Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
i've kinda swung back and forth on the whole Mccain Obama thing for sometime now and have almost decided on Obama. As a Ron Paul fan i would describe myself as a fiscal conservative and a social liberal and my priorities are in that order. believe me i am not delighted by the choices but i suppose i have to deal the hand i've been dealt.
fiscally i see no difference between the two. they are both going to squander my hard earned dollars, the difference i believe is that obama actually means to do something useful with it(even though he is creating another layer of entitlements which is scary) rather than hand it to haliburton execs, georgia(the russian one who dubya just handed $10 billion to) et al. i also think obama wants to wind down the war. mccain is just being naive if he believes that the temporary easing in fighting means that the surge is working.
so i don't really see much difference fiscally, i have to swing my vote over to social issues. it is here where the dems win my vote. mccain palin want to teach their kids creationism that's fine, i'll teach my kids something else thanks. although i would be more than happy to teach my kids about the birds and the bees i'd be just as happy for the school to do it. evidently palin's little chat fell on deaf ears. i don't really think that the abortion issue has a place on the presidents list of agendas but i am strictly opposed to palin's hardcore stance (this is one area where i disagree with Ron Paul). as for the whole war on drugs. i feel that the dems have a slightly firmer grip on reality where this topic is concerned. personally i'd welcome an outright legalisation but i'm not going to get that with either candidate so i'll choose the dems to be a bit more accommodating. hopefully by selecting a half black half white president we can ease all this racial bitching. also while i don't buy into this whole global warming thing i feel that palin's flagrant dismissal of environmental issues is troubling and highly irresponsible.
another thing i'd like to say is that the only reason we still have some sway with opec is because we still have reserves in dakota, california, the gulf and alaska. if we drill there like there's no tommorrow we'll be in a much weaker position in 20 years time. strategically i think we should use theirs first.
there's my thinking. welcoming some quality debate
i nearly forgot the most important thing, THE PATRIOT ACT! mccain voted for it and Obama against. Habeas corpus has been around for several hundred years and it's inexcusable that in "The Land Of The Free" we no longer subscribe!
i've kinda swung back and forth on the whole Mccain Obama thing for sometime now and have almost decided on Obama. As a Ron Paul fan i would describe myself as a fiscal conservative and a social liberal and my priorities are in that order. believe me i am not delighted by the choices but i suppose i have to deal the hand i've been dealt.
fiscally i see no difference between the two. they are both going to squander my hard earned dollars, the difference i believe is that obama actually means to do something useful with it(even though he is creating another layer of entitlements which is scary) rather than hand it to haliburton execs, georgia(the russian one who dubya just handed $10 billion to) et al. i also think obama wants to wind down the war. mccain is just being naive if he believes that the temporary easing in fighting means that the surge is working.
so i don't really see much difference fiscally, i have to swing my vote over to social issues. it is here where the dems win my vote. mccain palin want to teach their kids creationism that's fine, i'll teach my kids something else thanks. although i would be more than happy to teach my kids about the birds and the bees i'd be just as happy for the school to do it. evidently palin's little chat fell on deaf ears. i don't really think that the abortion issue has a place on the presidents list of agendas but i am strictly opposed to palin's hardcore stance (this is one area where i disagree with Ron Paul). as for the whole war on drugs. i feel that the dems have a slightly firmer grip on reality where this topic is concerned. personally i'd welcome an outright legalisation but i'm not going to get that with either candidate so i'll choose the dems to be a bit more accommodating. hopefully by selecting a half black half white president we can ease all this racial bitching. also while i don't buy into this whole global warming thing i feel that palin's flagrant dismissal of environmental issues is troubling and highly irresponsible.
another thing i'd like to say is that the only reason we still have some sway with opec is because we still have reserves in dakota, california, the gulf and alaska. if we drill there like there's no tommorrow we'll be in a much weaker position in 20 years time. strategically i think we should use theirs first.
there's my thinking. welcoming some quality debate
One BIG difference is that Obama will RAISE your taxes and McCain will extend the Bush taxcuts. Any increase in taxes should raise a red flag that this person is a statist and does not believe in fiscal individual freedoms. There's a reason that Paul is a republican, because he fits better with the reps fiscally. If this is your priority, I would suggest that you would be wrong to support Obama.
One BIG difference is that Obama will RAISE your taxes and McCain will extend the Bush taxcuts. Any increase in taxes should raise a red flag that this person is a statist and does not believe in fiscal individual freedoms. There's a reason that Paul is a republican, because he fits better with the reps fiscally. If this is your priority, I would suggest that you would be wrong to support Obama.
the differnce is that i will see some of the benefits of the taxes i pay. under mccain that money will be siphoned into the accounts of haliburton execs, military industrial complex etc
the differnce is that i will see some of the benefits of the taxes i pay. under mccain that money will be siphoned into the accounts of haliburton execs, military industrial complex etc
Even Ron Paul believes in taxes supporting the military. I don't understand your contention about Haliburton however.
So, if I understand you correctly, you would support an increase in everyone's taxes, so long as YOU benefit from it. Is it me or does this seem a bit unprincipled? This mentality is what empowers the fiscal liberals to continue to take our resources, with a promise that we'll get a small portion of it back in a manner of their choosing. However, they fail to mention that the large majority will go to entitlement programs designed to increase dependency on the government and to expand their power over the people.
Even Ron Paul believes in taxes supporting the military. I don't understand your contention about Haliburton however.
So, if I understand you correctly, you would support an increase in everyone's taxes, so long as YOU benefit from it. Is it me or does this seem a bit unprincipled? This mentality is what empowers the fiscal liberals to continue to take our resources, with a promise that we'll get a small portion of it back in a manner of their choosing. However, they fail to mention that the large majority will go to entitlement programs designed to increase dependency on the government and to expand their power over the people.
McCain = socialism for da Wall St boyz and unAmerican parasite lobbyists
Obama = socialism for the lazy and shiftless
One BIG difference is that Obama will RAISE your taxes and McCain will extend the Bush taxcuts. Any increase in taxes should raise a red flag that this person is a statist and does not believe in fiscal individual freedoms. There's a reason that Paul is a republican, because he fits better with the reps fiscally. If this is your priority, I would suggest that you would be wrong to support Obama.
That is not correct. Obama will lower taxes for the vast majority of Americans - he will simply be raising them on the top 5% of income earners - which is absolutely fine with me...
All this ridiculous propaganda from the Republican Convention about Democrats raising your taxes is only meant to stir up the base, and persuade those who are uninformed or just plain stupid.
The Republicans are the tax and spend party - period!! Take a look at the huge growth in the federal budget and the federal debt levels since Bush was president. He almost doubled the federal debt level.
Yes, I agree Democrats may increase spending - but not as much as the Republicans did. And at least they plan on using pay-as-you-go - so that either other programs are cut or taxes are increased to pay for these new programs. The Republicans were deceitful with their spending orgy over the past 7.5 years - they spent like drunken sailors, and put the amounts on the national credit card - so our children get to pay it off!!
Republicans have not one shred of credibility on fiscal conservatism - all they can chant is the mantra of No New Taxes - Read My Lips... What a crock!!!!
Even Ron Paul believes in taxes supporting the military. I don't understand your contention about Haliburton however.
So, if I understand you correctly, you would support an increase in everyone's taxes, so long as YOU benefit from it. Is it me or does this seem a bit unprincipled? This mentality is what empowers the fiscal liberals to continue to take our resources, with a promise that we'll get a small portion of it back in a manner of their choosing. However, they fail to mention that the large majority will go to entitlement programs designed to increase dependency on the government and to expand their power over the people.
i agree with you however the difference that i paid in taxes from clinton to bush was negligible. what did go up however was the amount i handed over in charity and then there is also the DEFICIT which my kids are going to have to pay!!!!
do i need to remind what the difference was in the deficit between clinton and bush? if mccain and bush are fiscal conservatives then i'm Elvis Presley!
Even Ron Paul believes in taxes supporting the military. I don't understand your contention about Haliburton however.
So, if I understand you correctly, you would support an increase in everyone's taxes, so long as YOU benefit from it. Is it me or does this seem a bit unprincipled? This mentality is what empowers the fiscal liberals to continue to take our resources, with a promise that we'll get a small portion of it back in a manner of their choosing. However, they fail to mention that the large majority will go to entitlement programs designed to increase dependency on the government and to expand their power over the people.
I think it's time to finally realize that today's Republicans ARE the fiscal liberals - they put the Democrats to shame on that point.
Who gave us the $800 Billion (over 10 years) boondoggle called Prescription Medicare which Bush pushed thru with Republican congressional backing?
Most of the tax cuts of the Republicans are aimed at the richest - which is not right - and don't say they pay most of the taxes, unless you also mention that they earn most of the income!!! The top 1% of wage earners get 23% of the national income - just ponder that for a moment if you can.
HubbleRules
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
