As an undecided voter, I am looking for something, anything to sway my opinion in the Presidential election. For instance, John McCain's selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate swayed me in the way an iceberg once swayed The Titanic.
So today, I was planning to write a positive post about the Gopher football team (I'll do that later this week) until I came across this little ditty. Apparently Joe Biden, Barack Obama's VP running mate, was speaking at a Seattle fund-raiser last Sunday when he uttered these very words:
"Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. ... Remember I said it standing here, if you don't remember anything else I said. Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate. ... And he's gonna need help. And the kind of help he's gonna need is, he's gonna need you ... to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it's not gonna be apparent initially, it's not gonna be apparent that we're right. ... Gird your loins. We're gonna win with your help, God willing, we're gonna win, but this is not gonna be an easy ride.
"This guy has it. But he's gonna need your help. Because I promise you, you all are gonna be sitting here a year from now going, 'Oh, my God, why are they there in the polls? Why is the polling so down? Why is this thing so tough?' We're gonna have to make some incredibly tough decisions in the first two years. So I'm asking you now ... be prepared to stick with us. ... There are gonna be a lot of you who want to go, 'Whoa, wait a minute, yo, whoa, whoa, I don't know about that decision.' Because if you think the decision is sound when they're made ... they're not likely to be as popular as they are sound. Because if they're popular, they're probably not sound.
"I probably shouldn't have said all this, because it dawned on me that the press is here."
OK. We are all aware that Joe Biden in known to put his foot in his mouth and say some crazy stuff from time to time. But this particular statement brings up a few issues in my mind. They are:
A. Joe - what the hell are you talking about????? Where did this bombshell come from?? An international CRISIS within 6 months of the Obama presidency? Hey - that's something to look forward to! I am full of confidence, now! Geez, where do I cast my early vote for you guys??
B. How, exactly, does one "gird their loins?"
C. At the end of this rant, Biden realizes "the press is here." Yeah, Joe, they're really not around much these days, are they? Not much going on. Joe - the press is there when you are in the bathroom having a tinkle. Whatever you say is going to be recorded, especially if the words "international" and "crisis" are involved.
D. Lastly, what would happen if John McCain predicted an "international crisis" within the next six months? Well, he'd be accused of trying to scare people and running a "negative campaign," that's what.
These are truly strange times. I am more confused than ever, and that is truly saying something. And to top it off, the Minnesota Gophers football team is 7-1.
Are these the end days?
Jeff
37 comments:
SNL did a very funny skit about the Biden and Murtha remarks.
Dools - I saw that last night and had no idea what they were talking about.
I didn't read the "actual story" until I picked up the Sunday paper.
Now the skit is even funnier to me.
I think the funniest part was McCain trying to stir up stuff with the Murtha comments by saying "Obama has said some ugly things and I couldn't agree more. Wait, I couldn't disagree wtih you more. Wait..."
Thank you Senator Eloquence. LOL
First, don't put a whole lot of stock into what Joe Biden says. So many words come out of that man's mouth a bunch are going to be head scratchers. He will be an entertaining VP however, probably not shoot an old man in the face entertaining, but entertaining nonetheless.
It's hard to believe you are undecided. Both candidates have pretty different approaches. One of them probably is closer to your views, go with that guy, but if I may...
Ask yourself if you want to reward the Republicans with the White House based on the last 8 years of performance. I know that's punishing John McCain for W's sins, but although he may have a different style, many of the policies that McCain is proposing are similar to the Bush policies after the last 8 years.
Isn't time to try a different approach?
I agree, the VP candidates are really trying to one up each other in sounding like idiots.
McCain is much more likely to die in office than Obama. That is about all I need to know. I actually know more than that, for the record.
Plus, Jeff Tweedy, Gary Louris and Bruce Springsteen all have personally told me to vote for Obama.
This will be the first time I ever voted for a Democrat person for President. (I didn't vote for either of the idiots last time).
Go. Gobama.
Yeah, I agree with you guys that we need to change some of things that are going on in this nation. It's a bad time right now, for many reasons.
As I have said before, I run into people who can't believe I would consider voting for Obama and I run into people who can't believe I'd consider voting for McCain. Guess I'll go with the heart in the voting booth.
Sarah Palin being one heartbeat away from the Presidency is awfully scary, however....
"Plus, Jeff Tweedy, Gary Louris and Bruce Springsteen all have personally told me to vote for Obama. "
Jeff, you gonna go against Tweedy, Louris, and the Boss? You might as well fly to NYC head over to Central Park and take a pee on Strawberry Fields while your at it.
Jeff,
I'm sure you have good reasons for being undecided at this point. However, if, as you say, the thought of a President Palin scares you, consider who has put us this close to that scenario.
Each presidential candidate basically makes one MAJOR decision before the election...who will be their running mate.
Obama essentially went with the measured and "conservative" pick of Biden. Sure, he likes to talk, and says silly things on occasion, but it's never been in dispute that he is experienced and knows his stuff. So, Obama thought long and hard, and didn't make a pick that would be sexy or flashy in any way, but instead set himself up with a close adviser to help him with a perceived weakness. (Experience and foreign policy experience.)
McCain, on the other hand, from all reports talked to Palin for about 60 minutes one night, and then chose her the next day. He chose her not for her knowledge, nor her experience, but to win votes among the conservative base. (Bad strategy anyway, he really needed to win independents.)
When Palin makes a fool of herself, as opposed to when Biden does, it's generally because of a lack of knowledge or understanding, rather than mis-speaking or droning on too long.
That pick came from McCain, who had promised to "Put country first." Well with the most important choice of his campaign, he certainly didn't.
I know the person who I want making major decisions about the countries future....it's the person who makes the calm, rational decision, not the one who makes the quick, off-the-cuff, choice made only for short-term gain.
Neil K
I am not going to comment much on mr obabmas character, or lack of poor judgement regarding his association with ayers, wright, rezko, acorn, etc. every liberal I have talked to dismisses that outright.
I am not going to talk about how he will conduct foreign policy. He will probably (hopefully) delegate a good portion of that.
let's talk about taxes, and what his policies are going to do to this country. When it comes to taxes, the difference between obama and mccain is arguably as wide as it's been in a presidential race since ronald reagan and mondale battled in 1984. obama is proposing to raise taxes more than any recent candidate, while mccain wants to cut them substantially. Here are some facts:
* obama would roll back the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for taxpayers in the top two brackets, raising the top two marginal rates of income tax to 36% and 39.6% from 33% and 35%. obama claims "no working families" earning less than $250,000 would pay more in taxes, but that is because he defines income more broadly than the taxable income line on the IRS form. It you are in individual with taxable income of $164,550, you will pay more taxes.
* The democrats would also reinstate the phaseout of the personal exemptions and itemized deductions for married couples making more than $250,000 a year. those phaseouts would raise the top marginal tax rate for millions of taxpayers by another 1.5 percentage points
* capital gains and dividend taxes would increase to 20% from 15% for those making more than $250,000, although capital gains taxes on investments in start-ups would be eliminated
* obamas most dramatic departure from current tax policy is his promise to lift the cap on which the social security payroll tax is applied. Currently, the employer and employee each pay 6.2% up to $102, 000, a level that is raised for inflation each year. the obama campaign says he would raise the payroll tax rate on incomes above $250,000 by as much as two to four percentage points. lifting the cap would change the nature of social security from an insurance program-which pays out based on how much you paid in-into a wealth-transfer program that is far more progressive.
* taken together, these add up to about a 10 percentage point hike in marginal tax rates for those making more than $ 250,000 a year, including millions of small businesses that pay taxes at individual rates. the "marginal" rate refers to the rate paid on the next dollar of income, and it has especially strong influence on decisions to work and invest. meanwhile, house ways and means chairman charlie rangel has proposed an additional 4% "surtax" on incomes above $200,000. this would further increase the top marginal federal income tax to close to 50%.
* obama is also famously promising that 95% of all americans will get a tax cut. However, he will not reduce tax rates. his tax cuts come in the form of tax credits, most of which are also "refundable". In tax jargon, "refundable" means that you get the credit even if you owe no income tax at all-which means the government cuts you a check. these credits include:
* a credit of $500 to offset the payroll tax on the first $8,100 in earnings
* a 10% mortgage interest credit for those who do not itemize deductions and so do not currently benefit from the mortgage interest deductions
* an increase of the college tuition tax credit to $4000 from $1,800.
According to the tax policy center, obamas tax credits would increase the share of americans who pay no income tax to 48% from an estimated 38% this year.
On corportate taxes, the obama campaign has proposed to eliminate "loopholes" for oil and gas companies and rewrite the rules for how multinational corporations are taxed. In particular, he has proposed to treat foreign income the same as income earned domestically-which means subjecting all income earned by american companies around the world to the 35% us corporate rate, which is also the world's second highest. he is also promising a "windfall profits" tax on oil companies.
67% of the taxes in this country are paid by the top 1% of the wage earners. so few americans now pay any income tax, we are now at a point where a very large part of the population pays no federal income tax at all. when you have a majority of the population that realizes you can transfer money from the productive to themselves, that's one of the great questions for the future of civilization, as far as I am concerned.
what about the sept 6 2001 interview with chicago radio station wbex-fm, mr obama noted that the supreme court under chief justice earl warren "never ventured into the redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice as I think people tried to characterize the warren court, it was not that radical". he also noted that the court "did not break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the constitution, at least as it has be interpreted". that is to say, he noted that the us constitution as written is only a guarantee of negative liberties from the government-and not an entitlement to a right to welfare or economic justice. to me, this raises the question of whether obama can in good faith take the presidential oath to "preserve, protect, and defend the constitution as he must do if he is to take office? does obama support the constitution as it is written, or does he support amendments to guarantee welfare? is his provision of a "tax cut" to millions of americans who currently pay no taxes merely a foreshadowing of constitutional rights to welfare, health care, social security, vacation time, and the redistribution of wealth? Perhaps the candidate ought to be asked to answer these questions before the election rather than after.
a whole generation of americans has come of age since the nation experienced the bad judicial appointments and foolish economic decisions of the johnson and carter administrations. if obama wins, we could possibly see any or all of the following: a federal constitutional right to welfare, a federal constitutional right to affirmative action wherever there are racial disparities, without regard to proof of discriminatory intent, the abolition of capital punishment and the mass freeing of criminal defendants, ruinous shareholder suits against corporate officers and directors, and approval of huge punitive awards like those imposed by against tobacco companies against many legitmate businesses such as those selling fattening food. nothing less than the very idea and the rule of law are at stake in this election. why would we let obama replace justice with empathy in our courts?
I don't get it. I have been studying this guy for the last two months and have come to this conclusion: prepare yourself for Great Depression II. you will have your messiah and your much-coveted "super majority". If you do not think things can get worse than they already are, study your economic history. they can, and will. me and my "rich" friends that create jobs and opportunity for everyone? we will go where money always goes, and that is where it is treated best.
it is my understanding the LA Times has a video with mr obabma at a party with radical palistinian activists and the clean, prIstine mr bill ayers. but they refuse to release it. Is this yet another thing we are going to poo poo away? yet another thing that does not quite pass the smell test folks, now does it? I remember what my mother always said, "you are the company you keep". or something like that. but that saying does not apply to him, right? RIGHT?
Ever notice that foxnews "nobama" (anti barack) people spend ALOT of time TALKING. Not so much with the listening. Good God.
listen to what? anonymous, make your point. can you do that? can you make a factual, logic based argument and join the discussion, or more likely, you have nothing to offer but bitterness and disdain to others who do not share your views. grow the hell up. ever notice that cnn or msnbc people spend A LOT of time being bitter and arguing with emotion? not so much with being open minded and LIBERAL. christ.
Tony 8489 speaks the truth. It's funny how many of you can be "scared" by the lack of experience of Sarah Palin, but no one seems too scared by the extremely liberal ideas of the Obama, Reid, Pelosi troika. I believe the latter has the possibility of doing far greater damage to the principles this country was founded upon and why we are unique throughout the world.
OK, Tony, I'll bite, though I know I shouldn't.
I guess Obama serving with Ayers on a community eduction board that was funded by conservative republicans doesn't bother me that much. (Annenberg Foundation.)
I would think it goes without saying that people who rise to high places interact with a lot of people. Sometimes, some of those people aren't the most savory. That is the way it goes. Hell, McCain did a lot more palling around with Liddy then Obama did with Ayers, and Liddy went so far as to basically advocate for domestic terrorists when he talked about the killing of ATF personnel. (No, I don't think he was joking.) I don't hold McCain personally responsible for palling around with Liddy, that's just the way it is.
And no, I don't particularly like Obama's choice of Pastor Wright as a spiritual voice, and wish he didn't have that in his past. But, heck, have you seen video of Palin at her kooky church in Alaska? Kinda weird stuff going on there as well.
Heck, Palin's husband used to belong to a group advocating Alaska's secession from the Union. (Alaskan Independence Party.) I imagine you'd have no problem if Michelle Obama belonged to a group advocating seceding from the USA?
And, BTW, if the LA Times had a video of Obama at a party with radical Palistinians, don't you think it might have been leaked by someone by now? But you know what, I'll bet you $100 that McCain has even been at a party with "Radical Palistinians." Do you know why? Because he is a high powered politician. And high powered politicians hob-nob with everyone. Heck, I'm sure you've seen the picture from the early '80s of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein, right? So what, big frickin deal! We were selling them arms at the time, so he met with him. Circumstances are fluid.
As for your dizzying array of tax statistics, you seem quite convinced in them, so I won't try to dissuade you, although I don't see the problem with increasing college tuition tax credits.
But you are correct, the wealthy do pay a disproportionate amount of the taxes. Do you know why? Because they can. If the USA didn't have a history of progressive taxation, we wouldn't be the country we are today, and wouldn't have the defense, capital infrastructure, and society that we have today.
Obama's taxes are still lower than many times in the recent past. If "Obama is a socialist" as the repubs are saying today, then Nixon was a downright commie.
BTW, here's what McCain said in 2001 when voting against the Bush tax cuts: "I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us, at the expense of middle-class Americans who most need tax relief."
Anyway, I'm sure I'm not going to get you to change your vote, and you probably won't get me to change mine. So anyway, have a good night.
who is this obama guy?
If Ronald Reagan had attempted to run for president of the United States as a liberal, the media would have been all over him. His support for Barry Goldwater would have been in the headlines and in editorial denunciations across the country.
No way would he have been able to get away with using soothing words to suggest that he and Barry Goldwater were like ships that passed in the night.
If Barack Obama had run as what he has always been, rather than as what he has never been, then we could simply cast our votes based on whether or not we agree with what he has always stood for.
Some people take solace from the fact that Senator Obama has verbally shifted position on some issues, like drilling for oil or gun control, since this is supposed to show that he is “pragmatic” rather than ideological.
But political zig-zags show no such moderation as some seem to assume. Lenin zig-zagged and so did Hitler. Zig-zags may show no more than that someone is playing the public for fools.
Some people who see the fraud in what Obama is saying are amazed that others do not. But Obama knows what con men have long known, that their job is not to convince skeptics but to enable the gullible to continue to believe what they want to believe. He does that very well.
neil-do you know the difference between timothy mcvey and ayers? mcveys bomb went off, he also said that he wished he could kill more. I am not even going to repeat the comments he made regarding 9/11. I do not want to waste the time it takes to type them. mr ayers favors individual schools built around specific political themes" which push students to "confront issues of inequity, war, and violence: he believes teacher education programs should serve as "sites of resistance" to an oppressive system". kind of a long way from dick and jane, huh?
I have not heard about mcain and liddy, so I take your word on that one. I know liddy did not blow things up, and he paid for his crimes in jail. I also thinks he loves his country in a way that my ayers never could, nor probably wants to.
I agree with your circumstances are fluid comment. I will take you up on that $100 dollar bet on a renegade photo of mccain.
prove me wrong on the statistics. especially the one where obamas mythical "tax credits increase folks who do not pay taxes from 38% to 48%. any way you slice it my friend, that is called income redistribution, and in economics 101, it is also called socialism.
palin and her church activities do not even compare with "god damn america". for twenty years he took his children to listen to this message of hate. shame on him and "bitter michelle".
your comment on taxes is so typical of the left, "because they can", that nothing that I say can penetrate the liberal fog you must be in. do you think we enjoy it? I do not know what you do for a living, but if you enjoy giving more of your money to the government than keeping what you earn, great. I do not. I pay enough. And people in my income bracket are sick of it. especially when I am giving money to someone that does not pay any taxes at all. maybe you are not in that income bracket where it affects you. I can assure you that the people that are, are incredulous to our abrupt turn towards practicing european socialism. is that not why the founding fathers came here anyway? freedom from excessive taxation and religious freedom? I do not want to be like europe!
enjoyed the sparring. Have a great night!
I agree 100% with all tony8489 has said, E-NUF said.....
Here, read this
Obama Affinity to Marxists Dates Back to College Days
Barack Obama shrugs off charges of socialism, but noted in his own memoir that he carefully chose Marxist professors as friends in college.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
German philosopher Karl Marx, author of "The Communist Manifesto," advocated redistributing wealth in order to achieve a classless society. (AP Photo)
German philosopher Karl Marx, author of "The Communist Manifesto," advocated redistributing wealth in order to achieve a classless society. (AP Photo)
Barack Obama laughs off charges of socialism. Joe Biden scoffs at references to Marxism. Both men shrug off accusations of liberalism.
But Obama himself acknowledges that he was drawn to socialists and even Marxists as a college student. He continued to associate with Marxists later in life, even choosing to launch his political career in the living room of a self-described Marxist, William Ayers, in 1995, when Obama was 34.
Obama's affinity for Marxists began when he attended Occidental College in Los Angeles.
"To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully," the Democratic presidential candidate wrote in his memoir, "Dreams From My Father." "The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists."
Obama's interest in leftist politics continued after he transferred to Columbia University in New York. He lived on Manhattan's Upper East Side, venturing to the East Village for what he called "the socialist conferences I sometimes attended at Cooper Union."
After graduating from Columbia in 1983, Obama spent a year working for a consulting firm and then went to work for what he described as "a Ralph Nader offshoot" in Harlem.
"In search of some inspiration, I went to hear Kwame Toure, formerly Stokely Carmichael of Black Panther fame, speak at Columbia," Obama wrote in "Dreams," which he published in 1995. "At the entrance to the auditorium, two women, one black, one Asian, were selling Marxist literature."
Obama supporters point out that plenty of Americans flirt with radical ideologies in college, only to join the political mainstream later in life. But Obama, who made a point of noting how "carefully" he chose his friends in college, also chose to launch his political career in the Chicago living room of Ayers, a domestic terrorist who in 2002 proclaimed: "I am a Marxist."
Also present at that meeting was Ayers' wife, fellow terrorist Bernardine Dohrn, who once gave a speech extolling socialism, communism and "Marxism-Leninism."
Obama has been widely criticized for choosing the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, an anti-American firebrand, as his pastor. Wright is a purveyor of black liberation theology, which analysts say is based in part on Marxist ideas.
Few political observers go so far as to accuse Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, of being a Marxist. But Republican John McCain has been accusing Obama of espousing socialism ever since the Democrat told an Ohio plumber named Joe earlier this month that he wanted to "spread the wealth around."
Obama's running mate, Biden, recently contradicted his boss, saying: "He is not spreading the wealth around." The remark came as Biden was answering a question from a TV anchor who asked: "How is Senator Obama not being a Marxist if he intends to spread the wealth around?"
"Are you joking? Is this a joke? Or is that a real question?" an incredulous Biden shot back. "It's a ridiculous comparison."
But the debate intensified Monday with the surfacing of a 2001 radio interview in which Obama lamented the Supreme Court's inability to enact "redistribution of wealth" -- a key tenet of socialism. On Tuesday, McCain said Obama aspires to become "Redistributionist-in-Chief."
Obama has managed to cultivate the image of a political moderate in spite of his consistently liberal voting record. In 2006, he published a second memoir, "The Audacity of Hope," that leaves little doubt about his adherence to the left.
"The arguments of liberals are more often grounded in reason and fact," Obama wrote in "Audacity." "Much of what I absorbed from the sixties was filtered through my mother, who to the end of her life would proudly proclaim herself an unreconstructed liberal."
National Journal magazine ranked Obama as the most liberal member of the Senate. The publication is far from conservative, employing such journalists as Linda Douglass, who resigned in May to become Obama's traveling press secretary.
see, this is what I am talking about. are we in bizzaro world here folks? freealonzo, you and neil are the spokesmen for the left on this blog, what say you? has this country, in the last year, turned so far left that you folks do not even believe in capitalism anymore? looks like your fella obama does not! I understand bush is very unpopular, and I certainly cannot identify with him fiscally. but come on guys, do you liberals even believe in america and the free enterprise system anymore? because the market is melting down, do you really believe that a massive increase in the size of our government will save us? do you want a nanny state?
Tony,
I still don't see any evidence that Obama is friends with Ayers. He served on a Republican funded community education board with him. Sorry, I can't get my passion up about that one.
Hell, McCain was one of the Keating Five. Do you think taking bribes from a thief to look the other way and eventually cost the taxpayers $3 billion is questionable character-wise, no?
And yes, I'm quite sure Liddy loves his country in a way many other can't. However, I don't think the way he loves his country is a good thing. If McCain wants to be proud of the guy who engineered Watergate, he can go right ahead.
And, Tony, you're right, you sure as hell don't know what I do for living, but I make a damn good salary. I'd even bet I'm even in "your income bracket." Not that I'd expect you to believe that there's a liberal out there who actually works as hard, as skillfully, and productively as you no doubt do. Seriously, do you really think that conservatives are the only ones who make money? We liberals are not all welfare cheats.
And yes, if we can get a functional, competent government, I don't mind paying for it. Living in a civilized society has a cost, and lately that cost hasn't been paid. (Have you seen the federal deficit?)
By the way, in Economics 101, a progressive tax system is not called "Socialism." Socialism is collective ownership of the production of goods. Interesting thing, the most socialist aspect of our nation's economy right now is the massive bailout of AIG and friends, which was brought on by a lack of regulation on the types of securities that could be bundled and how they could be sold.
Must be pretty hard to accuse the liberal's of being the "big government" guys these days, seeing as how government spending has gone the last eight years. I thought you guys used to be for fiscal responsibility?
By the way, America has never had a true "Free Enterprise System." It has always been a mix of capitalism with a touch of government regulation. And hell yeah, I believe in it.
One instructive thing lately has been the staggering number of Republicans who have bailed on McCain and endorsed Obama. Arne Carlson, Colin Powell, Christopher Hitchens, Christopher Buckley, etc. These guys aren't idiots, and they can't all hate America, can they?
I'm now going to retreat back into my "liberal fog." Peace and Good night.
neil-thanks for the kind response. you have made some great points. I agree with you on the aspects of fiscal irresponsibility of my party. shameful. I also agree with you on the bailout. shameful. we are miles apart on the character associations and how that relates to our future president. just for the record, I was never that red-hot on mccain and his association with keating, just so you know. in my world, there are staggering differences between liddy and ayers, and wright and keating. I do truly believe, in the reasons I have stated above, that giving someone my money that does not pay taxes is wrong. it goes against every belief system I have. I could not even take the money if I was in that tax bracket, I would be so ashamed of myself. your comments on the progressive tax structure are interesting. again, I am glad you like to pay such high taxes. If you make as much has you say you do, you are looking at 50%. your dreams to pay for the society you envision are going to come through! my whole point witb this obama thing is that he has buffaloed some pretty smart folks, he fits right into that living colour song from 1988, "the cult of personality." sorry to say we cannot afford great society part II. prepare for the backlash neil. once we all see (well, half of us can see) that the emperor has no clothes. we will shut this fraud down so fast, it will make 1994 look mild in comparison. in the meantime, I am going to find a plot of land to start growing vegetables, buy a gun, and start stocking up on provisions. like that bad 60's song goes. a bad moon is arisin.
by the way, I saw living colour in 1989 when they opened up for the stones. they blew the stones out of the metrodome.
I see a lot has transpired since I turned in for the night! Good discussion everyone. Makes for interesting reading....
Tony,
glad we can agree to disagree.
I'm not sure what type of society you seem to think I "envision" is. It certainly isn't the welfare state that you seem to think is every democrat's wet dream. The majority of any higher taxes won't actually go to the welfare queens, by the way, it will go toward our current financial obligations.
I do look for a government that is open, honest, accountable, and above all, competent.
Hell, if Bush had shown two or three of the above things, I'd probably be open for voting for a republican right now.
Yes, the party's over, as we are realizing. Two expensive wars have been going on, and the financial infrastructure is a mess. Easy credit was like crack, and consumers got addicted to it like a $5 whore. I guess we could ignore that stuff and pretend everything is hunky-dory, but I'd prefer not to.
If the shit really hits the fan, as you are hinting in you last couple sentences, it's because the ball has already been set in motion.
Yes, Living Colour rocks.
Did Tony just bet $100 with a guy he does not know on the internet?
That cracks me up.
I would like to bet Tony $1000 that McCain will win the election. If Obama wins, he gets my $1000, in What Jeff Thinks currency of course.
Oh, more fun, what a complete fake Obama is
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/29/mccain-slams-la-times-double-standard-withholding-obama-khalidi-tape/
strange times??? Try fool's paradise...
-Roger
neil-we are probably closer to what we agree on than farther apart on what we do not. I agreed with everything you wrote on your last post. very well stated.
dave-I know that neil is good for it. if he is a friend of jeff's, that is good enough for me. I will take you up on that bet. in real money. just kidding.
Tony,
It's always pleasant to end a disagreement amicably.
Actually, I've never even met Jeff.
I only stumbled onto this blog because the wife (Kris K) know's Jeff's wife and my youngest daughter used to play with their daughter when we used to live in the same neighborhood. One night a while ago Kris was reading Mrs Jeff's blog, which had a link to this blog, and she laughed at a blog entry in it, and showed it to me. I thought it was funny so I added it to my RSS reader, and I've kept reading ever since.
So, since I don't even know Jeff, you can kiss you $100 goodbye.
What Jeff Thinks reaches far and wide. No question about it.
Just use your energy to walk to your local precint to vote next week instead of trying to debate your fellow americans into believing in or agreeing with your "opinions" of who should be president.
It all boils down to lotsa talking and the neediness to feel like your "right" about everything.
Congrats on being able to throw out factoids, data & opinion so quickly & easily. Done anything nice for anyone today? Made a difference in the world in the past minutes / hours you've been typing away on "What Jeff thinks"?
Just a thought...
The name's Francis Soyer, but everybody calls me Psycho. Any of you guys call me Francis, and I'll kill you.
(Obama) Ooooooh.
You just made the list, buddy. Also, I don't like no one touching my stuff. So just keep your meat-hooks off. If I catch any of you guys in my stuff, I'll kill you. And I don't like nobody touching me. Any of you homos touch me, and I'll kill you.
(What Jeff Thinks): Lighten up, Francis.
btw, The Economist magazine, definitely not your typical socialist rag endorsed Barack Obama.
Here's the link:
http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12516666&source=features_box_main
Thomps.
Is the shine really that tarnished on the idealist I drank beer with in college. We used to wish for someone like Obama to come along and change the socio-political landscape.
Fuck all the fear mongers (like Tony1984) concerned with 401K's and Audi payments. It's time to set a fire in the masters house. I want better for my kids and I'm willing to sacrifice.
The last 8 years have left me with a hollow feeling about what it means to be an American. I never felt that way before and I never ever want my kids to feel that way.
The only thing the current Republicans can serve you for dinner is fear......that should tell you something.
Peace out,
ronnie-san
Hey Ronnie-San - I wouldn't say "my idealism" has left me. I can say with certainty, however, that I don't feel the same way about the world as I did back in late 80's. A lot has happened since that time - a job, kids, a house. I consider myself a man without a political party. The Democrats seem to move farther to the left, and the Republicans more futhur to the right.
I really wish there was a legitimate third party that ran on common sense. I wish there was a third party that wasn't ran by kooks and wing-nuts (Jesse Ventura).
If anything, I'm more into politics these days than I was back in college. I just can't get behind a single party.
This is the first chance I've had to vote for an exceptional human being in my lifetime. I'm not gonna screw it up.
ronnie-san
I cannot believe someone, other than a complete idiot would write
This is the first chance I've had to vote for an exceptional human being in my lifetime. I'm not gonna screw it up.
ronnie-san
Wow, that right there is a complete nutjob statement if I've ever seen one. An exceptional human? I'd really like to see an explanation of that one...
Post a Comment