The 2008 US Presidential Election Thread

Voted Worlds #1 Most Loonatic Fanbase

Moderator: Andrew

Postby Enigma869 » Fri Nov 07, 2008 1:07 am

Tito wrote:Why did the 2012 Presidental thread get locked? :evil:


Probably because you started it just to be a pain in the ass!


John from Boston
User avatar
Enigma869
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Back In The Civilized Part Of U.S.

Postby hoagiepete » Fri Nov 07, 2008 1:16 am

strangegrey wrote:
Skylorde wrote:Two business people whom I highly respect told me the *very* same thing. I quote:

"We may end up paying slightly more on our bottom line but make no mistake about it; we'll adjust the prices of consumables and adjust the workforce accordingly to offset the bulk of the increase that is being levied on us."

"Sticking it to the rich" is nothing more than telling people (who really don't understand economics) what they want to hear.

Tell me if I'm wrong Frank.


You're not.

The democrats took/stole/borrowed (whatever you want to call it) the concept of fiscal responsibility from the republicans....and they've been claiming it as their own, the very day a fiscal democrat in the name of Bill Clinton became president. What has happened, is they've claimed ownership of a republican ideal and attracted a great deal of socially liberal conservatives to their side of the aisle. Pure genius if you ask me...

The end result is that the democrat electorate wants fiscally responsible leadership. However, that doesn't jive with the far-left's entitlement/hand-out agenda. So they walk a fine line. It's a line that Obama is going to have to walk very carefully during his presidency. ESPECIALLY since people are rebelling against a fiscally liberal republican president, who has spent with reckless abandon and piled up debt faster than a million high school girls with daddy's credit cards.


One of the many problems with the party formerly known as the republican party, is that they have adopted the old school democrat philosophy (which is to spend with reckless abandon) thinking that the people will love them for the shower of free entitlements they get.

The problem is, is that you can justify entitlement programs for the ultra poor...maybe, if you roll that way. Some of us dont...that's not the problem.

The problem is, You *can't* walk into a room and justify entitlement programs for the middle and upper class. That's what the republicans have been doing for years...and that has forced this massive revolt against them....despite the fact that the majority of the country is center-right.


You had me in agreement until your last paragraph. Entitlement programs for middle and upper class??? What entitlements are there for them? Please be specific.
hoagiepete
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1610
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:16 am

Postby Behshad » Fri Nov 07, 2008 1:23 am

Enigma869 wrote:
Tito wrote:Why did the 2012 Presidental thread get locked? :evil:


Probably because you started it just to be a pain in the ass!

John from Boston


Minus "probably" 8)
Image
User avatar
Behshad
MP3
 
Posts: 12584
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:08 am

Postby strangegrey » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:07 am

hoagiepete wrote:You had me in agreement until your last paragraph. Entitlement programs for middle and upper class??? What entitlements are there for them? Please be specific.


Oh, that's the easiest....I'll give the biggest example in modern history.

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008
Image
User avatar
strangegrey
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3622
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:31 am
Location: Tortuga

Postby Ehwmatt » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:10 am

strangegrey wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:You had me in agreement until your last paragraph. Entitlement programs for middle and upper class??? What entitlements are there for them? Please be specific.


Oh, that's the easiest....I'll give the biggest example in modern history.

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008


I don't agree with the bail out, but comparing the bailout package to simply handing out $1000 checks to people who don't pay income taxes is asinine. Not to mention said bail out certainly doesn't help anyone in my family or friends, though most of us are all solidly middle-upper class. Apples and oranges
User avatar
Ehwmatt
MP3
 
Posts: 10907
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 4:15 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Postby Rhiannon » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:13 am

Image
Rhiannon
MP3
 
Posts: 10829
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 9:09 am

Postby Ehwmatt » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:16 am

Rhiannon wrote:Image


If they do that in 2012, I'm done with the Republicans. So dumb.
User avatar
Ehwmatt
MP3
 
Posts: 10907
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 4:15 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Postby strangegrey » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:19 am

Ehwmatt wrote:
strangegrey wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:You had me in agreement until your last paragraph. Entitlement programs for middle and upper class??? What entitlements are there for them? Please be specific.


Oh, that's the easiest....I'll give the biggest example in modern history.

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008


I don't agree with the bail out, but comparing the bailout package to simply handing out $1000 checks to people who don't pay income taxes is asinine. Not to mention said bail out certainly doesn't help anyone in my family or friends, though most of us are all solidly middle-upper class. Apples and oranges


Absolutely not apples and oranges. The concept behind welfare and the bailout is identical. Establish a floor so that failure can be overlooked and forgiven.

While I agree that banks and the financial industry requires a certain amount of help...due to the fact that a regular corporation can file for bankruptcy and survive...a financial institution cant. Once consumer confidence is wrecked, theres no chance for a financial business to survive.

However, you need to read the bailout to understand what I'm driving at. There are aspects of this bailout that creates a legal precedent of government help in failure in ways never done before.
Image
User avatar
strangegrey
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3622
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:31 am
Location: Tortuga

Postby Rhiannon » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:22 am

Ehwmatt wrote:If they do that in 2012, I'm done with the Republicans. So dumb.


Surely they wouldn't be that insane as to put Palin up against a dem incumbent. ...If so, maybe the mayans were right. :shock: :lol:
Rhiannon
MP3
 
Posts: 10829
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 9:09 am

Postby Ehwmatt » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:23 am

strangegrey wrote:
Ehwmatt wrote:
strangegrey wrote:
hoagiepete wrote:You had me in agreement until your last paragraph. Entitlement programs for middle and upper class??? What entitlements are there for them? Please be specific.


Oh, that's the easiest....I'll give the biggest example in modern history.

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008


I don't agree with the bail out, but comparing the bailout package to simply handing out $1000 checks to people who don't pay income taxes is asinine. Not to mention said bail out certainly doesn't help anyone in my family or friends, though most of us are all solidly middle-upper class. Apples and oranges


Absolutely not apples and oranges. The concept behind welfare and the bailout is identical. Establish a floor so that failure can be overlooked and forgiven.

While I agree that banks and the financial industry requires a certain amount of help...due to the fact that a regular corporation can file for bankruptcy and survive...a financial institution cant. Once consumer confidence is wrecked, theres no chance for a financial business to survive.

However, you need to read the bailout to understand what I'm driving at. There are aspects of this bailout that creates a legal precedent of government help in failure in ways never done before.


I've read it, I don't agree with it, but there is a far greater danger in just handing money out to individual citizens for free. Nothing's gonna change my mind about that.
User avatar
Ehwmatt
MP3
 
Posts: 10907
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 4:15 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Postby Ehwmatt » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:24 am

Rhiannon wrote:
Ehwmatt wrote:If they do that in 2012, I'm done with the Republicans. So dumb.


Surely they wouldn't be that insane as to put Palin up against a dem incumbent. ...If so, maybe the mayans were right. :shock: :lol:


I sure hope not. I wish Arnold could run, lol. His speech was amazing
User avatar
Ehwmatt
MP3
 
Posts: 10907
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 4:15 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Postby strangegrey » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:33 am

Ehwmatt wrote:I've read it, I don't agree with it, but there is a far greater danger in just handing money out to individual citizens for free. Nothing's gonna change my mind about that.


no need to disagree with you there. Theres no gaurantee that giving handouts to the public is going to result in stimulating the economy....it's almost as wreckless as picking up toxic assets from corporations and allowing them to throw out accounting rules relating to the preferred stock these corporations give out in exchange.


If you want to look at this in a more big-picture context, the past 8 years has resulted in a overall relaxation of some regulations in corporations that should have never been relaxed. The Bush white house, since it's first days acted in full support of outsourcing, claiming that outsourcing jobs would result in business growth that would trickle down to the end worker and/or the consumer. It hasnt worked.

While this isn't a handout to the corporations....it most certainly has the effect of free money. The general concept is that by making tax and trade policy advantageous to us business, they can operate outside of the confines of the US. This has been disastrous for US industry....and thats one of the many reasons we are no longer a producer nation.
Image
User avatar
strangegrey
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3622
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:31 am
Location: Tortuga

Postby S2M » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:41 am

I hear Obama is going to appoint Pacman Jones to a cabinet position. In return, Pacman is going to teach Barack how to 'Make it Rain'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkkH9_unsqo
Tom Brady IS the G.O.A.T.
User avatar
S2M
MP3
 
Posts: 11981
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:43 am
Location: In a bevy of whimsy

Postby Enigma869 » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:42 am

Rhiannon wrote:Surely they wouldn't be that insane as to put Palin up against a dem incumbent.


In my opinion, Palin won't ever run for POTUS. This woman can't figure out whether or not Africa is a country or a continent, and we're going to elect her president? Then again, the morons of Alaska elected her and just re-elected Stevens who was convicted of a felony. No wonder people around the world think Americans are dopes!


John from Boston
User avatar
Enigma869
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Back In The Civilized Part Of U.S.

Postby Tito » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:48 am

Enigma869 wrote:
Rhiannon wrote:Surely they wouldn't be that insane as to put Palin up against a dem incumbent.


This woman can't figure out whether or not Africa is a country or a continent,

John from Boston


I was wondering when you were going to jump on this.

Anyway, I don't believe that for one second. With all the leaks in the last 24 hours alone this sounds like a lot back biting, blame game, and other agendas. I don't believe most of this stuff. At minimum some of the stuff is exaggerated.
User avatar
Tito
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4024
Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 4:47 am
Location: Chicago, Il

Postby Tito » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:49 am

Why doesn't Rahm Emanuel pay property taxes?

HermitagephotoAccording to the Cook County Assessor's website, the Chicago home of four-term Democrat Congressman and likely new White House Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, doesn't exist. While the address of 4228 North Hermitage is listed as Emanuel's residence on the Illinois State Board of Elections' website, there seems to be no public record of Emanuel ever paying property taxes on this home.

The Cook County Assessor's and Cook County Treasurer's online records indicate Emanuel's Chicago neighbors pay between $3,500 and $7,000 annually. However, Illinois Review has been unable to locate any evidence the former Clinton advisor and investment banker is paying his fair share of Cook County's notoriously high tax burden.

Hermitageblock_2

Why wouldn't 4228 North Hermitage property owners Rahm Emanuel and wife Amy Rule not pay property taxes?

One reason may be because Emanuel and Rule declared their 4228 North Hermitage home as the office location for their non-profit foundation appropriately called the "Rahm Emanuel and Amy Rule Charitable Foundation". As a non-profit headquarters, they may consider their home as exempt from paying taxes.

007

In January 2007, USA Today reported on Emanuel's foundation:

The Rahm Emanuel and Amy Rule Charitable Trust was formed in 2002, when the Chicago lawmaker was first elected. The former Clinton White House aide and his wife, Amy Rule, are its only donors. Emanuel was an investment banker after serving in the White House.

The trust reported having $2,900 on hand at the end of 2005 after receiving $34,000 from Emanuel and donating more than $31,000.

During the past three years, Emanuel's charity gave nearly $25,000 to the Anshe Emet synagogue and school [a private school that the Rahm/Rule children attend]..., and $15,000 to the foundation run by former president Bill Clinton. It also gave $14,000 to Marwen, a Chicago charity that provides art classes and other educational help to low-income children. Rule is on Marwen's board.

Emanuel's 4228 North Hermitage home is one of the largest in the neighborhood, with a side yard that appears to be a vacant lot, making the Emanuels' property the largest portion on the block.

Other North Hermitage homes on Emanuel's block are valued in the $500,000 plus range. According to Cook County Treasurer's website, the Chicago owners of nearby 118 year old 4222 North Hermitage pay almost $6800 annually. The family at 4224 North Heritage pays $6000 each year in property taxes.

President Elect Obama - himself a connected, Chicago insider who has benefited from questionable land deals - may find it difficult to explain why his very own Chicago-based chief of staff doesn't pay property taxes like the "little guy" he claims to represent. Or perhaps allowing his wealthy friends to avoid taxes is part of Obama's trickle down redistribution economics. It's certainly the kind of "change" we Illinoisans can believe in.

Although, we're quite familiar with it here in the free-flowing indictment land of Daley, Blagojevich, Madigan, Jones, Cellini, Rezko, etc., etc.
User avatar
Tito
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4024
Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 4:47 am
Location: Chicago, Il

Postby Rhiannon » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:49 am

Enigma869 wrote:
Rhiannon wrote:Surely they wouldn't be that insane as to put Palin up against a dem incumbent.


In my opinion, Palin won't ever run for POTUS. This woman can't figure out whether or not Africa is a country or a continent, and we're going to elect her president? Then again, the morons of Alaska elected her and just re-elected Stevens who was convicted of a felony. No wonder people around the world think Americans are dopes!


Palin is a perfect fit for town mayor, reading "Where the Wild Things Are" to five year olds at the library once per month. She'd be great at organizing a county-wide bake sale to raise funds for little Billy who had a 4-wheeler accident. A true politician has to be a hardened, sharp, venomous creature in order to protect themselves and their job. Don't take this the wrong way, but she's too "cute" to lead a nation. She might be strong, who am I to judge, and I'd say she probably is a great woman. But president? She wouldn't last a day. Case in point comparison... Hillary could do it. Hillary is also a cold bitch who will chew you up. Palin would be the one with the band-aid for your "boo-boo".
Rhiannon
MP3
 
Posts: 10829
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 9:09 am

Postby Enigma869 » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:52 am

Rhiannon wrote:Palin is a perfect fit for town mayor, reading "Where the Wild Things Are" to five year olds at the library once per month. She'd be great at organizing a county-wide bake sale to raise funds for little Billy who had a 4-wheeler accident. A true politician has to be a hardened, sharp, venomous creature in order to protect themselves and their job. Don't take this the wrong way, but she's too "cute" to lead a nation. She might be strong, who am I to judge, and I'd say she probably is a great woman. But president? She wouldn't last a day. Case in point comparison... Hillary could do it. Hillary is also a cold bitch who will chew you up. Palin would be the one with the band-aid for your "boo-boo".


I don't disagree with ANY of this! Spot on, Rhi!


John from Boston
User avatar
Enigma869
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7753
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:38 am
Location: Back In The Civilized Part Of U.S.

Postby Michigan Girl » Fri Nov 07, 2008 2:58 am

Rhiannon wrote:
Enigma869 wrote:
Rhiannon wrote:Surely they wouldn't be that insane as to put Palin up against a dem incumbent.


In my opinion, Palin won't ever run for POTUS. This woman can't figure out whether or not Africa is a country or a continent, and we're going to elect her president? Then again, the morons of Alaska elected her and just re-elected Stevens who was convicted of a felony. No wonder people around the world think Americans are dopes!


Palin is a perfect fit for town mayor, reading "Where the Wild Things Are" to five year olds at the library once per month. She'd be great at organizing a county-wide bake sale to raise funds for little Billy who had a 4-wheeler accident. A true politician has to be a hardened, sharp, venomous creature in order to protect themselves and their job. Don't take this the wrong way, but she's too "cute" to lead a nation. She might be strong, who am I to judge, and I'd say she probably is a great woman. But president? She wouldn't last a day. Case in point comparison... Hillary could do it. Hillary is also a cold bitch who will chew you up. Palin would be the one with the band-aid for your "boo-boo".


I will have to disagree with the bolded, Very Much, so I guess I might be taking it the wrong way.
As far as strength, she looked as though she had been crying during McCain's speech, not a good sign!! :wink:
Michigan Girl
MP3
 
Posts: 13963
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 8:36 am

Postby Rhiannon » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:15 am

Michigan Girl wrote:I will have to disagree with the bolded, Very Much, so I guess I might be taking it the wrong way.
As far as strength, she looked as though she had been crying during McCain's speech, not a good sign!! :wink:


I don't mean in the aesthetic sense. I mean in the personality sense, which coincides with the second part of your post.
However, aesthetically speaking, I'm not so sure having that image as the face of a nation at war would help us to still garner being taken seriously by some nations. Has nothing at all to do with me being anti-femme pres. It has to do with sinuous leaders elsewhere who wouldn't see her as any kind of authoritative figure. And that's a problem.
Rhiannon
MP3
 
Posts: 10829
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 9:09 am

Postby stevew2 » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:16 am

Palin is a fucking hillbilly
User avatar
stevew2
MP3
 
Posts: 13073
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 4:20 pm
Location: Maryland

Postby Tito » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:19 am

stevew2 wrote:Palin is a fucking hillbilly


Pot meet kettle. :D
User avatar
Tito
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4024
Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 4:47 am
Location: Chicago, Il

Postby stevew2 » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:25 am

Tito wrote:
stevew2 wrote:Palin is a fucking hillbilly


Pot meet kettle. :D
Tito meet W2 s sack
User avatar
stevew2
MP3
 
Posts: 13073
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 4:20 pm
Location: Maryland

Postby Suzanne » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:31 am

First let me start by saying I'm supportive of Obama BUT- someone asked me this question and I had no answer. If Obama has a Caucasian mother and an African-American father, why did he choose to be referred to as black? Example: Mariah Carey has a "white" parent and a "black" parent but I've never heard her call herself only "black". Mind you- I don't care of what desent (did I spell that right?) Obama is from- I'm mixed with a lot of different things if you go back far enough, I only pondered on the question I was asked. Thanks all... :?
Suzanne
8 Track
 
Posts: 617
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 12:35 am

Postby strangegrey » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:33 am

Here's the issue with Palin that I dont think anyone's touched on....and one of the reasons why republican/conservatives flocked to her support when she was rolled out:

After being stranded in a desert, we will drink from the first puddle of water we see....even if it's a puddle of piss left from an animal that walked by 5 minutes earlier.


The problem here, is that republicans/conservatives have been starved for true leadership for years. I would risk even saying decades. They want their ideals adhered to by their elected officials...and we all know and recognize that it hasn't happened for a very long time. McCain NEVER represented true conservatism. He was a farce. A RINO. One of the worst fakes in the party formerly known as the republican party.

But...and here's where the problem in american politics lies..... He was simply the next fucking useless lying piece of shit in line. It was his turn and he wasnt going to let anyone in the party tell him otherwise.....That's as simple as it gets....

Who cares about McCain's reasons for picking Palin...thats not the issue.

However, Palin had a few old-school republican things going for her, from the perspective of the disillusioned republican base....and those few things.....in todays atmosphere....were enough to make people forget all about the fact that she's an idiot....



This is actually where I really let my resentment for DisDain bubble to the surface again. In picking an idiot like palin, he was able to allow the american people to associate stupidity with some of the good things that used to represent the party formerly known as the republican party. Like George Bush before him....he has succesfully confused and turned away people through pig headed refusal to think this through, strategically.


I was dreadfully afraid that if elected potus, McCain was going to finish the damage to the GOP that Bush had nearly completed....I hadn't realized until about Mid-October....that he already did the damage.

People will be scared shitless of the GOP for years, because of Sarah Palin....and it's sad....because underneath the stupidity, there were some good qualities....that if had been delivered from someone having an IQ greater than 122...the message might resonate.


It's like going to a dentist with bad teeth and shitty breath.....or investing with a guy that doesn't look like he knows how to save a penny.....
Image
User avatar
strangegrey
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3622
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:31 am
Location: Tortuga

Postby strangegrey » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:36 am

Suzanne wrote:First let me start by saying I'm supportive of Obama BUT- someone asked me this question and I had no answer. If Obama has a Caucasian mother and an African-American father, why did he choose to be referred to as black? Example: Mariah Carey has a "white" parent and a "black" parent but I've never heard her call herself only "black". Mind you- I don't care of what desent (did I spell that right?) Obama is from- I'm mixed with a lot of different things if you go back far enough, I only pondered on the question I was asked. Thanks all... :?


I dunno if it was up to him. Obama looks a hell of a lot more black than Mariah Carey...perhaps it was a label that was assigned to him by people....instead of a label he assigned to himself...
Image
User avatar
strangegrey
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3622
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:31 am
Location: Tortuga

Postby Behshad » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:38 am

stevew2 wrote:
Tito wrote:
stevew2 wrote:Palin is a fucking hillbilly


Pot meet kettle. :D
Tito meet W2 s sack




:lol: :lol:
You two are killing me here :lol: :lol:
Image
User avatar
Behshad
MP3
 
Posts: 12584
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:08 am

Postby Don » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:48 am

Suzanne wrote:First let me start by saying I'm supportive of Obama BUT- someone asked me this question and I had no answer. If Obama has a Caucasian mother and an African-American father, why did he choose to be referred to as black? Example: Mariah Carey has a "white" parent and a "black" parent but I've never heard her call herself only "black". Mind you- I don't care of what desent (did I spell that right?) Obama is from- I'm mixed with a lot of different things if you go back far enough, I only pondered on the question I was asked. Thanks all... :?


I said this in another thread. You ARE what you defend. As long as there are people out there that will call you derogatory names because of your skin color, you are, for all intensive purposes, a minority. You may feel you are not, but if you have to explain your racial profile to someone, then you clearly will not be considered white. It's not fair but it is still a sad reality in this great nation of ours.
Last edited by Don on Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
Don
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 24896
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 3:01 pm

Postby stevew2 » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:48 am

Behshad wrote:
stevew2 wrote:
Tito wrote:
stevew2 wrote:Palin is a fucking hillbilly


Pot meet kettle. :D
Tito meet W2 s sack




:lol: :lol:
You two are killing me here :lol: :lol:
Titos going over the edge today,im just helping him
User avatar
stevew2
MP3
 
Posts: 13073
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 4:20 pm
Location: Maryland

Postby Tito » Fri Nov 07, 2008 3:56 am

strangegrey wrote:However, Palin had a few old-school republican things going for her, from the perspective of the disillusioned republican base....and those few things.....in todays atmosphere....were enough to make people forget all about the fact that she's an idiot....


She's not an idiot. She may have not been ready for primetime but she's not an idiot.
User avatar
Tito
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4024
Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 4:47 am
Location: Chicago, Il

PreviousNext

Return to Journey

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 22 guests

cron