RE: Palin positives (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


BitaTruble -> RE: Palin positives (10/6/2008 5:25:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MadRabbit

So I base my decision off of what I think the country needs at the time based off what political viewpoints they consistently hold to during election year.

My decision to vote for McCain and Palin comes from the fact that as much I HATE the idea of voting for a platform that is anti-gay marriage and pro-life, I HATE the idea of voting for a platform that will mean higher taxes, big government spending, and universal health care in the middle of an economic crisis even more. In my eyes, it would be a nightmare and therefore McCain and Palin are the lesser of two evils.

8 years from now, when we are way better off economically, then I would consider siding with a party that represents my social viewpoints.

As far as the debate, Palin didn't cop out once under "I'm only been doing this 5 weeks" and didn't respond with an "I don't know". (Okay, I might be sticking my ass out here, because I missed parts of it). She held her own with Joe Biden who has been doing this for decades and I thought that, along with the way she handled herself, was impressive. It showed to me, at least, there is some room for doubt in regards to media portrayal of her and makes me feel a little bit more confident with the future in the hands of the people I am grudgingly voting for.

Okay, taxes first:
Tax Policy Center






BREAKING DOWN THE NUMBERS



Here's how the average tax bill could change in 2009 if either John McCain's or Barack Obama's tax proposals were fully in place.







MCCAIN
OBAMA

Income
Avg. tax bill
Avg. tax bill

Over $2.9M
-$269,364
+$701,885

$603K and up
-$45,361
+$115,974

$227K-$603K
-$7,871
+$12

$161K-$227K
-$4,380
-$2,789

$112K-$161K
-$2,614
-$2,204

$66K-$112K
-$1,009
-$1,290

$38K-$66K
-$319
-$1,042

$19K-$38K
-$113
-$892

Under $19K
-$19
-$567
Source:The Tax Policy Center Now, this, of course, is predicated on the idea that either McCain or Obama could actually get their tax plans to pass through Congress. If projections are accurate and the dems get lucky and pick up those extra 9 seats, McCain will not only have to contend with a democratic majority but one which doesn't need a single pub vote to pass legislation since they'll have the 60 seats they need to pass, well, pretty much any damn thing they like (with the appropriate consequences should the people waggle a finger or two at what they're proposing). It would be much more difficult for his plan to pass than for Obamas in the event such a scenario takes place. Right now it's looking very possible for that to happen.  The Executive branch doesn't make the legislation so both of these are more 'wishful' thinking on the part of the major contenders rather than anything being set in stone.  Okay - big government spending.  McCain has said he will seriously consider freezing all government spending except for defence and veterans care which sounds good in theory, but isn't very realistic in practice. Giving him the benefit of the doubt, I'll assume he meant a freeze on discretionary spending and that mandatory spending remains in place. Discretionary government spending includes things like paying for defence, of course, but also, infrastructure,  federal courts, agricultural subsidies and foreign aid (like the $1b we just sent to Georgia). So, no new roads, no paychecks for judges (or compensation for jury duty) and no more foreign aid and if the farmers fail, pfft.. Safeway can't afford to stock their shelves anyway and besides, was the Depression really all that bad?  Again, what are the odds that a democratic Congress is going to allow this sort of hatchet job on spending? Sometimes discretionary spending is necessary spending. So, where is the line drawn? McCain proposes hacking it all up and be done with it while Obama proposes cutting out those things which are not cost effective but leaving in place what is truly necessary to spend for a quality of life that does not put us backwards and liken us to the Great Depression.  Universal Health Care - you and about half the rest of the country have a problem with Universal health care (you know, because it's really nothing but socialism and not even in a clever disguise!) but it's pretty much a non-issue at this point since the bailout just wiped it out as a possibility. In any event, it was more of that wishful thinking on the part of both Clinton and Obama and the odds of it actually coming to pass were probably already slim and at this point, I'd venture to guess none because we just don't have the bucks for it at this point. Last - from what I gather, you were impressed because Palin didn't have a repeat of her Couric interview but can't really point to specific Q&A's which impressed you? Maybe I can help because there are a few which impressed me. She's very savvy on energy. I liked the confidence I saw whenever she brought up the issue though I wasn't happy it was sometimes as a dodge to other, also important, questions. I give her credit for knowing her stuff in that area. I'm a fan of ANWR and drilling as well as alternate forms of energy so that she knows that stuff cold is a good thing in my view. The thing is, Biden knows it too, so for me, that's a wash. Still, I give credit for her knowledge in that area. Also, she was spot on in pointing out Biden's willingness to run with McCain just a few short months ago as well as his own comments on Obamas suitability to lead. Points there and, in my opinion, not very well answered by Biden. That was a basket for Palin. So, two points to her for it. I don't mind that she reverted to talking points, just that she did it so often and at the expense of answering some of the tougher questions which were asked. In addition, I was disappointed that Gwen Ifill was chosen as moderator because it prevented her from being able to ask follow-up questions so there was no appearance of bias. Pity, because I would like to have seen some clarity on many things. Ah well. Can't have it all, I suppose. Anyway, MR, thanks for answering. I hope you check out the site I linked. I find it to be impartial and informative and hope you do as well.  The main thing is .. you're going to vote and I think that rocks!




fearghus -> RE: Palin positives (10/6/2008 5:32:09 PM)

I am not a Palin supporter.  And I can not really say anything positive about her.

For the sake of balance, would it help if we bashed Biden a bit?  That's pretty easy to do!




TheHeretic -> RE: Palin positives (10/6/2008 6:21:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SirEbonyPhoenix

The question is if she and McCain are elected (which I hope to Heaven they aren't), will she be a better shot than Cheney?



         See for yourself

http://technorati.com/videos/youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dyn7UzxXv8p4





Irishknight -> RE: Palin positives (10/6/2008 6:21:45 PM)

But then we would get accused of abusing the elderly.




bluepanda -> RE: Palin positives (10/6/2008 7:52:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Venatrix

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

I bet you can't wait for the Palin condoms to come out [8D] .



They'll be no use.  They'll have a hole in the head.


That was very good! [sm=applause.gif]




Briena -> RE: Palin positives (10/7/2008 12:09:11 AM)

... Shes a great baby maker.... And she has nice glasses...


*vagina, its not a clown car*




Hippiekinkster -> RE: Palin positives (10/7/2008 1:23:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

You don't need experience to be a President or a leader, that has been proved time and time again. What you need to look at is the people gethered round the young pretender, his/her ability to choose men and women that can offer advice and have policies delegated to them. This is where McCain loses badly for simply choosing Palin, she offers nothing but eye candy in a PR campaign, she adds nothing else to the ticket.

I'd still fuck her though. Oh oh oooooooooooooooh my god! Oh god, I don't doooo anal but I wiiiiill for the VP j-j-j-jooooob!
I have said time and time again that this whole "experience" thing is a complete red herring; what is of more import is that the president be able to assemble a team of intelligent, non-partisan and non-dogmatic advisors and Department heads who will be able to give well-thought-out and researched opinions, and not just push the partei Dogma, which is what the Bushzis did and which the McSamians give every indication of continuing to do.  McSame has already surrounded himself with  Neocon lobbyist yes-men. He has already sold out to the oil industry. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joseph-romm/why-did-mccain-sell-out-t_b_132269.html

And I will tell you all I am already tired of hearing the new Neocon Dogma of  "well, everyone screwed up. Now how can we fix it?" No, everyone DIDN'T screw up. The Repubs have been in complete control of all three branches of government since Bush was sworn in the first time, up until January 20, 2007. They had every chance to make sure there were regulations in place to prevent this derivative meltdown, and they shirked their duty every chance they had.

Now the Neocons are blaming the borrowers (Oh, noooo! These borrowers made us bankers make stupid loans and then sell them to foreign investors!) and Barney Frank (On, no, mommy! Barney Frank came out from a gay bar and made all us tough Republicans bend over and take it up the ass! Oh noooooo! hahahahaha).

How pathetic. I actually watched a film clip of some burly manly-man Neocon tough guy whining about how Nancy Pelosi  hurt his feelings. Waaaaah! Hahahaha how fucking pathetic.

I'll stop now. If I keep going, ModXI will call in an air strike on me. [8D] (That's a joke, just in case it wasn't apparent) 




DomOnTheLevel -> RE: Palin positives (10/16/2008 3:33:52 PM)

No prudent, patriotic person could support the McCain/Palin ticket.

McCain picked Palin for the most venal reasons.  She is not qualified for high office and neither is he.

Here is one datum I like to share. Much has been made about how neither McCain nor Obama has held an executive position;  actually, both have. They are the executives of their election campaigns.

And as such, McCain ran his campaign into bankruptcy last year.  He IS erratic. He IS unfit to be president.  That condition maintains whatever you think about Senator Obama.

And Senator Obama has run a disciplined and effective campaign and he has PLENTY of cash.

Walt




Owner59 -> RE: Palin positives (10/16/2008 4:38:38 PM)

Positives?


Contributing to the death of the GOP....




farglebargle -> RE: Palin positives (10/16/2008 5:04:34 PM)

4 out of 5 ain't bad.




Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875