Didnt anyone watch Michelle Obama? Did anyone care?

[jficquette]

[quote=asianautica]SD Realtor, you and I are on the same track regarding this. That’s why I really hope this is the year a 3rd party will get a serious look. My vote will go to Bob Barr. Hopefully the Libertarian party will get enough vote to get public funding and a spot in the debate the next time around.[/quote]

Libertarian party will never be viable because too many people work for the government.

Libertarian party has been round for years. No one cares about supporting them.

Our system was designed to be grassroots system. All the power was put out in the local communities to elect their reps to congress. However, people think we are a top down system. They think we just elect a certain person as President and they will take care of everyting and get whatever they want done.

We think we can elect 535 Socialists to congress and expect the President to ride herd on the big mess and do it all by himself.

Right now Jesus Christ could be President and we would still be screwed because of our sorry congress.

We really need a grassroots movement to get the kind of ideals we want in the people we elect to congress. Once you get congress on your side then true reform can take place.

John

[afx114]

[quote=jficquette]Once you get congress on your side then true reform can take place.[/quote]

You had a blank-check congress on your side for 6 years. A lot of good that did us.

[afx114]

[quote=jficquette]Once you get congress on your side then true reform can take place.[/quote]

You had a blank-check congress on your side for 6 years. A lot of good that did us.

[afx114]

[quote=jficquette]Once you get congress on your side then true reform can take place.[/quote]

You had a blank-check congress on your side for 6 years. A lot of good that did us.

[afx114]

[quote=jficquette]Once you get congress on your side then true reform can take place.[/quote]

You had a blank-check congress on your side for 6 years. A lot of good that did us.

[afx114]

[quote=jficquette]Once you get congress on your side then true reform can take place.[/quote]

You had a blank-check congress on your side for 6 years. A lot of good that did us.

[gandalf]

Obama will be elected. He’ll be a decent President and will attempt to govern from the center. I think efforts at post-partisan governance will be thwarted by the Democan/Republicrat establishment.

Pretty funny to hear people on this board argue about Obama/McCain tax policy as if the executive branch sets tax rates. Congress sets tax policy and the Dems are going to net another 20 seats in the House and 5-7 in the Senate.

If Dems are evil, why are so many republicans getting kicked out of congress? Hard to answer that without looking in the mirror. Today’s Republican party sucks badly. Toss them overboard and don’t bother looking back.

[gandalf]

Obama will be elected. He’ll be a decent President and will attempt to govern from the center. I think efforts at post-partisan governance will be thwarted by the Democan/Republicrat establishment.

Pretty funny to hear people on this board argue about Obama/McCain tax policy as if the executive branch sets tax rates. Congress sets tax policy and the Dems are going to net another 20 seats in the House and 5-7 in the Senate.

If Dems are evil, why are so many republicans getting kicked out of congress? Hard to answer that without looking in the mirror. Today’s Republican party sucks badly. Toss them overboard and don’t bother looking back.

[gandalf]

Obama will be elected. He’ll be a decent President and will attempt to govern from the center. I think efforts at post-partisan governance will be thwarted by the Democan/Republicrat establishment.

Pretty funny to hear people on this board argue about Obama/McCain tax policy as if the executive branch sets tax rates. Congress sets tax policy and the Dems are going to net another 20 seats in the House and 5-7 in the Senate.

If Dems are evil, why are so many republicans getting kicked out of congress? Hard to answer that without looking in the mirror. Today’s Republican party sucks badly. Toss them overboard and don’t bother looking back.

[gandalf]

Obama will be elected. He’ll be a decent President and will attempt to govern from the center. I think efforts at post-partisan governance will be thwarted by the Democan/Republicrat establishment.

Pretty funny to hear people on this board argue about Obama/McCain tax policy as if the executive branch sets tax rates. Congress sets tax policy and the Dems are going to net another 20 seats in the House and 5-7 in the Senate.

If Dems are evil, why are so many republicans getting kicked out of congress? Hard to answer that without looking in the mirror. Today’s Republican party sucks badly. Toss them overboard and don’t bother looking back.

[gandalf]

Obama will be elected. He’ll be a decent President and will attempt to govern from the center. I think efforts at post-partisan governance will be thwarted by the Democan/Republicrat establishment.

Pretty funny to hear people on this board argue about Obama/McCain tax policy as if the executive branch sets tax rates. Congress sets tax policy and the Dems are going to net another 20 seats in the House and 5-7 in the Senate.

If Dems are evil, why are so many republicans getting kicked out of congress? Hard to answer that without looking in the mirror. Today’s Republican party sucks badly. Toss them overboard and don’t bother looking back.

[PatentGuy]

SDR – I certainly agree. I am registered as a libertarian for voting purposes, but it’s pointless, especially in California.

I can stand going back to the Clinton tax rates to help appease the “renterclint” types out there who unabashedly want to take as much money from “the rich” as they can. Does not matter what for, or whether good policy in the long run. Just simple-minded class jealously. But, the comment about how the unlimited payroll tax will “save” social security?!? Yeah, right. It will “save” nothing, and will cost a few jobs including people who were otherwise paying into social security. A tax is a tax. What you call it is meaningless. The money will simple be squandered or well-spent, depending on how you view the way government spends money, for example, on foreign wars).

I am certainly no McCain or GW fan. I might even vote for Obama if it weren’t his plan to raise my taxes so freaking much through the payroll tax increase (which only effects actual working people – mostly the self-employed; not those who are wealthy through passive means such as inheritance or investment, or executives cashing in on stock options).

At least Obama wears his socialism on his sleeve. No surprises. This is because more and more Americans are also socialists, and want wealth redistributed. We can emulate Sweden (they don’t produce much of value, but no one is allowed to get rich in order to keep everything government-provided). Obama is honest in that he wants to take from the upper earners and give it to his voter base. He panders to the “quasi-rich” dual income democrats, but just up to $250K. After all, he wants their support.

I have no idea if Obama will win. Nor do I know if Congress will support the payroll tax hike (can’t lay it all on Obama – Congress has to pass the law; he just signs it). The saddest part is that if Obama losses, it will not be because of his wealth redistribution proposals; it will be because of the color of his skin and the closet racist vote in swing states (hello Florida, Ohio). While I will be happy for tax reasons if he losses, I wish it would be for the right reasons (bad tax/spend policies) and not because of his race.

[PatentGuy]

SDR – I certainly agree. I am registered as a libertarian for voting purposes, but it’s pointless, especially in California.

I can stand going back to the Clinton tax rates to help appease the “renterclint” types out there who unabashedly want to take as much money from “the rich” as they can. Does not matter what for, or whether good policy in the long run. Just simple-minded class jealously. But, the comment about how the unlimited payroll tax will “save” social security?!? Yeah, right. It will “save” nothing, and will cost a few jobs including people who were otherwise paying into social security. A tax is a tax. What you call it is meaningless. The money will simple be squandered or well-spent, depending on how you view the way government spends money, for example, on foreign wars).

I am certainly no McCain or GW fan. I might even vote for Obama if it weren’t his plan to raise my taxes so freaking much through the payroll tax increase (which only effects actual working people – mostly the self-employed; not those who are wealthy through passive means such as inheritance or investment, or executives cashing in on stock options).

At least Obama wears his socialism on his sleeve. No surprises. This is because more and more Americans are also socialists, and want wealth redistributed. We can emulate Sweden (they don’t produce much of value, but no one is allowed to get rich in order to keep everything government-provided). Obama is honest in that he wants to take from the upper earners and give it to his voter base. He panders to the “quasi-rich” dual income democrats, but just up to $250K. After all, he wants their support.

I have no idea if Obama will win. Nor do I know if Congress will support the payroll tax hike (can’t lay it all on Obama – Congress has to pass the law; he just signs it). The saddest part is that if Obama losses, it will not be because of his wealth redistribution proposals; it will be because of the color of his skin and the closet racist vote in swing states (hello Florida, Ohio). While I will be happy for tax reasons if he losses, I wish it would be for the right reasons (bad tax/spend policies) and not because of his race.

[PatentGuy]

SDR – I certainly agree. I am registered as a libertarian for voting purposes, but it’s pointless, especially in California.

I can stand going back to the Clinton tax rates to help appease the “renterclint” types out there who unabashedly want to take as much money from “the rich” as they can. Does not matter what for, or whether good policy in the long run. Just simple-minded class jealously. But, the comment about how the unlimited payroll tax will “save” social security?!? Yeah, right. It will “save” nothing, and will cost a few jobs including people who were otherwise paying into social security. A tax is a tax. What you call it is meaningless. The money will simple be squandered or well-spent, depending on how you view the way government spends money, for example, on foreign wars).

I am certainly no McCain or GW fan. I might even vote for Obama if it weren’t his plan to raise my taxes so freaking much through the payroll tax increase (which only effects actual working people – mostly the self-employed; not those who are wealthy through passive means such as inheritance or investment, or executives cashing in on stock options).

At least Obama wears his socialism on his sleeve. No surprises. This is because more and more Americans are also socialists, and want wealth redistributed. We can emulate Sweden (they don’t produce much of value, but no one is allowed to get rich in order to keep everything government-provided). Obama is honest in that he wants to take from the upper earners and give it to his voter base. He panders to the “quasi-rich” dual income democrats, but just up to $250K. After all, he wants their support.

I have no idea if Obama will win. Nor do I know if Congress will support the payroll tax hike (can’t lay it all on Obama – Congress has to pass the law; he just signs it). The saddest part is that if Obama losses, it will not be because of his wealth redistribution proposals; it will be because of the color of his skin and the closet racist vote in swing states (hello Florida, Ohio). While I will be happy for tax reasons if he losses, I wish it would be for the right reasons (bad tax/spend policies) and not because of his race.

[PatentGuy]

SDR – I certainly agree. I am registered as a libertarian for voting purposes, but it’s pointless, especially in California.

I can stand going back to the Clinton tax rates to help appease the “renterclint” types out there who unabashedly want to take as much money from “the rich” as they can. Does not matter what for, or whether good policy in the long run. Just simple-minded class jealously. But, the comment about how the unlimited payroll tax will “save” social security?!? Yeah, right. It will “save” nothing, and will cost a few jobs including people who were otherwise paying into social security. A tax is a tax. What you call it is meaningless. The money will simple be squandered or well-spent, depending on how you view the way government spends money, for example, on foreign wars).

I am certainly no McCain or GW fan. I might even vote for Obama if it weren’t his plan to raise my taxes so freaking much through the payroll tax increase (which only effects actual working people – mostly the self-employed; not those who are wealthy through passive means such as inheritance or investment, or executives cashing in on stock options).

At least Obama wears his socialism on his sleeve. No surprises. This is because more and more Americans are also socialists, and want wealth redistributed. We can emulate Sweden (they don’t produce much of value, but no one is allowed to get rich in order to keep everything government-provided). Obama is honest in that he wants to take from the upper earners and give it to his voter base. He panders to the “quasi-rich” dual income democrats, but just up to $250K. After all, he wants their support.

I have no idea if Obama will win. Nor do I know if Congress will support the payroll tax hike (can’t lay it all on Obama – Congress has to pass the law; he just signs it). The saddest part is that if Obama losses, it will not be because of his wealth redistribution proposals; it will be because of the color of his skin and the closet racist vote in swing states (hello Florida, Ohio). While I will be happy for tax reasons if he losses, I wish it would be for the right reasons (bad tax/spend policies) and not because of his race.

[Author]

Posts