to give you little morsels to keep the people in poverty just quiet enough to not riot, we want to create the opportunity so they can move out of poverty themselves. The republicans want to fix broken inner city schools, give people better education, create more jobs. The only reason the democrats are considered pro educations is because the teachers UNION supports them... but its a union thing, not an education thing.

They want to give you a fish, we want to teach you to fish.
 
what about someone working 2 or 3 minimum wage jobs who is losing their home. This is happening right now and its not from a lack of effort
 
Just from an australian perspective... All ive seen so far that has been hatin on obama is the tax increase/cuts .. still don't know cause so many conflicting arguments.

Do you guys seriously just care that much about a tax increase? IF IN FACT it is a tax increase? even if it was for the over 150K? who gives a flying f#$% ...
.. in aus we pay 46% tax (we have a different tax system) if you earn over 85k...

What about obama's policy on your really **** health system (no offence), compared to mccains.

What about his foreign policy? (z0mg is he gonna help ze terrorists?) - compared to Mccains

When i was watching the news here, when obama was talking about his policies.. It would show Mccain saying "america will not be safe" .. "he cant lead a war" ..blah blah.. It was like a typical Bush fear campaign.

At least from a semi-nuetral perspective, give me the low down on SOMETHING BESIDES THE TAX STUFF. It makes you yanks look more selfish lol

BTW so what happens if you earn over 50K do you get a tax increase? heard conflicting things
 
NateWA said:
I Just see time and again that rebuplicans blame poor people for being lazy. Thats not true in all cases, some of the hardest working people I have ever known are poor people.
Click to expand...
Nate, man, you're 22 yrs old now.
When you add another 20 something years to your life, bust your ass to obtain a nice pocket of money, house, business, etc. You feel you earned it and wouldn't want to give it to anyone but your own family.

And with Nabisco's post about the People down in Georgia being on welfare when then are driving Escalades. I highly doubt they bought their cars with your tax money.
Click to expand...
No they are paid for with untaxed drug money.
The cocaine business is still lucrative in most cities.
 
AnthonyEhsani said:
Just from an australian perspective... All ive seen so far that has been hatin on obama is the tax increase/cuts .. still don't know cause so many conflicting arguments.

Do you guys seriously just care that much about a tax increase? IF IN FACT it is a tax increase? even if it was for the over 150K? who gives a flying f#$% ...
.. in aus we pay 46% tax (we have a different tax system) if you earn over 85k...

What about obama's policy on your really **** health system (no offence), compared to mccains.

What about his foreign policy? (z0mg is he gonna help ze terrorists?) - compared to Mccains

When i was watching the news here, when obama was talking about his policies.. It would show Mccain saying "america will not be safe" .. "he cant lead a war" ..blah blah.. It was like a typical Bush fear campaign.

At least from a semi-nuetral perspective, give me the low down on SOMETHING BESIDES THE TAX STUFF. It makes you yanks look more selfish lol

BTW so what happens if you earn over 50K do you get a tax increase? heard conflicting things
Click to expand...

Private enterprise is more efficient and effective at providing social services. Hows that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top