I started this blog after the 2004 election to combat the rise of religous, "Neocon" conservatism of the the Bush administration.
During the time of the adults running the show, I didn't have much to write about but now that Trump and Pence have been elected, I am sure this will be as successful as the last time we elected a know nothing figure head who let his VP run this country into the ground.
Don't count on it. But never fear, thats why he picked Palin since she has so much experience with the... um, well,the moose that wondered on to Main Street? I hear she just got a passport last year!
I'm going to assume that there are a lot of things that disqualify you from being President.
And no, foreign policy and the economy are not her strong suites. And come to think of it their not really McCain's either. Making babies, fishing and shooting moose, are.
On a side note, what did you think of her "special needs" portion of the speech? From what I understand you have an autistic child and she obviously has a retarded one...or perhapse her daughter does but they have one in their family at least.
I thought the Republican motto was "you're on your own", "the free market will sort everything", "no hand outs", etc. What I was hearing was "I am going to raise taxes to take care of babies who have special needs even if women went forward with high risk pregnancies like having children in their mid 40s", for instance.
And since when do republicans care about people once they are born? Thats an interesting plot line. I mean, I know they care about signing them up for the military but other than that...
I'm going to assume that there are a lot of things that disqualify you from being President.
The media being the way they are, I'm sure there is. I'd get around that by giving the media a good chorus of "Go fuck yourselves!"
A governor has to manage an economy, more than any senator. And state governments are all about working within a budget. As for foreign policy, every president is a work in progress at one point. I'm sure you didn't say that being a governor doesn't mean shit back in 1992. Even when said governor's only foreign policy experiance is breakfast at the International House of Pancakes (that was such a good line).
As for the special needs, she popped a down syndrome baby, fyi.
Now if you think republicans don't care about people after they're born, then you're being an idiot. Both parties care about living people (voters, especially). It's a difference between making people independent versus fostering dependence on government. But there's a difference between making people independent and the "you're on your own" mentality.
What Sarah is saying is that she understands the challenges that children who need that extra help bring. I'm not sure how that will manifest itself, whether it is simply through legislation that addresses the education system or another program (government tit) that sucks cash. That's a wait-and-see one.
Well, so it wasn't an issue with Clinton and that showed in what he did in N. Ireland and with the middle East. As for Bush...that inexperience was obvious. You don't think Obama managed a budget at the non profits or at the harvard law review? Both of those were probably bigger than Alaska's budget.
And I am saying that we don't know how Alaska's budget is going to be balanced, she hasn't even been there for 2 years yet. I think it took Bush 3 years to deplete our surplus.
I just keep going back to the 3am call, which terrifies me knowing that she is one step away from that and why anyone would want such a big job who just had a special needs baby a few months ago.
The Clinton administration was an exercise in poll-driven governance. It meant maintaining the status quo. And Clinton didn't make any big foreign mistakes (except for al Qaeda, but everybody missed that) and didn't have a serious war.
This was the reason I wasn't as opposed to Hillary as I was Obama: There's a chance that Hillary would have run the country the same way.
Now there are many things that I'm not sure about on the McCain/Palin ticket concerning the economy. But with Obama/Biden, I know there will be tax increases and expanded government. Those are two things guaranteed to hurt the economy.
The choice is either a crap shoot with a GOP president and Dem congress or guaranteed damage with the Obama/Pelosi/Reid axis (of EEEVIL, of course, LOL).
Actually, your taxes and about 95% of the rest of the country's taxes will go down under Obama and go down even more so than what McCain would be willing to do. Your taxes, my parents small business taxes, almost everyone’s taxes would go down. I don't think it's possible to expand the government any more than what Bush already has. But, come to think of it, as our population grows and we end up with more tax payers, as our standing in the world declines and thus our threats increase and the gap between rich and poor widens and jobs go over seas, isn't somewhat logical that the government has to keep up with all that? I mean, I don't want the federal government to grow but when you talk about the government getting into your (not yours personally) uterus and telling you what you can do with it or who you can marry, listening to your phone calls, searching your sock drawer without a warrant, isn't that scarier than adding a few IRS agents to collect taxes from an ever expanding tax base? That’s the kind of big government you will get with McCain and Palin.
With Obama, he merely wants to make the government the size it should be to keep up with our deficit and security concerns. And if some taxes have to be raised I have to say I told you so. You can't start a war which cost 450 million dollars per day, which then raises the price of oil thus lowering the value of the dollar and expect everything to be ok. Someone, either some rich guy at Exxon or your kids are going to have to pay for that...at some point.
So for you, Mr. Middle American single parent, if you want to keep more of your money and want the government to show at least a little fiscal responsibility, and don't want and ever expanding, intruding federal government in your face, you need to vote for Obama, not McCain. How does lowering taxes for Rich people help the economy? It didn't work in the Reagan years. If you want a Clintonesque economy, you aren't going to get that from a Republican. Obama has a BA in Political Science and International Affairs from Columbian University in NY and a Magna Cum Laude law degree from Harvard; he's no moron. If you were looking at that resume as opposed to someone who graduated 894th out of 899 from the Naval Academy, who would you hire for the job? Any job assuming that job wasn't sweeping floors at the Naval Academy. Not only do I have more trust in Obama that he knows what he is doing but I also trust that when he doesn't know what he is doing he is smart enough, unlike Bush, to hire the right person for the job. Not just one of his flat earth friends who just graduated from Liberty University.
Technically, my direct taxes can't go down. They're effectively at 0 now after the EIC, and I don't deduct from my paycheck. Anything more would be a transfer of wealth, Marx style. As for jacking the remaining 5%, two words mean a tax hike for you and a tax hike for me: EMBEDDED TAXES. You know where I'm going with this, don't you?
[Laundry list of hysterical things] That’s the kind of big government you will get with McCain and Palin.
No, that's your list of what Bush has done to destroy the country. I'm not sure what parts of it will be close to reality under McCain/Palin, but based on what was in his acceptance speech, I'm willing to listen.
With Obama, he merely wants to make the government the size it should be to keep up with our deficit and security concerns.
You forgot health care, education, job programs, protectionism, and all the other socialist projects that he's promised but I can't remember off the top of my head. All these add to the government.
So explain to me how a whole host of social programs that expand the powers and the scope of the federal government in our daily lives will not expand the government. If you can do that to my satisfaction (without outright lies), then I'll vote Obama.
actually, I do in fact have a problem with the fact that Palin is 45 and doesn't have a passport. you need to have a little travel under your belt, IMO to want to be doing the VP shuffle. McSame picked Palin to pander to the Religious Reich. Period. She's dumb rube.
11 comments:
LOL!
I hope McCain has addressed that lack of coherence on the economy by now.
Don't count on it. But never fear, thats why he picked Palin since she has so much experience with the... um, well,the moose that wondered on to Main Street? I hear she just got a passport last year!
I hear she just got a passport last year!
Palin's strong suit is not foreign policy. She was too busy running her state to worry about that.
And I don't have my passport yet. Does that disqualify me to run for president?
I'm going to assume that there are a lot of things that disqualify you from being President.
And no, foreign policy and the economy are not her strong suites. And come to think of it their not really McCain's either. Making babies, fishing and shooting moose, are.
On a side note, what did you think of her "special needs" portion of the speech? From what I understand you have an autistic child and she obviously has a retarded one...or perhapse her daughter does but they have one in their family at least.
I thought the Republican motto was "you're on your own", "the free market will sort everything", "no hand outs", etc. What I was hearing was "I am going to raise taxes to take care of babies who have special needs even if women went forward with high risk pregnancies like having children in their mid 40s", for instance.
And since when do republicans care about people once they are born? Thats an interesting plot line. I mean, I know they care about signing them up for the military but other than that...
I'm going to assume that there are a lot of things that disqualify you from being President.
The media being the way they are, I'm sure there is. I'd get around that by giving the media a good chorus of "Go fuck yourselves!"
A governor has to manage an economy, more than any senator. And state governments are all about working within a budget. As for foreign policy, every president is a work in progress at one point. I'm sure you didn't say that being a governor doesn't mean shit back in 1992. Even when said governor's only foreign policy experiance is breakfast at the International House of Pancakes (that was such a good line).
As for the special needs, she popped a down syndrome baby, fyi.
Now if you think republicans don't care about people after they're born, then you're being an idiot. Both parties care about living people (voters, especially). It's a difference between making people independent versus fostering dependence on government. But there's a difference between making people independent and the "you're on your own" mentality.
What Sarah is saying is that she understands the challenges that children who need that extra help bring. I'm not sure how that will manifest itself, whether it is simply through legislation that addresses the education system or another program (government tit) that sucks cash. That's a wait-and-see one.
Well, so it wasn't an issue with Clinton and that showed in what he did in N. Ireland and with the middle East. As for Bush...that inexperience was obvious. You don't think Obama managed a budget at the non profits or at the harvard law review? Both of those were probably bigger than Alaska's budget.
And I am saying that we don't know how Alaska's budget is going to be balanced, she hasn't even been there for 2 years yet. I think it took Bush 3 years to deplete our surplus.
I just keep going back to the 3am call, which terrifies me knowing that she is one step away from that and why anyone would want such a big job who just had a special needs baby a few months ago.
The Clinton administration was an exercise in poll-driven governance. It meant maintaining the status quo. And Clinton didn't make any big foreign mistakes (except for al Qaeda, but everybody missed that) and didn't have a serious war.
This was the reason I wasn't as opposed to Hillary as I was Obama: There's a chance that Hillary would have run the country the same way.
Now there are many things that I'm not sure about on the McCain/Palin ticket concerning the economy. But with Obama/Biden, I know there will be tax increases and expanded government. Those are two things guaranteed to hurt the economy.
The choice is either a crap shoot with a GOP president and Dem congress or guaranteed damage with the Obama/Pelosi/Reid axis (of EEEVIL, of course, LOL).
Actually, your taxes and about 95% of the rest of the country's taxes will go down under Obama and go down even more so than what McCain would be willing to do. Your taxes, my parents small business taxes, almost everyone’s taxes would go down. I don't think it's possible to expand the government any more than what Bush already has. But, come to think of it, as our population grows and we end up with more tax payers, as our standing in the world declines and thus our threats increase and the gap between rich and poor widens and jobs go over seas, isn't somewhat logical that the government has to keep up with all that? I mean, I don't want the federal government to grow but when you talk about the government getting into your (not yours personally) uterus and telling you what you can do with it or who you can marry, listening to your phone calls, searching your sock drawer without a warrant, isn't that scarier than adding a few IRS agents to collect taxes from an ever expanding tax base? That’s the kind of big government you will get with McCain and Palin.
With Obama, he merely wants to make the government the size it should be to keep up with our deficit and security concerns. And if some taxes have to be raised I have to say I told you so. You can't start a war which cost 450 million dollars per day, which then raises the price of oil thus lowering the value of the dollar and expect everything to be ok. Someone, either some rich guy at Exxon or your kids are going to have to pay for that...at some point.
So for you, Mr. Middle American single parent, if you want to keep more of your money and want the government to show at least a little fiscal responsibility, and don't want and ever expanding, intruding federal government in your face, you need to vote for Obama, not McCain. How does lowering taxes for Rich people help the economy? It didn't work in the Reagan years. If you want a Clintonesque economy, you aren't going to get that from a Republican. Obama has a BA in Political Science and International Affairs from Columbian University in NY and a Magna Cum Laude law degree from Harvard; he's no moron. If you were looking at that resume as opposed to someone who graduated 894th out of 899 from the Naval Academy, who would you hire for the job? Any job assuming that job wasn't sweeping floors at the Naval Academy. Not only do I have more trust in Obama that he knows what he is doing but I also trust that when he doesn't know what he is doing he is smart enough, unlike Bush, to hire the right person for the job. Not just one of his flat earth friends who just graduated from Liberty University.
95%
Technically, my direct taxes can't go down. They're effectively at 0 now after the EIC, and I don't deduct from my paycheck. Anything more would be a transfer of wealth, Marx style. As for jacking the remaining 5%, two words mean a tax hike for you and a tax hike for me: EMBEDDED TAXES. You know where I'm going with this, don't you?
[Laundry list of hysterical things] That’s the kind of big government you will get with McCain and Palin.
No, that's your list of what Bush has done to destroy the country. I'm not sure what parts of it will be close to reality under McCain/Palin, but based on what was in his acceptance speech, I'm willing to listen.
With Obama, he merely wants to make the government the size it should be to keep up with our deficit and security concerns.
You forgot health care, education, job programs, protectionism, and all the other socialist projects that he's promised but I can't remember off the top of my head. All these add to the government.
So explain to me how a whole host of social programs that expand the powers and the scope of the federal government in our daily lives will not expand the government. If you can do that to my satisfaction (without outright lies), then I'll vote Obama.
actually, I do in fact have a problem with the fact that Palin is 45 and doesn't have a passport.
you need to have a little travel under your belt, IMO to want to be doing the VP shuffle.
McSame picked Palin to pander to the Religious Reich. Period.
She's dumb rube.
Post a Comment