Is someone who did not show up to vote 394 times qualified to be president? - Page 3

bhkad · 07-27-08, 02:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders

So we should go to pure capitalism? Close down public schools, public police departments, public fire departments, public water/waste management, medicare, medicade, welfare, the US Postal Service, Amtrack, public roads, etc etc etc. Should we let the free market take care of all of those things? Or do you admit that pure capitalism is just as ridiculous as pure communism, and that the US already implements a large number of socialist programs to the great benefit of its citizens?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders

http://www.debatepolitics.com/us-ele...post1057680230 (Is someone who did not show up to vote 394 times qualified to be president?)

Quote:

First off, you don’t raise taxes during a recession. That’s a no-brainer. Second, doubling the capital-gains tax rate will affect Americans up and down the income ladder, not just rich hedge-fund managers. In addition, capital-gains tax cuts are self-financing, and they stimulate jobs and the economy. You want to raise budget revenues and spark economic growth? Cut the cap-gains tax rate. That’s what history shows.

The Wall Street Journal’s Steve Moore points out that in 2005, almost half of all tax returns reporting capital gains came from households with incomes under $50,000, while more than three-quarters came from households earning less than $100,000.

Obama also proposed uncapping the payroll tax, another blunder that will hit people up and down the income ladder. While Obama pledges tax hikes only for folks earning more that $200,000 a year, his tax hike on payrolls would actually slam middle-income earners. The cap on wages subject to the payroll tax is presently $102,000. By eliminating that cap Obama will be soaking veteran firemen, cops, teachers, and health-service workers, along with a variety of other occupations.

In fact, in America’s largest cities, a firefighter married to a school teacher can earn close to $200,000 filing jointly. So not only will each spouse separately pay more for Social Security and health care under Obama’s plan, together they’ll also be slammed by Obama’s cap-gains tax increase.

This is more than just a failure to understand the Laffer curve. It’s another cultural misstep by Obama. I can’t help but wonder if the senator knows any cops or firemen. His appeal is to well-educated latte liberals. That remark about middle-income folks having turned to God, faith, and guns because of economic setbacks? Not only was it ill-advised, it illustrates the wide cultural chasm that exists between the candidate and the rest of America.

In effect, Obama’s economics are bad and his social circle is very limited. This is one of the many reasons why a quarter of the Hillary Democrats are telling pollsters they’ll likely move to John McCain in the general election.

Obama’s real agenda is far-liberal left. It’s an ideology that places income redistribution above economic growth. That’s his real message. And it’s the same one that sunk Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, and Kerry. Bill Clinton? He was a growth Democrat. So he won twice. But Obama is aligning himself with the Democratic losers. And that will make him a loser as well.

Larry Kudlow on Barack Obama and Tax Policy on NRO Financial

Kernel Sanders · 07-27-08, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhkad

Larry Kudlow on Barack Obama and Tax Policy on NRO Financial

Thanks for completely avoiding the question I asked. I'll post it again in case you missed it

So we should go to pure capitalism? Close down public schools, public police departments, public fire departments, public water/waste management, medicare, medicade, welfare, the US Postal Service, Amtrack, public roads, etc etc etc. Should we let the free market take care of all of those things? Or do you admit that pure capitalism is just as ridiculous as pure communism, and that the US already implements a large number of socialist programs to the great benefit of its citizens?

bhkad · 07-27-08, 03:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders

Thanks for completely avoiding the question I asked. I'll post it again in case you missed it

So we should go to pure capitalism? Close down public schools, public police departments, public fire departments, public water/waste management, medicare, medicade, welfare, the US Postal Service, Amtrack, public roads, etc etc etc. Should we let the free market take care of all of those things? Or do you admit that pure capitalism is just as ridiculous as pure communism, and that the US already implements a large number of socialist programs to the great benefit of its citizens?

Stop trying to confuse the issue.

Obama is a Socialist.

Quote:

However, that’s not to say that Obama doesn’t believe in the Leftist principles of top-down statist control and redistributionism. One only need to consider his policies on capital-gains taxes, new federal spending, and massive expansion of regulatory and bureaucratic management to understand that much about him. Obama may not be a Bernie Sanders Socialist, but his proposals rely heavily on the same philosophy. Rather than concern ourselves about a couple of college rallies, let’s focus on Barack Obama’s current rallies and the policies he declares at them. That’s enough.

Hot Air Blog Archive Is Obama a socialist?

Kernel Sanders · 07-27-08, 04:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhkad

Stop trying to confuse the issue.

Obama is a Socialist.

Hot Air Blog Archive Is Obama a socialist?

Let's assume for a second that you are correct and that Obama is a socialist.

Are you saying that we should go to pure capitalism? Close down public schools, public police departments, public fire departments, public water/waste management, medicare, medicade, welfare, the US Postal Service, Amtrack, public roads, etc etc etc. Should we let the free market take care of all of those things? Or do you admit that pure capitalism is just as ridiculous as pure communism, and that the US already implements a large number of socialist programs to the great benefit of its citizens?

GottaHurt · 07-27-08, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kernel Sanders

So we should go to pure capitalism? Close down public schools, public police departments, public fire departments, public water/waste management, medicare, medicade, welfare, the US Postal Service, Amtrack, public roads, etc etc etc. Should we let the free market take care of all of those things? Or do you admit that pure capitalism is just as ridiculous as pure communism, and that the US already implements a large number of socialist programs to the great benefit of its citizens?

Actually I would like to see those agencies/services turned over to private business. It would eliminate huge chunks of government waste and definitely cut out most of the red tape.

It would expose our elected officials, forcing them to be more productive as they wouldn't be able to hide themselves in worthless committees. (committees not needed to "oversee" the services/agencies listed above)

It wouldn't be a "pure" capitalistic society as suggested, we still need the US Government to control certain segments.

Happy Days · 07-27-08, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by obvious Child

You like having police and firefighters right? You like not having to bribe them to do what you want right? How about roads? Do you enjoy having to pay a toll on every road you drive on? How about your beloved military? Or would you rather prefer it entirely like blackwater/Executive Outcomes/Triple Canopy?

What DO you know about Socialism?

I believe you are being a tad misleading. There is a very big difference between the government managing services which everyone needs in a developed nation (such as roads, schools, police, etc) and socialist programs which are necessary only for a portion of society. Socialist programs such as medicine, welfare, food stamps, to name a few, are paid for by taxes from everyone, but not everyone uses them.

PeteEU · 07-27-08, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Days

I believe you are being a tad misleading. There is a very big difference between the government managing services which everyone needs in a developed nation (such as roads, schools, police, etc) and socialist programs which are necessary only for a portion of society. Socialist programs such as medicine, welfare, food stamps, to name a few, are paid for by taxes from everyone, but not everyone uses them.

Not everyone uses the police, schools, roads etc either... in fact why should I pay for any other roads than the ones I drive on? or pay for schools .. I dont have kids so why pay for it? Or the police.... I dont interact with them on a daily basis, so why pay for them? Same goes for the military. Why pay for them, a bottomless pit? Just because some people like to play warrior? Get a real job for peak sake! (yes this is ironic for those people that dont get it).

But this is so off topic that it has been reported.

McCain is by far the biggest absent Senator for the last 2 years or so, and while you might be critical of Obama not being there more.. at least he was there over 50% of the time and he had a hard and long primary season.. McCain did not. For peak sake he even missed votes (or did not vote) on one of his key issues.. the use of torture.. basiclly giving the stamp of approval for the use of such war crimes.

UtahBill · 07-27-08, 09:30 AM

Janet Napolitano for president!!!!
McCain is qualified, tho. Sad thing is, the criteria that makes him qualified allows any natural born citizen over 35 to hold the office.
There is no intelligence test given to candidates. There is no review of his scholastic achievements, or lack there of. There is no investigation, other than the pathetic efforts of the press, to determine whether or not the candidate is his own man, or just a shill for his party.
We as a nation vote for the person the parties present to us, and lately they have been serving up some crappy choices.
I would say that there is some kind of grand conspiracy going on that has led our nation to the brink of becoming part of the 3rd world, but that would imply that there are some brains behind it, for good or ill. There doesn't seem to be.
Are we voters really that easy to manipulate?
Surely there are better choices than Obama or McCain?

PeteEU · 07-27-08, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UtahBill

Are we voters really that easy to manipulate?

Yes, they voted George Bush into office twice.

Quote:

Surely there are better choices than Obama or McCain?

There is, but they are not dumb enough to get involved in the sewer that's called politics.

As for qualifications to be president.. they are pretty low considering the last President.

UtahBill · 07-27-08, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeteEU

Yes, they voted George Bush into office twice.

There is, but they are not dumb enough to get involved in the sewer that's called politics.

As for qualifications to be president.. they are pretty low considering the last President.

In 2000, it was tweedle dumb, and tweedle dumber...
In 2004, it was tweedle dumb, and tweedle dee...but tweedle dumb had the advantage of being an incumbent.
This time, McCain has to suffer from his association with the party that gave us the Shrub, but it appears that Obama may be making it easy for him.

At least with Bush, there was a clear choice as to which was the lesser of 2 weasels, this time I can't decide which one will do the worst job.
Guess I will go with the lazy old white man who was born into priviledge and made the least of it. With a republican in the white house, and both houses owned by the democrats, he can't screw up too badly.