View Poll Results: Rock the Vote 2008

Voters
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 ... 2829303132 ...
tools
  1. stewdaddy's Avatar
    O.K. B.O. in 08 fans. If you won one million dollars in the lotto, would you be pissed that the government took 35% of it? Well how would you feel if instead of winning it you got a good education and worked your a$$ off for it. 35%! Thats what B.O. wants to tax those making <250,000 per year. Now only 10% of Americans make that or more and I'm sure not one of them so why should I care? Because those people making <250,000 don't care either. These are the CEO's and heads major corporations and highly skilled professions. And they don't care because they will simply pass that 35% down to you and I driving up cost to us on EVERYTHING. This economy is screwed under the B.O. plan. You will not see the pipe dream plan he is selling and you WILL see higher taxes and unemployment because the line between working and saying screw it give me a welfare check is disappearing.
    Very well said.
    10-23-08 05:39 PM
  2. Hi-Definition's Avatar
    Someone had mentioned the no child left behind program..the program is a joke. Instituting that program into the school system has created dishonest teachers; which in-turn creates inflated test scores; and has made America's youth...and their future...more shaky than ever before. There is more pressure on the teachers and school systems to produce better test scores on standardized tests. Because of this pressue whch is driven by performance-based incentives...many students are getting less out of the program than the teachers, principals, administrators and school boards are.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Last edited by Hi-Definition; 10-23-08 at 06:09 PM.
    10-23-08 06:04 PM
  3. vinnie_dugan's Avatar
    Very well put hi def, I've never been a fan of no child left behind...and jrusset, if a business spends more on something(whether it be taxes, production, labor cost, etc.)that price will be passed down to the consumer. As far as the oil example goes, that isn't exactly the best thing to compare things to. The oil companies have a wholly different standard than most businesses do...

    Hope this helps

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    10-23-08 08:00 PM
  4. exelant's Avatar
    I am tired. I spent a couple hours on the phone getting out the vote, and I don't have anything left in the tank. While I was calling from the Democratic Party offices, the goal is to get registered Dems out to vote, and arrange rides for those without transportation.

    I think I'll head over to the 83XX thread and help someone upgrade their OS or something less stressful than politics, lol. One thing is for sure, I need a beer. I think tonight I'm going to pop the cork on a 20 oz Chimay red label -- heck, I may have 2 and a shot of something in the cabinet, just don't know what yet.

    Since it'll be the first time I've had a drink in a couple weeks, you might not want to pay attention to anything I say for the rest of the night (not that anyone does anyway). I have told my wife to shut me down if I start telling the Republicans I love them.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Last edited by exelant; 10-23-08 at 08:14 PM.
    10-23-08 08:11 PM
  5. berry me with it's Avatar
    That is the end of the line exelant!! ha ha enjoy your night!
    10-23-08 08:13 PM
  6. stewdaddy's Avatar
    I have told my wife to shut me down if I start telling the Republicans I love them.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Once you go Republican, you never go.............
    Hey, anybody know what rhymes with Republican?

    (this ought to be interesting)
    10-23-08 08:25 PM
  7. exelant's Avatar
    Thanks BMW, I also forgot to say thank you to Stew. This is the debate that has been going on since the very beginning of our country. Fortunately, the founders set our government up in such a way that neither side will get too much power for too long. We're always being pulled back to the center, and I'll drink to that!

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    10-23-08 08:27 PM
  8. nyprincess13's Avatar
    Obama/Biden 2008 All the Way
    10-23-08 09:06 PM
  9. Frawg's Avatar
    Having a few beers should be a good thing Exelant. Working the phones can be challenging in times like these. I'm pretty sure Senator Obama will win this election, and you should be proud of your accomplishments.

    Actually, the Dems may end_up with control the Presidency, the House of Representatives, and the Senate by the time it's all over.

    From where I'm perched, it looks like the GOP is getting a good spanking. And they deserve it!

    I have a prediction...after the great community organizer from Chicago is elected President, he will be tested by evil people wishing to do harm to the citizens of this country. I predict he will have more Republican allies in Congress than he will from those in his own party.

    I hope I'm wrong about this election and that all of this this is all a just a bad dream....and that Senator McCain wil be elected President. Redistribution of wealth is turning this country into the U.S.S.A. .

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    10-23-08 11:16 PM
  10. khelena13's Avatar
    For Obama!
    10-23-08 11:36 PM
  11. yeahman's Avatar
    I didn't know it was an insult to call someone by their name. I will keep that in mind. I have laid out several times why hussein will hurt this country...

    1. Socialism doesn't work
    Tell that to Bush who approved a $750 billion bank bailout.

    2. Healthcare should be left private
    Nobody is proposing to nationalize healthcare

    3. He has some friends that are shady characters
    McCain has Bush, the shadiest character of the 21st century.

    4. He is the same left wing liberal that has been running for years
    And what does it say about right wing neocons that they are losing to him?

    5. He wants to reduce troop sizes
    Midgets should be able to serve their country too.

    6. Spend less on defense
    Actually, he wants to spend more, something I disagree with him on.

    7. Spread the wealth around
    I hope he succeeds.
    10-24-08 12:16 AM
  12. yeahman's Avatar
    Education is the states responsibility, why doesn't anyone understand this.
    It's not the state's responsibility. It's the parents' responsibility.

    A flat percentage is fair. 10% of $100,000 is $10,000. 10% of 1,000,000 is $100,000. The millionaire pays 10 times more but it's still fair.

    I would also be ok with starting that above the poverty level.
    Start above the poverty level?! That's unfair!
    Republicans really have to get away from describing their tax policies in terms of "fairness." As any trained debater or negotiator knows, arguing "fairness" is a loser.

    I don't really think the founding fathers could have imagined an economic system such as the one we have today -- one where those with the most money control the government; as Jack Abramoff tried to do with his plan to only have Republicans in office. They did worry about the rich having too much power, but the founders believed the people would vote them out of office. They didn't foresee the current system where the rich actually hired politicians to do their work for them. A system where you can't vote them out. They worried the rich would try to take power for themselves. I don't think they foresaw the rich merely using politicians to get richer.
    Completely wrong. During the time of the founding fathers, most states didn't even allow the poor to vote.
    Last edited by yeahman; 10-24-08 at 01:46 AM.
    10-24-08 12:18 AM
  13. yeahman's Avatar
    I don't really understand what you meant here so let me just simply say I am 100% against the bailout and I am furious with all of those who proposed, advanced and voted for it. The principal of the bailout was wrong. Government should not pick the winners and loosers....period.
    There are some principles we should be willing to die for. Avoiding moral hazard in banking is not one of them. In other words, the bailout is a lesser evil.

    As for "spreading the wealth" I think I've use the word here before, but that concept has already been tried in other places around the globe and it failed everytime. It's called Socialism.
    Actually it's called taxation. All taxes spread the wealth. Socialism is something else entirely.

    I was not raised to believe that I deserved or was owed anything......other than an opportunity. I do not hate the rich. I would like to be rich someday.
    The problem is that not everyone has the same opportunity. How are the poor supposed to pay for education? That's why we have socialized education in this country.

    Maybe you like our "free" trade with the likes of Communist China, a country that has actually threatened us. Or maybe the unprecedented wealth transfer to our enemies in the Middle East and Venezuela. And the tax breaks McCain advocates for companies who take our jobs overseas in search of cheaper and cheaper labor?
    So I assume that you do your patriotic duty and boycott Chinese goods?
    We benefit from trade. The patriotic thing to do would be continue to exploit China's cheap labor for our own benefit.
    As for the Middle East and Venezuela, I've heard McCain say that he wants to stop buying oil from them. What he doesn't understand is that oil is an internationally traded commodity. It doesn't matter who we buy it from.

    Whoever keeps posting the obviously incorrect information about millionaires only paying 20 percent tax please stop.

    http://www.house.gov/jct/x-32-08.pdf

    page 5

    hope this helps
    Page 5 lists income tax brackets, not effective tax burden.
    Warren Buffett pays a lower rate than his secretary because much of his income is in capital gains and dividends which is taxed at 15%.

    Jefferson, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Wilson, were presidents without any real military experience who did a pretty decent job using force. It is an American tradition and the Constitution clearly states the military comes under the control of a civilian leader.

    We are all, or we all should be thankful for the job our military does. Every male in my immediate family has served. My nephew is in Iraq now in the Army (sorry Vinnie, lol) But military experience doesn't mean they'd be a better president. I think the last ex-military presidents to do a decent job were Truman and Eisenhower.
    Most of our presidents are ex-military. Bush Jr, Bush Sr, Reagan, Carter...
    Bill Clinton was among the exceptions.

    Anyway, military experience, especially post WW2 experience, is a big negative in my book. I don't want a president who was trained to kill from a young age.
    Last edited by yeahman; 10-24-08 at 01:45 AM.
    10-24-08 12:40 AM
  14. Hi-Definition's Avatar
    Actually it's called taxation. All taxes spread the wealth. Socialism is something else entirely.
    Precisely yeahman. Although I admit that seeing you double-posting on top of existing double-postings..was annoying :-); the premise of your point above is correct.

    This socialist label that some people are tagging Obama with; is yet another one of the many other labels his opponents have tagged him with ever since his announcement to run for the Presidency. Half of the people that label Obama as a 'socialist'; probably didn't even know to label him as such on their own accord...yet as soon as the opponents of Obama have labeled him as a 'socialist' (so too have the minions of anti-Obama'ists).

    If the logic/premise behind labeling Obama a socialist is applied to taxation in America as it exists now; then using that logic/premise...we already live in a socialistic nation.

    The point here is that denial of Obama's impending presidency within the sub-set of millions of Americans is creating these labels as their ammunition to mask their subconscious denial of Obama becoming the next U.S. President. People have called the man a terrorist lover, an unpatriotic man, a socialist, a man whose citizenship is questioned...it's unfortunate and an extremely sad commentary that the point is that you can't accept Obama as the President; yet won't sincerely say why you can't. Instead...you mask the real reason(s) under the disguise that it's 'truly' felt he'll be worse than McCain illustrating things such as his taxation proposal as one of a select-plethora of defining reasons.

    As Obama said it the first time around...I get it...too.
    Last edited by Hi-Definition; 10-24-08 at 01:27 AM.
    10-24-08 01:18 AM
  15. nyprincess13's Avatar
    Precisely yeahman. Although I admit that seeing you double-posting on top of existing double-postings..was annoying :-); the premise of your point above is correct.

    This socialist label that some people are tagging Obama with; is yet another one of the many other labels his opponents have tagged him with ever since his announcement to run for the Presidency. Half of the people that label Obama as a 'socialist'; probably didn't even know to label him as such on their own accord...yet as soon as the opponents of Obama have labeled him as a 'socialist' (so too have the minions of anti-Obama'ists).

    If the logic/premise behind labeling Obama a socialist is applied to taxation in America as it exists now; then using that logic/premise...we already live in a socialistic nation.

    The point here is that denial of Obama's impending presidency within the sub-set of millions of Americans is creating these labels as their ammunition to mask their subconscious denial of Obama becoming the next U.S. President. People have called the man a terrorist lover, an unpatriotic man, a socialist, a man whose citizenship is questioned...it's unfortunate and an extremely sad commentary that the point is that you can't accept Obama as the President; yet won't sincerely say why you can't. Instead...you mask the real reason(s) under the disguise that it's 'truly' felt he'll be worse than McCain illustrating things such as his taxation proposal as one of a select-plethora of defining reasons.

    As Obama said it the first time around...I get it...too.
    AMEN to that!!
    10-24-08 09:01 AM
  16. exelant's Avatar
    The point about president's and military service, Yeahman, was that some without military service turned out to be pretty good presidents who used military power well. The presidents serving during our greatest (worst) conflicts were Lincoln, Wilson and FD Roosevelt.

    The point about Communist China is that we need to level the playing field. When a country, any country has barriers in place through tariffs and restrictive importation rules that keep us from exporting goods to them and reducing the trade imbalance, we need to respond in kind. Of course one must be realistic -- if one can only get a needed product from one source, one has no other choice . But as Obama points out, why should we have a tax policy that rewards those who move production to other countries?

    The point about the founder's concerns about the rich are valid, despite the fact landholders and others of their class were the only ones able to vote. Remember we were an agrarian society and a much higher percentage of Americans owned property at the time. When I get off work, I will be happy to find the quotes for you supporting my original point.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Last edited by exelant; 10-24-08 at 11:33 AM.
    10-24-08 09:01 AM
  17. JRussett's Avatar
    Very well put hi def, I've never been a fan of no child left behind...and jrusset, if a business spends more on something(whether it be taxes, production, labor cost, etc.)that price will be passed down to the consumer. As far as the oil example goes, that isn't exactly the best thing to compare things to. The oil companies have a wholly different standard than most businesses do...

    Hope this helps

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

    just becuase a company's CEO is taxed an extra 1-2% does not mean the company is spending more on something - they are still paying the ceo the same salary...and actually the oil business is a very good example to compare things too - in the oil industry you see the demand/supply affect the price within a day or two, most other comodities and products take much longer for the price increase/decrease to appear at the cash register...and the standard is still the same - make money
    10-24-08 09:26 AM
  18. JRussett's Avatar
    and yes, my point about NCLB was that it's a cRap program...and McCain voted for it
    10-24-08 09:28 AM
  19. exelant's Avatar
    To speak to the oil issue a bit further, Yeahman, (and I understand we probably agree on more issues than we disagree).

    Isn't it in our best interest to get serious about reducing our reliance on oil? Not reducing dependence on imported oil, but on oil? When we begin to use alternative fuels in quantities large enough to eliminate importing oil for transportation, we can produce more than enough oil for our other needs such as plastics, lubrication and polymers, etc. We already have vast deposits of oil shale and coal to see us through for centuries. This will allow us to stop the wealth transfer to those who dislike us and may not have our best interests in mind.

    The technology is coming; it could come exponentially faster with government assistance. This is not a naive pipe dream. It is happening now -- Honda is bringing hydrogen cars to California. It is not unrealistic to want our government to provide the research necessary to create the batteries needed and to subsidize creation of the infrastructure required to supply alternative fuels. Barrack Obama is advocating these, or similar ideas. That is another huge reason to vote for him.
    Last edited by exelant; 10-24-08 at 11:32 AM.
    10-24-08 11:10 AM
  20. Hi-Definition's Avatar
    Not to come across as a stickler; but we need to keep in mind that it's not JUST US (i.e. the people who regularly post in this thread); who participate in the discussion in here..there are passive participants too (readers who don't post).

    For their sake (and even for the posters), please don't acronym'ize everything; such as NCLB (no-child-left-behind); because although the active posters in here may not get debunked by such things...readers may. And a large part of this thread (to me at least); is for people to learn...and this learning may get lost in acronyms.

    Carry on...

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    10-24-08 11:17 AM
  21. xxxxpradaxxxx's Avatar
    Lets All Play Nice, Make some Popcorn, And Get Togethor To Watch "Nailing Palin".

    (If your of age of Course!)
    10-24-08 12:08 PM
  22. stewdaddy's Avatar
    [QUOTE=yeahman;871002]Actually it's called taxation. All taxes spread the wealth. Socialism is something else entirely.

    Are you serious?
    I grew up poor, busted my **** and made it. No one told me there was another option.

    The problem is that not everyone has the same opportunity. How are the poor supposed to pay for education? That's why we have socialized education in this country.

    I grew up poor, busted my **** and made it. No one told me there was another option. I was not "lucky"

    Page 5 lists income tax brackets, not effective tax burden.
    Warren Buffett pays a lower rate than his secretary because much of his income is in capital gains and dividends which is taxed at 15%.

    Fine by me. Warren also provides thousands of jobs. I'll say it again----"punishing Warren won't help anybody else get rich, nor should it if they didn't earn it, what it will do is hurt lots of people that want to work for Warren in the jobs he creates"
    10-24-08 01:00 PM
  23. stewdaddy's Avatar
    This socialist label that some people are tagging Obama with; is yet another one of the many other labels his opponents have tagged him with ever since his announcement to run for the Presidency. Half of the people that label Obama as a 'socialist'; probably didn't even know to label him as such on their own accord...yet as soon as the opponents of Obama have labeled him as a 'socialist' (so too have the minions of anti-Obama'ists).

    Taxing citizens fairly and using the money for defense, roads, education, etc.------things that benefit the masses of tax payers is taxation.

    Taking extra from those nasty rich bastards and giving it to those who don't have anything (bless their little hearts).....is socialism.
    10-24-08 01:06 PM
  24. JRussett's Avatar
    let's remember something here - all obama can do is propose a tax plan...if all the other ELECTED officials do not like it, then it will not pass. the majority of the president's responsiblity is foreign policy. here's one other quote we should all remember, and for all you republicans out there it comes directly from one of you - "read my lips - no new taxes" - OOOPS!!!...just a side note here, i actually believe the first bush president was a good one, but that statement right there disolved any chance he had at reelection...

    socialism blah blah blah...stop talking about something that you're afraid of and talk about what the competion is proposing - is mccain proposing an equal tax cut across the board? no he isn't - so i guess we have two socialists running for president...we've been stuck on this topic for entirely too long...next
    10-24-08 01:23 PM
  25. aceswildtru's Avatar
    One quick question, what are the job requirements of a president, what would make a presidential candidate resume look good? Does it mirror Bush's straight Cs on a legacy accpetance to college?
    For starters, a candidate for President of The United States of America is to be a naturalized citizen, which Obama has yet to prove. I don't care where he went to college, but I do care that he has yet to submit this most basic credential: this is not optional, it is in our Constitution!
    10-24-08 01:25 PM
937 ... 2829303132 ...
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD