And before anyone calls the Seattle Times a liberal paper, you will only be fooling yourself....It's more conservative than the Seattle Post Intelligencer and they endorsed Bush in 2000 but Kerry in 2004....They don't have a partsian agenda...


"An economic Katrina is shattering the confidence of hardworking, middle-class Americans. The war that should never have been in Iraq is dragging on too long. At a time of huge challenge, the candidate with the intelligence, temperament and judgment to lead our nation to a better place is Sen. Barack Obama.

Obama should be the next president of the United States because he is the most qualified change agent. Obama is a little young, but also brilliant. If he sometimes seems brainy and professorial, that's OK. We need the leader of the free world to think things through, carefully. We have seen the sorry results of shooting from the hip.

On numerous other issues, from media consolidation to health care, Obama has the stronger take. He makes up for a thin résumé with integrity, judgment and fresh ideas. Obama can get America moving forward again."

Too bad he has not done any of those things for his State, City or COMMUNITY.

Speaking of shooting from the hip...

If the economy is so bad, the question is whether a hundred billion dollars in new taxes, his estimate for just one program, is going to help or make it worse.  If you believe he can get out of the mess by taxing more and more and using the income wiser, than he is your man.

Regardless of whether we should have gone in, a complete distraction, the question is how to wrap it up.  The war is already winding down because of policies that Obama was against.  He ends up saying the surge was more successful than anyone imagined.
NO, not anyone.  Those if favor of it imagined it. HE was wrong.
His one big foreign policy effort and he misjudged, according to his own words.

Integrity - switch sides on FISA, make up a F'in lie that he always supported second amendment rights, befriend radicals and racists.

He may be smart.  One of the smartest presidents was Nixon.

Obama is corrupt from top to bottom.  Think Tony Rezko and "The Chicago Way."  Obama was in on screwing the poor of southside Chicago and the tax-payers. 30 out of 30 Rezmar Co. buildings went belly up and Rezko will not account for 14 million dollars.   Rezko and Mahru were the first to get their cut and the buildings were not refurbished.

Corruption--that's the Chicago way.

Why won't Obama take care of his brother living in a mud hut on 12 dollars a year in Kenya?

Why did Obama have Franklin Raines, the scumball from Fannie Mae, as a economic advisor.  The chickens have come home to roost on that one for the dems.  During clinton's watch, all the dems demanded community re-investment and demanded that mortgage companies give mortgages to scumball deadbeats.  Now look what's happening.  The GOP wanted to reform Fannie Mae 3 years ago but the scumball dems screamed racism.

Obama is narcisstic in my view.  He doesn't know shit about economics and is to lazy to learn.

He thinks gov programs will solve all of our problems.  Obama is corrupt and in my humble opinion.
I edited out the word sc****ll

-- Modified on 9/19/2008 8:17:41 PM

Well since we're on the subject of corruption and immoral behavior, why don't you throw in Keating Five Scandal??  Did you forget that one?  How about about Carol McCain, the fucked over forgotten first wife of Johnny Boy who he left for the current trophy wife.  It seems she could use a little help these days, and she's a hell of a lot closer than Kenya.  Why doesn't he help her out?  

Let's talk about Fallwell, Hagee, and Parsley - all twisted and supposedly religious sons-of-bitches who've had an indelible and undeniable impact on the good senator's views.  Take some time to examine some of rhetoric they've used on their soapboxes and question whether or not it's had an effect on McCain's abilitly to lead and govern.  THAT'S a discussion that never seems to make it's way onto these type of forums (The Rev Wright said nothing wrong by the way...he was absolutely correct).    

I dunno...Call me naive, but I don't think you can label a guy who's made so much academic progress as "too lazy to learn" about anything.  I think that you just may be too lazy to take your head out of your ass and look at the big picture.  You've been watching way too much Fox.  Pick up a fucking newspaper, visit sites other than TER, hell - change the TV channel...maybe you'll see the benefit in voting for someone fit to lead;  instead of a decrepit, useless individual that more closely resembles your own follies and fuck-ups...

Read what I said a few times...and update your "humble opinion" accordingly.

Stop right there:  The war is winding down because we've been paying the Sunnis, genius - not because of a fucking "surge."  As soon as that money's gone, it'll be back to sniping and bombing the brave American troops that shouldn't be there in the first place.  So, no, the discussion on whether we should have gone in or not isn't a distraction.  It's a very valid point....Stop being naive and stop lavishing praise upon individuals who created and fuck up and succeeded at cleaning it up.  If I drove my car into your living room, would you pat me on the back for backing it out through the big ass hole in the wall I created??  If the answer is yes, I want your address right now...

You are TERRIBLY naive if you believed any of the shit you said in that post...Nixon wasn't terribly bright either - far from "one of the smartest presidents."

*created a fuck-up

McCain was cleared on the Keating scandal. He was only brought in as part of the group because everyone accused were all DIMoCRAPS. They needed a Republican in there just to show the people that Keating affected both political groups.

Even the special investigator himself, Robert Bennett, admitted that McCain had nothing to do with it. He even recommended that McCain and Glenn be dropped from the investigation. Read this link, genius, and stop reading the FAR-LEFT Blogsites. You might end up like Keith O.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/specials/mccain/articles/0301mccainbio-chapter7.html

I'm aware of the outcome of the Keating scandal, but I thought we were throwing out INFERENCES of wrongdoing to disparage candidates.  I'm not sure if you're aware or not, but Obama was never found to have done anything wrong in his dealings with Rezko either.  So it's pretty safe to say that both claims have the same weight, right?  

Dumbass...

I knew some idiot would step up and help solidify my point; and YOU get the prize Mr. Blue.

...that you know what the outcome on the Keating 5, because this is what you said on your previous comment...

"Well since we're on the subject of corruption and immoral behavior, why don't you throw in Keating Five Scandal??  Did you forget that one?"

It seems that you don't know what the outcome was. You just implied that McCain is corrupt like Obama. wow! and you just started calling names. wow! it's ok. i already know that when a democrat runs out of ammo, he starts calling people names.

You do realize that you're continuing to illustrate my point, don't you?  

Maybe you don't.  Every once in a while you meet that reformed retard who's reached his intellectual peak.  Maybe if I knew about all of your "special" accomplishments, I'd be congratulating you instead of calling you a dumbass.  My apologies.  

I'm not a Democrat, btw...nor a Republican...not aligned with any party for that matter.  I'm just able to pick the best guy for the job.  I bet that's difficult for you to imagine...

Franklin Raines and a Mr. Johnson of FannieMae fame.  Obama and Barney Frank and chris Dodd received lots and lots of bucks from the corrupt FannieMae big shots.   This mortgage mess is the dems fault.

I think your last rant has pretty much invalidated your "humble opinion" to any intelligent person on this board.  You'll need to use an alias if you expect to have any credibility after this...or at least wait until your post gets pushed to the next page.

-- Modified on 9/19/2008 8:47:28 PM

-- Modified on 9/20/2008 7:56:42 AM

...you old fuck.

Obviously, we will just not agree on whether the surge worked.

You may not like Nixon, and I voted against him twice, but there is not doubt that he was one of the smarter presidents.  Read even neutral biographies.  

By the way, as between Bush and Gore, do research and see who did better on things like standardized tests.  Bush may have gotten into Harvard and Yale because of his family.  BUT, once you are there, grading is anonymous. You pass because you were competative.

Final word: You and Seatle ignored my most imortant point:  If the economy is doing poorly, do you improve the economy with hundreds of billions on new taxes.  (His energy program alone is already 100 billion.)

If you believe that massive taxes will help the economy, then Obama is the man.

Change Agent?

What in the hell O'Bomb knows about the economics? Hasn't shown any.

It really takes journalist to take an abstract word like "change agent" and make it into a reason for voting for O'Bomb!

I don't know if you've ever attended an institution of higher learning or not, but grading is hardly anonymous....on to your point about the economy:  

Raising taxes on those of us who can afford it while giving relief to the ones of us who are stretched thin, would in fact improve the economy...it's the best way to go about resolving this country's economic and health care woes.  We need the revenue.  I fall into the category of individuals whose taxes would increase under an Obama administration, and I can handle it.  Most can, despite the objections.  Across-the-board tax cuts would be a disaster at this point.

Yes, I have attended institutions of higher education, getting two Bachelor degrees (anthropology and Soviet studies - soviet showing my age), as well as a J.D. (law) and a graduate degree (Ll.M.) from NYU with a focus in constitutional law.

While there are  exceptions, the vast majority of grading is anonymous.  Blue books with numbers, etc.

Bush went to Harvard and Yale.  Do you imagine for one second that the extremely competative types that go to those schools, all yearning to be in the top tier, would tolerate a system where their grades are going to be dragged down by favoritism.  There would be a world of law suits.

Of course, if you assume that Ivy League schools are systemically corrupt so that the system can be short circuited, then you have a point.

But that ignores Bush beating out Gore on things like SATs. Or maybe the computer grading system was bribed, also.

Finally, it is not possible for him to raise his hundreds of billions only on those making over $250,000.  He will have to tax those bad large corporations also.  Not to mention small corporations making over that amount, of which there are a countless number.

If you think that every corporation will eat the cost, then there is no harm to the middle class and poor.

If you think that even a substantial number will pass on the added taxes to the consumer, then the raise WILL be across the board, hitting middle and lower the most in terms of percent, which you think is a disaster.

"I will just take if from the rich" is not possible.

-- Modified on 9/20/2008 7:31:47 AM

-- Modified on 9/20/2008 7:44:58 AM

That's what happened when you were conceived.  I am a pro choice Republican.  Clearly your parents made the wrong choice.

That wasn't so much an invitation for you to give a snapshot of your resume as it was sarcasm for not recognizing that ample opportunities for favoritism present themselves in  the Ivy League (I'm intimately familiar with this).  Certain individuals "yearning to be in the top tier" would not only tolerate favoritism, but encourage it for their own gain.  There's more than enough naivete among the rest for this to occur...not to mention cheating, which doesn't seem too far fetched for the younger George.  

As far as SAT scores are concerned, there's a wealth of debate on the validity of these types of tests as measurement of one's academic ability.  

-- Modified on 9/20/2008 7:51:51 AM

but as a businessman I cannot. If my personal taxes are raised I can make adjustments. If my business is subjected to Obama's massive tax hikes I will have to cut back on either hiring, capital investments or both.

An extra $250K a year in taxes means four less $60K jobs I can create. Is this really the way to solve an economic crisis?

The impact of increased tax rates will have different long and short term effects on different types of businesses.  One could argue that lack of funding for an aggressive energy plan (which requires higher taxes) could also mean less jobs, etc as more funds are dedicated to keeping up with that expense.  Perhaps a crumbling infrastructure would be an even bigger disaster for others.  Maybe your business is more of a drain than it is helpful.  A perfect example is the unfettered development in the metro Atlanta area and dangerously low supply of water.  You wouldn't happen to be a developer would you?  

Got off on a tangent, but my point is your particular business model doesn't really serve as compelling evidence that this isn't the way to solve an economic crisis. ALL businesses, either directly or indirectly, benefit from the healthy incomes of Middle Class Americans.  If this group is fucked, it's bad for everyone.  So they need relief...but we still need the tax $$$ to solve the issues we face.  

Suck it up and pay.  

-- Modified on 9/20/2008 10:34:07 AM

-- Modified on 9/20/2008 10:42:14 AM

A claim that BHO agrees with.

I am in the oil business. I produce the very energy we are talking about. Every extra dollar the government takes from me is a dollar that don't get to spend to produce more oil. It's also one more dollar that I don't have to hire more employees and it's one more dollar that I don't have to invest in more equipment.

I already pay more in taxes than most people make, but there is no satifying you libs. Just who do you think employs the middle class?

If you want to pay more, that your choice. You and MRB pay all are free to give all of your money away if it makes you happy. I pay enough already, just stay the fuck out of my wallet.

...and one more dollar to invest in the other forms of energy we so desperately need.  If the shift hurts some to make way for something infinitely better, I'm for it.  Adapt...find a way to get on the receiving end of that shift when it occurs; or not - but what I said still stands.  Across-the-board tax cuts would be wrong right now.  

I understood the point you were attempting to make very well...and what I said still stands.  Stop watching looped clips and view the entire interview.