OT: 8 years of Republican rule and all I got was this lousy Depression

[creechrr]

[quote=CDMA ENG]So true Comrad FLU!

Please let the tenants of any La Jolla home, 5 million or more, know that I will be moving in shortly!

😛

Someone on NPR yesterday joked that we were the greatest nation since France!

Oink,

CE[/quote]

That’s right! Does that mean I can move into Paulson’s house? I bet he has a really nice house. Anybody have his number? I want to know when my room will be ready.

[SDEngineer]

Wow. Nice hit piece by Terry Jones there.

Question – if all this is Clinton’s fault, then why did it all start under a Republican Congress AND a Republican Administration?

I’ll grant that perhaps it is Clinton’s legacy that allowed for Fannie and Freddie to potentially buy some toxic paper – but it is the GOP that was responsible for oversight during the actual bubble blowup – and the GOP doesn’t seem to BELIEVE in oversight (invisible hand and all that).

And I believe that Bush (and the rest of the GOP) were all trumpeting the huge gains in minority home ownership under their reign (indeed, they made it a centerpiece of Bush’s 04 reelection campaign). Attempting to shift the blame to Clinton on this is nothing but a red herring to distract everyone who reads it from the FACT that this entire financial meltdown occurred with a Republican President, and the entire bubble inflation which led to this meltdown occurred with a Republican Congress.

And while Freddie and Fannie certainly are the giants in the industry, during the heydey of the bubble, they weren’t nearly as prevalent in the really toxic paper (due to at least some minimal qualifications and documentation that they insisted on before lending, as well as their lower maximum loans) as the major subprime players, as well as Wall Street and their willingness to package anything for a buck.

[SDEngineer]

Wow. Nice hit piece by Terry Jones there.

Question – if all this is Clinton’s fault, then why did it all start under a Republican Congress AND a Republican Administration?

I’ll grant that perhaps it is Clinton’s legacy that allowed for Fannie and Freddie to potentially buy some toxic paper – but it is the GOP that was responsible for oversight during the actual bubble blowup – and the GOP doesn’t seem to BELIEVE in oversight (invisible hand and all that).

And I believe that Bush (and the rest of the GOP) were all trumpeting the huge gains in minority home ownership under their reign (indeed, they made it a centerpiece of Bush’s 04 reelection campaign). Attempting to shift the blame to Clinton on this is nothing but a red herring to distract everyone who reads it from the FACT that this entire financial meltdown occurred with a Republican President, and the entire bubble inflation which led to this meltdown occurred with a Republican Congress.

And while Freddie and Fannie certainly are the giants in the industry, during the heydey of the bubble, they weren’t nearly as prevalent in the really toxic paper (due to at least some minimal qualifications and documentation that they insisted on before lending, as well as their lower maximum loans) as the major subprime players, as well as Wall Street and their willingness to package anything for a buck.

[SDEngineer]

Wow. Nice hit piece by Terry Jones there.

Question – if all this is Clinton’s fault, then why did it all start under a Republican Congress AND a Republican Administration?

I’ll grant that perhaps it is Clinton’s legacy that allowed for Fannie and Freddie to potentially buy some toxic paper – but it is the GOP that was responsible for oversight during the actual bubble blowup – and the GOP doesn’t seem to BELIEVE in oversight (invisible hand and all that).

And I believe that Bush (and the rest of the GOP) were all trumpeting the huge gains in minority home ownership under their reign (indeed, they made it a centerpiece of Bush’s 04 reelection campaign). Attempting to shift the blame to Clinton on this is nothing but a red herring to distract everyone who reads it from the FACT that this entire financial meltdown occurred with a Republican President, and the entire bubble inflation which led to this meltdown occurred with a Republican Congress.

And while Freddie and Fannie certainly are the giants in the industry, during the heydey of the bubble, they weren’t nearly as prevalent in the really toxic paper (due to at least some minimal qualifications and documentation that they insisted on before lending, as well as their lower maximum loans) as the major subprime players, as well as Wall Street and their willingness to package anything for a buck.

[SDEngineer]

Wow. Nice hit piece by Terry Jones there.

Question – if all this is Clinton’s fault, then why did it all start under a Republican Congress AND a Republican Administration?

I’ll grant that perhaps it is Clinton’s legacy that allowed for Fannie and Freddie to potentially buy some toxic paper – but it is the GOP that was responsible for oversight during the actual bubble blowup – and the GOP doesn’t seem to BELIEVE in oversight (invisible hand and all that).

And I believe that Bush (and the rest of the GOP) were all trumpeting the huge gains in minority home ownership under their reign (indeed, they made it a centerpiece of Bush’s 04 reelection campaign). Attempting to shift the blame to Clinton on this is nothing but a red herring to distract everyone who reads it from the FACT that this entire financial meltdown occurred with a Republican President, and the entire bubble inflation which led to this meltdown occurred with a Republican Congress.

And while Freddie and Fannie certainly are the giants in the industry, during the heydey of the bubble, they weren’t nearly as prevalent in the really toxic paper (due to at least some minimal qualifications and documentation that they insisted on before lending, as well as their lower maximum loans) as the major subprime players, as well as Wall Street and their willingness to package anything for a buck.

[SDEngineer]

Wow. Nice hit piece by Terry Jones there.

Question – if all this is Clinton’s fault, then why did it all start under a Republican Congress AND a Republican Administration?

I’ll grant that perhaps it is Clinton’s legacy that allowed for Fannie and Freddie to potentially buy some toxic paper – but it is the GOP that was responsible for oversight during the actual bubble blowup – and the GOP doesn’t seem to BELIEVE in oversight (invisible hand and all that).

And I believe that Bush (and the rest of the GOP) were all trumpeting the huge gains in minority home ownership under their reign (indeed, they made it a centerpiece of Bush’s 04 reelection campaign). Attempting to shift the blame to Clinton on this is nothing but a red herring to distract everyone who reads it from the FACT that this entire financial meltdown occurred with a Republican President, and the entire bubble inflation which led to this meltdown occurred with a Republican Congress.

And while Freddie and Fannie certainly are the giants in the industry, during the heydey of the bubble, they weren’t nearly as prevalent in the really toxic paper (due to at least some minimal qualifications and documentation that they insisted on before lending, as well as their lower maximum loans) as the major subprime players, as well as Wall Street and their willingness to package anything for a buck.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=Dunerookie]Found this interesting:

Taxes…Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html>

Taxes under Clinton 1999
Single making 30K – tax $8,400
Single making 50K – tax $14,000
Single making 75K – tax $23,250
Married making 60K – tax $16,800
Married making 75K – tax $21,000
Married making 125K – tax $38,750

Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K – tax $4,500
Single making 50K -tax $12,500
Single making 75K -tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K – tax $18,750
Married making 125K – tax $31,250

Both democratic candidates will return to the higher tax rates
[/quote]

Of course, at the time Clinton left office, the budget was also balanced, and the US national deficit was roughly half of what it is now.

Every single penny of those tax cuts has increased the national debt, so the net result is that we as a people owe more, and have to pay more every year out of our budget in interest payments, mostly to nations abroad (like China). Currently, those interest payments are up to $429 BILLION dollars each year.

[quote]
It is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above think Bush is putting it to them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Obama is elected, he says he will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can’t wait for it to happen.

This is like the movie ‘The Sting’ with Paul Newman; you scam somebody and they don’t even know what happened.

Additionally:

In just two years. Remember the election in 2006?

A little over two years ago:

1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.

Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 (WHO PROMISED CHANGE) we have seen:

1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $4.00 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value
evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion
dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!

Remember it’s Congress that makes law not the President.
He has to work with what’s handed to him.

[/quote]

Like none of the above would have happened if the GOP was in the majority today? I have this Bridge in Alaska I’d like to sell you if you believe that. You can only spend on the government’s giant VISA card for so long, and you can only inflate bubbles to a certain point before they’re guaranteed to drop. Most people on this site SAW this meltdown coming LONG before the Democrats took back the congress in ’06.

As well, you might want to mention that consumer confidence was even higher during Clinton’s administration, gas was even lower, and unemployment was about the same.

BTW, the GOP is currently on pace to almost double the largest number of filibusters ever recorded in a 2 year Senate session (they’re at about 140, the previous record was something like 85). It’s hard to get anything done when you’ve got an obstructionist minority party willing to filibuster just about anything – and what doesn’t get filibustered, well, King George finally found his veto pen after 6 years of having lost it.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=Dunerookie]Found this interesting:

Taxes…Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html>

Taxes under Clinton 1999
Single making 30K – tax $8,400
Single making 50K – tax $14,000
Single making 75K – tax $23,250
Married making 60K – tax $16,800
Married making 75K – tax $21,000
Married making 125K – tax $38,750

Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K – tax $4,500
Single making 50K -tax $12,500
Single making 75K -tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K – tax $18,750
Married making 125K – tax $31,250

Both democratic candidates will return to the higher tax rates
[/quote]

Of course, at the time Clinton left office, the budget was also balanced, and the US national deficit was roughly half of what it is now.

Every single penny of those tax cuts has increased the national debt, so the net result is that we as a people owe more, and have to pay more every year out of our budget in interest payments, mostly to nations abroad (like China). Currently, those interest payments are up to $429 BILLION dollars each year.

[quote]
It is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above think Bush is putting it to them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Obama is elected, he says he will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can’t wait for it to happen.

This is like the movie ‘The Sting’ with Paul Newman; you scam somebody and they don’t even know what happened.

Additionally:

In just two years. Remember the election in 2006?

A little over two years ago:

1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.

Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 (WHO PROMISED CHANGE) we have seen:

1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $4.00 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value
evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion
dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!

Remember it’s Congress that makes law not the President.
He has to work with what’s handed to him.

[/quote]

Like none of the above would have happened if the GOP was in the majority today? I have this Bridge in Alaska I’d like to sell you if you believe that. You can only spend on the government’s giant VISA card for so long, and you can only inflate bubbles to a certain point before they’re guaranteed to drop. Most people on this site SAW this meltdown coming LONG before the Democrats took back the congress in ’06.

As well, you might want to mention that consumer confidence was even higher during Clinton’s administration, gas was even lower, and unemployment was about the same.

BTW, the GOP is currently on pace to almost double the largest number of filibusters ever recorded in a 2 year Senate session (they’re at about 140, the previous record was something like 85). It’s hard to get anything done when you’ve got an obstructionist minority party willing to filibuster just about anything – and what doesn’t get filibustered, well, King George finally found his veto pen after 6 years of having lost it.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=Dunerookie]Found this interesting:

Taxes…Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html>

Taxes under Clinton 1999
Single making 30K – tax $8,400
Single making 50K – tax $14,000
Single making 75K – tax $23,250
Married making 60K – tax $16,800
Married making 75K – tax $21,000
Married making 125K – tax $38,750

Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K – tax $4,500
Single making 50K -tax $12,500
Single making 75K -tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K – tax $18,750
Married making 125K – tax $31,250

Both democratic candidates will return to the higher tax rates
[/quote]

Of course, at the time Clinton left office, the budget was also balanced, and the US national deficit was roughly half of what it is now.

Every single penny of those tax cuts has increased the national debt, so the net result is that we as a people owe more, and have to pay more every year out of our budget in interest payments, mostly to nations abroad (like China). Currently, those interest payments are up to $429 BILLION dollars each year.

[quote]
It is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above think Bush is putting it to them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Obama is elected, he says he will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can’t wait for it to happen.

This is like the movie ‘The Sting’ with Paul Newman; you scam somebody and they don’t even know what happened.

Additionally:

In just two years. Remember the election in 2006?

A little over two years ago:

1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.

Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 (WHO PROMISED CHANGE) we have seen:

1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $4.00 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value
evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion
dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!

Remember it’s Congress that makes law not the President.
He has to work with what’s handed to him.

[/quote]

Like none of the above would have happened if the GOP was in the majority today? I have this Bridge in Alaska I’d like to sell you if you believe that. You can only spend on the government’s giant VISA card for so long, and you can only inflate bubbles to a certain point before they’re guaranteed to drop. Most people on this site SAW this meltdown coming LONG before the Democrats took back the congress in ’06.

As well, you might want to mention that consumer confidence was even higher during Clinton’s administration, gas was even lower, and unemployment was about the same.

BTW, the GOP is currently on pace to almost double the largest number of filibusters ever recorded in a 2 year Senate session (they’re at about 140, the previous record was something like 85). It’s hard to get anything done when you’ve got an obstructionist minority party willing to filibuster just about anything – and what doesn’t get filibustered, well, King George finally found his veto pen after 6 years of having lost it.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=Dunerookie]Found this interesting:

Taxes…Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html>

Taxes under Clinton 1999
Single making 30K – tax $8,400
Single making 50K – tax $14,000
Single making 75K – tax $23,250
Married making 60K – tax $16,800
Married making 75K – tax $21,000
Married making 125K – tax $38,750

Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K – tax $4,500
Single making 50K -tax $12,500
Single making 75K -tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K – tax $18,750
Married making 125K – tax $31,250

Both democratic candidates will return to the higher tax rates
[/quote]

Of course, at the time Clinton left office, the budget was also balanced, and the US national deficit was roughly half of what it is now.

Every single penny of those tax cuts has increased the national debt, so the net result is that we as a people owe more, and have to pay more every year out of our budget in interest payments, mostly to nations abroad (like China). Currently, those interest payments are up to $429 BILLION dollars each year.

[quote]
It is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above think Bush is putting it to them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Obama is elected, he says he will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can’t wait for it to happen.

This is like the movie ‘The Sting’ with Paul Newman; you scam somebody and they don’t even know what happened.

Additionally:

In just two years. Remember the election in 2006?

A little over two years ago:

1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.

Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 (WHO PROMISED CHANGE) we have seen:

1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $4.00 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value
evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion
dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!

Remember it’s Congress that makes law not the President.
He has to work with what’s handed to him.

[/quote]

Like none of the above would have happened if the GOP was in the majority today? I have this Bridge in Alaska I’d like to sell you if you believe that. You can only spend on the government’s giant VISA card for so long, and you can only inflate bubbles to a certain point before they’re guaranteed to drop. Most people on this site SAW this meltdown coming LONG before the Democrats took back the congress in ’06.

As well, you might want to mention that consumer confidence was even higher during Clinton’s administration, gas was even lower, and unemployment was about the same.

BTW, the GOP is currently on pace to almost double the largest number of filibusters ever recorded in a 2 year Senate session (they’re at about 140, the previous record was something like 85). It’s hard to get anything done when you’ve got an obstructionist minority party willing to filibuster just about anything – and what doesn’t get filibustered, well, King George finally found his veto pen after 6 years of having lost it.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=Dunerookie]Found this interesting:

Taxes…Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html>

Taxes under Clinton 1999
Single making 30K – tax $8,400
Single making 50K – tax $14,000
Single making 75K – tax $23,250
Married making 60K – tax $16,800
Married making 75K – tax $21,000
Married making 125K – tax $38,750

Taxes under Bush 2008
Single making 30K – tax $4,500
Single making 50K -tax $12,500
Single making 75K -tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K – tax $18,750
Married making 125K – tax $31,250

Both democratic candidates will return to the higher tax rates
[/quote]

Of course, at the time Clinton left office, the budget was also balanced, and the US national deficit was roughly half of what it is now.

Every single penny of those tax cuts has increased the national debt, so the net result is that we as a people owe more, and have to pay more every year out of our budget in interest payments, mostly to nations abroad (like China). Currently, those interest payments are up to $429 BILLION dollars each year.

[quote]
It is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above think Bush is putting it to them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Obama is elected, he says he will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can’t wait for it to happen.

This is like the movie ‘The Sting’ with Paul Newman; you scam somebody and they don’t even know what happened.

Additionally:

In just two years. Remember the election in 2006?

A little over two years ago:

1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.

Since voting in a Democratic Congress in 2006 (WHO PROMISED CHANGE) we have seen:

1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $4.00 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value
evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion
dollars;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.

America voted for change in 2006, and we got it!

Remember it’s Congress that makes law not the President.
He has to work with what’s handed to him.

[/quote]

Like none of the above would have happened if the GOP was in the majority today? I have this Bridge in Alaska I’d like to sell you if you believe that. You can only spend on the government’s giant VISA card for so long, and you can only inflate bubbles to a certain point before they’re guaranteed to drop. Most people on this site SAW this meltdown coming LONG before the Democrats took back the congress in ’06.

As well, you might want to mention that consumer confidence was even higher during Clinton’s administration, gas was even lower, and unemployment was about the same.

BTW, the GOP is currently on pace to almost double the largest number of filibusters ever recorded in a 2 year Senate session (they’re at about 140, the previous record was something like 85). It’s hard to get anything done when you’ve got an obstructionist minority party willing to filibuster just about anything – and what doesn’t get filibustered, well, King George finally found his veto pen after 6 years of having lost it.

[underdose]

“Taxes…Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.”

Doonrookie, you fail to take into account the inflation tax. I’m no fan of Clinton either, but what Bush did was particularly sleezy. Do the politically popular thing of cutting taxes, even dropping rebates from the sky, while deficit spending and debasing the currency. It works to win approval from the unsophisticated. For those of us who understand inflation and realize that it is an insidious tax, the shell game is glaringly obvious. So, no, those statistics are not enlightening at all since they are only part of the picture.

Sadly, both parties are tax and spend. Much as I dislike the democrats and would prefer a true “republican” that respects the constitution like Ron Paul, at least Obama is candid about his desire to tax and spend. McCain promises more of the dishonest dollar-debasing shenanigans and warmongering. And McCain is too much in bed with the Bush camp that has allowed the 3 biggest disasters in US history to occur on their watch (9/11, the Katrina aftermath, and now the housing and credit bubble/bust). Obama, whatever the sins of Clinton might have been, is clearly the less bad choice by a long shot. Let’s just hope there really is an election….

[underdose]

“Taxes…Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.”

Doonrookie, you fail to take into account the inflation tax. I’m no fan of Clinton either, but what Bush did was particularly sleezy. Do the politically popular thing of cutting taxes, even dropping rebates from the sky, while deficit spending and debasing the currency. It works to win approval from the unsophisticated. For those of us who understand inflation and realize that it is an insidious tax, the shell game is glaringly obvious. So, no, those statistics are not enlightening at all since they are only part of the picture.

Sadly, both parties are tax and spend. Much as I dislike the democrats and would prefer a true “republican” that respects the constitution like Ron Paul, at least Obama is candid about his desire to tax and spend. McCain promises more of the dishonest dollar-debasing shenanigans and warmongering. And McCain is too much in bed with the Bush camp that has allowed the 3 biggest disasters in US history to occur on their watch (9/11, the Katrina aftermath, and now the housing and credit bubble/bust). Obama, whatever the sins of Clinton might have been, is clearly the less bad choice by a long shot. Let’s just hope there really is an election….

[underdose]

“Taxes…Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.”

Doonrookie, you fail to take into account the inflation tax. I’m no fan of Clinton either, but what Bush did was particularly sleezy. Do the politically popular thing of cutting taxes, even dropping rebates from the sky, while deficit spending and debasing the currency. It works to win approval from the unsophisticated. For those of us who understand inflation and realize that it is an insidious tax, the shell game is glaringly obvious. So, no, those statistics are not enlightening at all since they are only part of the picture.

Sadly, both parties are tax and spend. Much as I dislike the democrats and would prefer a true “republican” that respects the constitution like Ron Paul, at least Obama is candid about his desire to tax and spend. McCain promises more of the dishonest dollar-debasing shenanigans and warmongering. And McCain is too much in bed with the Bush camp that has allowed the 3 biggest disasters in US history to occur on their watch (9/11, the Katrina aftermath, and now the housing and credit bubble/bust). Obama, whatever the sins of Clinton might have been, is clearly the less bad choice by a long shot. Let’s just hope there really is an election….

[underdose]

“Taxes…Whether Democrat or a Republican you will find these statistics enlightening and amazing.”

Doonrookie, you fail to take into account the inflation tax. I’m no fan of Clinton either, but what Bush did was particularly sleezy. Do the politically popular thing of cutting taxes, even dropping rebates from the sky, while deficit spending and debasing the currency. It works to win approval from the unsophisticated. For those of us who understand inflation and realize that it is an insidious tax, the shell game is glaringly obvious. So, no, those statistics are not enlightening at all since they are only part of the picture.

Sadly, both parties are tax and spend. Much as I dislike the democrats and would prefer a true “republican” that respects the constitution like Ron Paul, at least Obama is candid about his desire to tax and spend. McCain promises more of the dishonest dollar-debasing shenanigans and warmongering. And McCain is too much in bed with the Bush camp that has allowed the 3 biggest disasters in US history to occur on their watch (9/11, the Katrina aftermath, and now the housing and credit bubble/bust). Obama, whatever the sins of Clinton might have been, is clearly the less bad choice by a long shot. Let’s just hope there really is an election….

[Author]

Posts