|
Post by juancarlos on Jun 6, 2008 0:59:20 GMT -5
McCain's age isn't that bad. He's close to the age Ronald Reagan started out with (although a few years older). What's sad is that McCain made a lot more sense 8 years ago; he was a contender for the 2000 nomination until he denounced the influence of religion towards government... which caused the religious right to back George W. Right now McCain is basically pushing himself as version 3.0 of the Bush administration.....Although he probably won't be that bad, since I seriously doubt anybody can do any worst then our current administration. As Obama had said, Bush set a very low bar ... even a bartender would do a better job (pun intended).* *the ad lib was mine.
|
|
|
Post by PerzanKitCat86205 on Jun 6, 2008 1:05:50 GMT -5
McCain's age isn't that bad. He's close to the age Ronald Reagan started out with (although a few years older). What's sad is that McCain made a lot more sense 8 years ago; he was a contender for the 2000 nomination until he denounced the influence of religion towards government... which caused the religious right to back George W. Right now McCain is basically pushing himself as version 3.0 of the Bush administration.....Although he probably won't be that bad, since I seriously doubt anybody can do any worst then our current administration. As Obama had said, Bush set a very low bar ... even a bartender would do a better job (pun intended).* *the ad lib was mine. "better" as in.. not hotter, though?
|
|
|
Post by buff on Jun 6, 2008 7:45:11 GMT -5
McCain's age isn't that bad. He's close to the age Ronald Reagan started out with (although a few years older). What's sad is that McCain made a lot more sense 8 years ago; he was a contender for the 2000 nomination until he denounced the influence of religion towards government... which caused the religious right to back George W. Right now McCain is basically pushing himself as version 3.0 of the Bush administration.....Although he probably won't be that bad, since I seriously doubt anybody can do any worst then our current administration. As Obama had said, Bush set a very low bar ... even a bartender would do a better job (pun intended).* *the ad lib was mine. Hence, Obama believes that being mediocre is good enough. Does this guy even know the meaning of quality control.
|
|
|
Post by buff on Jun 6, 2008 8:03:40 GMT -5
Be Careful of a Demagogue that thinks that the Presidency has been set to a lower standard hence he could just wing it in.
|
|
|
Post by Roam'n on Jun 6, 2008 16:47:42 GMT -5
Hence, Obama believes that being mediocre is good enough. Does this guy even know the meaning of quality control. Of course he does. It means filling your administration with of competent individuals versus gathering up a bunch of ass kissing yes-men who's only qualification is being an ass kissing yes man.* Should I care to explain the prior qualifications of "heck of a job" Michael D. Brown, before Bush had him direct FEMA? He ran a equestrian organization. How about Bush's first choice for Supreme Court, Harriet Miers? She's was a business lawyer with absolutely no experience in handling constitutional law. Obama's track record isn't long, but it does show that he taps best people he can find for whatever jobs he needs filled. As an Illinois Senator he gathered up people with years of experience in their own field! *Cheney is an exception, but we all know he's the Dark Lord of the administration anyways.
|
|
|
Post by PerzanKitCat86205 on Jun 6, 2008 16:51:26 GMT -5
I'm still afraid they think it's for the idea of minority status alone.
|
|
|
Post by Altan on Jun 8, 2008 4:51:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by PerzanKitCat86205 on Jun 8, 2008 4:53:48 GMT -5
I heard the word beating and turned it off. What does it have to do with it?
|
|
|
Post by juancarlos on Jun 11, 2008 2:49:05 GMT -5
Be Careful of a Demagogue that thinks that the Presidency has been set to a lower standard hence he could just wing it in. What are some of the things that would suggest that Obama would be a demagogue? Why do you seem to be so angry with him and Ted Kennedy? Is it because HRC, the candidate you support, has lost?
|
|
|
Post by betahat on Jun 11, 2008 17:06:21 GMT -5
"John McCain Will Maintain The Current Income And Investment Tax Rates And Fight The Democrats' Plans For A Crippling Tax Increase In 2011. Left to their devices, Democrats will impose a massive $100 billion tax hike, almost $700 per taxpayer every year. John McCain has also long sought permanent and immediate reform of the estate tax, and supports raising the exemption from taxation on estates up to $10 million while cutting the tax rate to 15 percent"
What they don't tell you is that the $100 billion a year tax increase is repealing the Bush tax cuts on people who make more than 250K a year (which is about the top 1.5% of the income distribution). So that $700 a year per taxpayer is of course an average where you divide by the incorrect denominator and attribute tax increases to people who will not see their taxes rise. But of course, who would expect a Republican to understand a concept like an "average." Also, Obama has signalled his pragmatism by saying that he will decide about tax cuts based on the economic conditions. If the economy is deep in recession in January 2009 he will not raise taxes - he is after all a Democrat and most likely a doctrinaire Keynesian. On the other hand, his stimulus package would be more pro-poor than McCain's undoubtedly. And I (we) know where his sympathies are - as the economy picks back up again, Obama will take the necessary steps, including raising taxes (which I know Republicans cannot possibly stomach - that's how you know when a so-called Hillary supporter is really a Republican all along, because the one thing that truly separates Dems from Republicans is that Republicans absolutely hate raising taxes under any circumstances) to help balance the budget again.
I think the thing that people miss about Obama is that even though his policies sound like a long list of standard Democratic policies (which they are) he is quite a pragmatic person. I know they are trying to paint him as a far-left marxist, but his record is different and when he talks about "change" or a new kind of politics, I think he is signaling that he honestly believes in compromise when necessary. Hopefully we'll have a filibuster proof majority in the both houses and a Democratic president, and Americans will finally get universal (or near universal) health care.
|
|
|
Post by juancarlos on Jun 12, 2008 1:03:24 GMT -5
To add to what Betahat had said, I also like Obama's humility and grace. What a class act!!!
|
|