View Poll Results: Rock the Vote 2008

257. You may not vote on this poll
  • Obama

    150 58.37%
  • McCain

    94 36.58%
  • Undecided still

    13 5.06%
11-05-08 12:08 PM
937 ... 2324252627 ...
  1. vinnie_dugan's Avatar
    Car dealerships encourage people to live beyond their means, should we regulate them too? There are two people to blame here, one is the person getting the loan, and the second is the business that bought the mortgage from the short term lender. The bottom line keeps this country running.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-15-08 12:00 AM
  2. exelant's Avatar
    I disagree with you frawg, and there's a number of arguments I can use to back that up -- as there are plenty for your point of view. I will save that argument for when I am not so tired if you don't mind.

    I will bring up the Cuban Cigar. That is a completely different argument. We don't import Cubans because they are the product of a regime we have a profound hatred for. Some may like to think I'm some sort of socialist leftist. This would be wrong. I hate communism and everything it stands for. I support my government's embargo of Cuban products. I do not believe there is a connection between jobs leaving this country and products from Cuba.

    Sure some countries do not have the regulations we do and can produce products cheaper, but at what cost? Take a look at an analysis of the water in those border Mexican towns where our companies have flew to avoid our regulations. Just look at the air in Bejing during the olympics -- and that was after their factories had been shut down for two weeks. We are exporting pollution along with jobs.

    These countries that accept our factories will soon see the trade offs aren't worth it and start passing the same regs we have. They will soon realize the health of their citizens are as important as the jobs. Something we learned a few decades ago.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-15-08 12:18 AM
  3. vinnie_dugan's Avatar
    I agree with you too an extent exelant, the problem with our government is over regulation. I would like to say that I don't want the government to bail those companies out, but if they don't, upwards regulation comes. Just look at all the stuff fdr messed up.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-15-08 12:48 AM
  4. Frawg's Avatar
    The banking industry is really taking a beating in this forum. It appears as though banks are being blamed for adhering to mandates imposed on them by our government.

    Many posters in this forum have conveniently blamed banks for issuing loans to those that could not afford it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the banks were not driving through neighborhoods announcing the fact they were willing to lend money to people so they could buy a house they could not afford. If they did, I was not home at the time.

    The US Congress imposed their will on banks and threatened them with sopenas to appear in front of the Senate or the House of Represenatives to state why they would not make loans to the disadvantaged. This banking crisis falls squarely on the shoulders of the current Congress for imposing impossibe requirements that lenders had to adhere to.
    While many in this forum have blamed deregulation for the problem, it is the opposite that is true. Coercing banks to issue loans to those that could not afford it is a result of regulations imposed by the current congress.

    Banks are not in business to lose money. Inaccurate and uninformed people from the oversite committees charged with protecting consumers failed miserably. Congerssional leaders such as Senator Christopher Dodd and Reresentative Barney Frank have gone a long way to contributing to this dillema. All in the name of fairness.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-15-08 12:58 AM
  5. vinnie_dugan's Avatar
    Wow, frawg I could not have stated that better. Fannie and freddie are prime examples of this...

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-15-08 01:03 AM
  6. Frawg's Avatar
    Exelant...while I appreciate your concerns over the environment, I respectfully disagree with you regarding how concerned we should be over the drinking water in Mexico or the air in China. Those problems happen to be local issues that I have no concern over. One day it will occur to the good citizens of Mexico and China that it would be advantageous for them to clean it up a bit....for their own good health. I see no reason to make mandates via trade restrictions for them to do so.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-15-08 01:19 AM
  7. exelant's Avatar
    That's what I said about environmental regs, that they will see the light and change. But you mention trade restrictions, who has higher tariffs and more import restrictions than China? We don't have anything like free trade with them, but were drunk with the money they are loaning us so we don't/can't do anything about it.

    I disagree that our financial mess was caused by over regulation. This is the least regulated market we have had in decades. This is a fact. It can be easily researched, just google SEC filings. I know you bring up Congress, but the last two years are the first time the Republicans haven't had at least one house since Clinton's first term. You can keep repeating that other stuff all you want, but it won't make it true.

    I'm done for. Goodnight everyone. I have to get up at 0400 to go to work. I have put in my 10 to 11 hours again tomorrow.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-15-08 02:19 AM
  8. samsams's Avatar
    EU is anxiously watching and Poll Results are worrying.
    Interesting to read all yr comments and especially your preferences. Most of US people I work with don't express their preference so easily.
    After the ich bin ein Baracker-speech it seems like EU has made their choice. Not for me, I would go for the old guy and the GILF!
    Based morely on US-Israel-EU relations, US as a peacekeeper and also keeping alive the big financial bubble created that after all is not so bad.
    10-15-08 07:32 AM
  9. JRussett's Avatar
    im not sure the problem is necessarily over regulation as it is the WRONG type of regulation...once banks were allowed to cross state lines and they began the super mergers that have created entities like BOA, CHASE, AIG, WaMu, Wachovia etc...once this happened a hypothetical (not so hypothetical now) situation arose where if a mega-bank failed it affected the entire country and was no longer isolated to one part of the if a mega-bank fails you have huge pockets throughout the country that are affected - and it's more than people not getting mortgages, it's the bank's employees and the money they bring to the communities and the money each branch brings to the allowing these mega-banks to form the gov't pretty much set themselves up for this...a bank that has a more centralized and focused area has more of a motivation to make money and will actually have more competition from the other local/state banks state wide...home grown banks CANNOT compete with the mega-banks in today's markets...
    10-15-08 08:31 AM
  10. exelant's Avatar
    Sam. You have to read about the events leading up to the Great Depression and compare them to today. The only difference in the US is the FDIC. There won't be a panic while people try to get their money out of the bank, but everything else is very similar. The bubble then was funded by Great Britian sending huge amounts of money of here.
    Today as then, the money has dried up. The G7 governments are pouring funds in to provide "liquidity." I'm afraid it won't be enough. We shall know soon enough, but look at the Stock Market's reaction to the loan package. Losses rivaled only by the Depression. I don't know about anyone else, but I am scared about what the future holds. I hope my fears are unfounded.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-15-08 09:46 AM
  11. JRussett's Avatar
    it's def not pretty, but the way i see it this is just the economy righting was inflated by all of these bad banking practices...the dow probably should never have reached 12000 or 13000...i highly dount this will reach great depression heights only because jobs are still out there - not great jobs, but they're there...there is huge fallout right now from all these banks and their credit practices that it is trickling down the entire economy, but it's all about balancing...once the economy balances we'll be where we should have been all this time....the "housing bubble" all these economist talk about was created by all these credit practices and now that everyone realizes what an awful mistake that was the economy is just leveling out...does it suck? yes absolutely, but it could have been much worse if it continued down that path they were on...better now than latter as the result would have been even more drastic...just the way i see it
    10-15-08 09:56 AM
  12. Hi-Definition's Avatar
    I can see Obama as my President...I can't do so for McCain.

    I can see the composure needed for being the President in Obama; not so much in McCain. I see and hear the numbers needed to be a competent and from Obama...not so much in McCain.

    Of the three debates; this was the best performance for McCain...yes; I said performance..with an emphasis on that word.

    In no particular order; these categories are the backbone of importance now and in the future (both distant and not so distant): The economy, our involvement in current wars, healthcare, energy and foreign policy.

    Think. Hard.
    Last edited by Hi-Definition; 10-16-08 at 12:32 AM.
    10-16-08 12:24 AM
  13. exelant's Avatar
    Nice to see you back in the debate Def! JRCIVIC and i were getting lonely. I thought McCain did a good job the first half hour, as the pundits were saying, but Obama did show me how well he recovers from a couple hard body shots and keep his composure. And of course McCain didn't have as much substance as he did attack dog. The same old tired attacks. If that's all he has, then John is in trouble.

    Is it just me, or does McCain not seem as interested in domestic issues. I wonder about how others see his health plan. That 5000 he is offering is about half of what it costs to insure my family with Kaiser -- generic medicine. No way around it, with John McCain, health care costs for families are going up, way up.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-16-08 06:27 AM
  14. wnm's Avatar
    What I see in Obama and what I think we need in any President is smart, steady and aware. McCain may be smart, but I don't see him as steady or aware. I don't mean that he's erratic in the way Obama tries portray him. I mean that he is not focused on an issue. As for aware, I really think that he is not in touch with the middle class and that is a real problem for him.

    For comparison, some others:

    Bush: Steady in a consistent sort of way. Never changes his mind once it's made up for him. I don't see him as smart or aware.

    Kerry: Smart, and aware, but not steady.

    Gore: Smart, steady, aware

    Clinton: Smart, aware, not steady

    Bush Sr.: Smart, steady not aware
    10-16-08 08:34 AM
  15. Frawg's Avatar
    The truth about Seator Obama's tax plan was revealed last night. He intends to "spread the wealth around". Huh?

    The Communist manefesto goes something like this; "...from those with means, to those with needs".

    Do these two statements sound eerily similar to anyone else.

    What is happening to the once respected Democratic Party?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-16-08 12:47 PM
  16. exelant's Avatar
    That is not an accurate interpretation of what he said, it is what you want to believe he said. Communism is state controlled means of production combined with a totalitarian government. A discredited and dying form of government. The US progressive system of taxation where those most able to pay taxes do. Obama simply put into words what we do and have done in this country since the first income tax during WWI.

    Barrack Obama is for a free market, with an emphasis on free. When he spoke about trade barriers, all McCain could talk about was his not wanting to give preferential treatment to the Columbian government for a billion dollars in a trade agreement. What's that compared to the hundreds of billions of dollars we owe the real communists in China.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-16-08 01:22 PM
  17. Frawg's Avatar
    Exelant, as long as what Senator Obama said is open for interpretation, mine is as valid as yours.

    If a U.S. Senator makes a radical statement about how he is going to spread the wealth around, and that statement can be easily discredited, he deserves to have it pointed out by the likes of an unsophicated person like me.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-16-08 03:17 PM
  18. El33tist's Avatar
    Maybe "unsophisticated" people should keep inane opinions to themselves.
    10-16-08 03:33 PM
  19. vinnie_dugan's Avatar
    Redistirbution of wealth is socialism by definition...

    Hope this helps

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-16-08 03:52 PM
  20. trucky's Avatar
    Maybe "unsophisticated" people should keep inane opinions to themselves.
    The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources is, in my unsophisticated opinion, elitist and any guru would know that. Call me inane, and sometimes I am, but my opinions deserve the validity and due respect of anyone else on here who is allowed to post. The senator made a statement, the world has seen it over and over, and I think it's up to each individual to interpret what it means to them.
    10-16-08 03:59 PM
  21. Frawg's Avatar
    Maybe "unsophisticated" people should keep inane opinions to themselves.
    Thank you for the comments Eli33tist. I'll consider following your advice the next time I feel compelled to express my opinion in a public forum. (Right!!)

    In the mean time, I'm thankful for the fact that there are individuals on the liberal side like Exelant (a person I profoundly disagree with) on your team who expresses his opinion in an artful and persuave manner.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-16-08 09:01 PM
  22. exelant's Avatar
    It would be a sad, unamerican thing if people were not able to express their opinion. This debate between big and small government has been going on since the founding of our nation. Perhaps the less "sophisticated" are better able to cut through the cr*p and see what's really going on.

    I'm not so sure I can be called a liberal in all of my views, Frawg. I am about as pro military as they come. I am a gun owner and cheered the Supreme court's decision concerning DC citizens right to own arms. I believe we were sold a load of bull concerning Iraq, and am heartened that Bush and the Iraqis have come up with a withdrawal schedule very similar to what Senator Obama planned.

    I also know we have to finish off Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. We also need to really beef up our law enforcement efforts and cooperation with our allies to root out the terrorists in Europe and the US. And most of all cut off the flow of oil money to those who hate us, including Saudi Arabia and Hugo Chavez. Anyone notice that despite his threats, old Hugo hasn't made any moves to cut off oil? He knows we are his best customers.

    I wonder if I am wrong to want more regulation of these Wall Street speculators who have caused so many problems. Is it socialist to want to make it harder to export jobs? I'm pretty sure the UAW would negotiate in good faith if the result was a car factory opening here and closing in Mexico. It may not be exactly free market thinking, but I believe it is critical for the US to start making goods the world wants, again.

    I think our future is tied into us becoming a producing country again. We need to let business owners know it is unpatriotic to move their manufacturing plants to other countries. We certainly need to not reward them. I am for Obama because I do not trust the same old people to lead us out of our economic crises. It's that simple for me.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-17-08 08:28 AM
  23. vinnie_dugan's Avatar
    Exelant, until our corporate tax in this country becomes reasonable businesses have no incentive to produce here. Your friend mr hussein wants to raise corporate tax even more...

    Hope this helps

    Posted from my CrackBerry at
    10-17-08 08:34 AM
  24. Blue_Snowflakes's Avatar
    Hope this helps
    You're really into saying this aren't you? I totally got burnt out on this thread...
    10-17-08 09:50 AM
  25. exelant's Avatar
    Isn't our business tax rate the lowest of all the industrialized countries? It's also at the lowest rate ever in the US since the income tax was created. Isn't it also true that industry paid the bulk of our taxes for most of the 20th century -- back when we used to make things here, before we were a paper economy? I'm just wondering what's different that's all. We need good paying jobs to drive our economy. People with good jobs buy homes, invest in the stock market, buy cars and all the stuff we need to dig our way out without a massive government bailout. How can a steel plant job in Islamabad help us? I'm trying to say that we have cut corporate taxes and they have repaid us by taking production away. The bottom line isn't the only line. Henry Ford could have built factories elsewhere but he didn't, and I suggest he wouldn't have because he was a loyal American. He didn't put profit at the top of his list. Of course he wanted to make money -- and he did make a lot of it, but he didn't try to squeeze every last penny of profit out of his product because he created jobs for his fellow citizens. In my opinion.
    10-17-08 09:57 AM
937 ... 2324252627 ...