See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #101
   On October 29th, 2008 at 10:14 am, FamilyMan said:

   Here is another test watershed, that only needs a yes or no answer. Do you approve of this statement?

   U.S. Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D. Toledo) whipped the crowd up before Mr. Obama took the stage yesterday telling them that America needed a Second Bill of Rights guaranteeing all Americans a job, health care, homes, an education, and a fair playing field for business and farmers.

   It is a simple clarifying position of your Obamas view.

2. #102
   On October 29th, 2008 at 10:15 am, Dave Turson said:

   Michael Malone tells us why MSM editors are giving Obama a pass. As they say, just follow the money–they hope The One, through the change of a revived Fairness Doctrine, will repay them.

3. #103
   On October 29th, 2008 at 10:16 am, Misscheryl said:

   When McCain/Palin wins, that feeling Matthews feels going down his leg won’t be tingling…teehehhe

4. #104
   On October 29th, 2008 at 10:17 am, watershed said:

   If Obama had a tax plan that resembled anything SOCIALIST, I would say maybe you have a point with your gigantic rants. As it is, it’s a complete red herring strawman argument designed to inflame “patriots”.

   Bottom line- Obama wants to have the middle class shoulder less of the tax burden than the wealthy, reversing years of Bush tax cuts for the top ONE PERCENT. If you thought for a minute, you would realize that that’s GREAT FOR YOU, the middle class. But you are all such toadies for the rich that you vote against your own self interests and for theirs, the rich, and THEN get all angry about the geighs and the blacks and the browns, and blame them for your ills.

   It is a absolute dupe. You’ve been conned.

5. #105
   On October 29th, 2008 at 10:17 am, Misscheryl said:

   flyover – that was hillarious!

6. #106
   On October 29th, 2008 at 10:19 am, wighttrasch said:

   Most of all I like watching you squirm as a black man becomes President.

   McCain’s black?!

7. #107
   On October 29th, 2008 at 10:19 am, cheapseat said:

   btw watershed, i get the feeling you work for a college, that bastion of progressive thought, and you speak of hipocracy. look around you. if you don’t see that 3rd world cheap labor outnumbers american postdocs by a huge margin, you must be in silky jones college of how to be a ho. so try to think of the next generation of educators, maybe your children, will they be willing and able to work 60 hrs a week for 20k a year. washington u in st louis wouldn’t let the postdocs unionize, and went to court to block people from getting minimum wage. workers paradise indeed. but hey it’s a resume builder right.

8. #108
   On October 29th, 2008 at 10:21 am, watershed said:

   The second bill of rights as a concept is hardly new. And it doesnt involve changing the constitution, fearmongers.

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Bill_of_Rights

   LOOKS SCAAAAARY! A living wage? Education? Gak! better get in those bunkers!

9. #109
   On October 29th, 2008 at 10:22 am, wighttrasch said:

   GREAT FOR YOU, the middle class. But you are all such toadies for the rich

   I asked yesterday & I’ll ask today: what is ‘middle class’??

   If you are an Obama follower, that makes you a ‘toadie for the rich’…

10. #110
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:22 am, FamilyMan said:

    cheapseat; Watershed says he owns a music school.

11. #111
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:22 am, sausage said:

    Bottom line- Obama wants to have the middle class shoulder less of the tax burden than the wealthy, reversing years of Bush tax cuts for the top ONE PERCENT. If you thought for a minute, you would realize that that’s GREAT FOR YOU, the middle class.

    Well put watershed. I post this occasionally as it really nails it:

    “I think what the Republicans have done in past elections is brilliant. Because, they’ve convinced a lot of people to vote for them against their own economic self-interest, and they’ve done that by skillfully manipulating a handful of social issues, primarily abortion and gay rights and sometimes gun control,” he says. “And the Republicans have used those to scare a lot of people into voting for Republican candidates. It’s skillful manipulation.” – John Grisham.

12. #112
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:23 am, frostrt said:

    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:19 am, wighttrasch said:
    Most of all I like watching you squirm as a black man becomes President.
    McCain’s black?!

    HAR.

    This is what voter intimidation is about: trying to make us feel that the only reason we would not vote Obama is because we “squirm” at the thought of a black man becoming our President. There are a lot of things about him/his past associations that make me squirm, but not his skin color.

    No sale on the racism charge.

13. #113
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:23 am, ajmontana said:

    lol, a person that is tone deaf running a music school??…. roflmao

    It’s Killin em and
    I Love it!!!

    McCain/Palin 08′

14. #114
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:26 am, watershed said:

    #111

    Right on. I always though Grisham ws a republican? Must be some other novelist.

    Fortunately, when a giant economic meltdown occurs, it’s hard to distract with GAY MARRIAGE!!! so much. People will vote their economic interests when they have NO MORE MONEY.

15. #115
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:27 am, Flyoverman said:

    I asked yesterday & I’ll ask today: what is ‘middle class’??

    Ah the dirty little secet. There is no quantitative, accepted definition of the term. THAT is why pols love to throw the term around.

    NPR, to their credit, had a VERY GOOD program on the political use of the term. They pointed out how politicians try to convice the vast majority of voters that they are not only middle class but in that part of the middle class that needs their help and will be protected.

    The old shell game, except there is really no pea at all.

16. #116
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:28 am, FamilyMan said:

    watershed; I assume that was a big YES.
    Every patriot on this blog knows that statement would destroy the Constitution,
    Thank you for fully exposing yourself.

    Misscheryl. This is why we play with the trolls. They reenforce the ideals we are fighting for.

17. #117
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:31 am, watershed said:

    #116

    I know you think that a living wage and education and health care are all bad things for every American to have, I just don’t know why.

18. #118
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:31 am, Misscheryl said:

    The things I detest re: Obama have nothing to do with skin color. I would have run, not walked to vote for J.C. Watts. I cannot even begin to articulate all that is wrong with Obama and his wife. Unpatriotic, unAmerican, not trustworthy, will sell his soul for a couple of bucks and 15 minutes of fame. He’s been riding the wave that gobs of money will buy, but as it was said on an earlier post, those issues such as gay marriage, won’t matter when the rubber hits the road. I think most just don’t trust Oblama and rightfully so.

19. #119
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:31 am, heroyalwhyness said:

    FLASHBACK to LAT’s political activism: LA TIMES Had No Problem Releasing Candid ’06 Arnold Tape either…articles.latimes.com

20. #120
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:32 am, frostrt said:

    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:26 am, watershed said:
    #111

    Right on. I always though Grisham ws a republican? Must be some other novelist.

    Fortunately, when a giant economic meltdown occurs, it’s hard to distract with GAY MARRIAGE!!! so much. People will vote their economic interests when they have NO MORE MONEY.

    Aaah, but the Dem’s have been doing the distracting re: the economic meltdown. We’ve been asked to ignore:

    Democrat’s connection to Fannie & Freddie and refusal to regulate them;

    Democrat’s (Obama’s) connection to Acorn, and Acorn’s involvement in the economic meltdown by pushing banks to make high-risk home loans.

    I, for one, am choosing not to ignore either of those things.

21. #121
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:32 am, FamilyMan said:

    Obama’s tax break limit was lowered to $200,000 three days ago. Do I hear a bid for $150,000?

22. #122
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:32 am, DBNinKY said:

    Bottom line- Obama wants to have the middle class shoulder less of the tax burden than the wealthy, reversing years of Bush tax cuts for the top ONE PERCENT.

    As long as the top one percent is responsible for there even being a middle class (see the Industrial Revolution), then the economic fortunes of both classes are inextricably tied, i.e., what hurts the “top one percent” increases unemployment for the rest of us!

    BTW Water Shed, you Sausage enjoy your mutual admiration society:)

23. #123
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:33 am, watershed said:

    #115

    The middle class is everyone on this board, minus perhaps one or two posters. Oh, and minus Malkin. That’s yes, nearly EVERYONE on this board.

    You are middle class. The tax burden is yours to get rid of. Yet you defend the rich. It’s such a dupe, flyover.

24. #124
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:34 am, Misscheryl said:

    Obama’s “tax plan” is just like Clinton’s. I’m telling you when, when that clown got into office, he raised taxes so badly on the middle class we suffered for the next 10 years. By the way, my financial situation is far better today that it was 8 years ago since we finally paid off all of those taxes and Bush gave us a tax cut.

25. #125
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:36 am, Dave Turson said:

    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:17 am, watershed said:
    If Obama had a tax plan that resembled anything SOCIALIST, I would say maybe you have a point with your gigantic rants. As it is, it’s a complete red herring strawman argument designed to inflame “patriots”.

    Watershed skipped Economics 101.

26. #126
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:36 am, sonofdy said:

    Obama’s tax break limit was lowered to $200,000 three days ago. Do I hear a bid for $150,000?

    Biden already said 150,000. McCains figure of 42,000 is looking more and more acurate. BTW yes I know that is RRRAAACCCIIISSSTTT

27. #127
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:36 am, watershed said:

    #122

    The rich are responsible for your existence? Whatever happened to personal responsibility?? What a great giveaway.

    Talk about a complete 180 from the conservative view.

28. #128
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:36 am, Marc said:

    Nobody could be worse than Geraldo Rivera. He insists that any criticism of Obama is racist. Geraldo justified the Obama Ayers Khalidi frienship by saying that he (Rivera) was a “friend of Yasser Arafat”. And Rivera was actually bragging about his friendship with Arafat on Fox News last Saturday night. Rivera thought being friends with Arafat made him (Rivera) cool and chic and a chick magnet.
    As to Arafat’s corruption, Geraldo had nothing to say. As to Arafat’s terrorism, Geraldo had no criticism.

29. #129
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:37 am, Misscheryl said:

    30 pcs of silver said:

    By the way 30, I do miss reading your posts. I’ve noticed you and a couple of others visibly “absent.” I hope that won’t be permanent.

30. #130
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:37 am, cheapseat said:

    so the fact that president bush gave a 10% tax cut to the lowest income people but only a 3% cut to the HIGHEST INCOME people is ignored by both sausage and watershed. i wonder if it will be noticed when those expire under the obama regime. imagine the poor getting a 10% tax hike, while the rich only get a 3% tax hike. OH THE OUTRAGE. BTW WHAT ARE INCOME TAXES AND PAYROLL TAXES. OBAMA WANTS INCOME TAXES ON SOME TO PAY PAYROLL TAXES (SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE) ON 40% OF NON INCOME TAX PAYING AMERICANS. it can’t work. there aren’t enough high income earners to fund that, and please don’t confuse high income earners with rich. ted kennedy is rich, but he only earns 178k.

31. #131
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:38 am, sonofdy said:

    Misscheryl: Whats the point with trolls like watershed arround? I am outa here.

32. #132
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:39 am, ajmontana said:

    Fam, Bidet already moved the goal posts to 150k. lol

33. #133
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:39 am, fluffy said:

    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:17 am, watershed said:

    Bottom line- Obama wants to have the middle class shoulder less of the tax burden than the wealthy, reversing years of Bush tax cuts for the top ONE PERCENT. If you thought for a minute, you would realize that that’s GREAT FOR YOU, the middle class. But you are all such toadies for the rich that you vote against your own self interests and for theirs, the rich

    Bush’s tax cuts only benefited the top one percent? No one else?

    I thought if everyone gets a tax cut, everyone benefits. Someone earning more benefits more, because their 1% is 1% of a bigger pie.

    Tell me how eliminating Bush’s tax cuts will help me. Use numbers, and use them coherently, please.

34. #134
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:40 am, wighttrasch said:

    I’m ‘middle class’? Is that what you’re saying? Have you used obamatactics & know how much my income is?
    Do you have madobamaskillz to determine what I have paid in taxes, or what I will pay for under obama?

    If they think Joe Plumber needs to share his wealth, pretty soon the dustbin collectors will be in that group too.

35. #135
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:40 am, Flyoverman said:

    Familyman,

    Correct, the U.S. Constitution and within it, the Bill of Rights are the means to implement the premise of the Declaration of Independence.

    It provides the means ensure that our unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the PURSUIT of happiness are not abridged. There is no “right” to happiness or success.

    Note that the only amendment that ever restricted liberty, Prohibition, was later rescinded. All others have expanded rights and liberty.

    The proposed “2nd Bill of Rights” imposes across the board restrictions on liberty. It proponents have no desire to live within this country’s Constitution.

36. #136
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:41 am, DBNinKY said:

    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:32 am, FamilyMan said:

    Obama’s tax break limit was lowered to $200,000 three days ago. Do I hear a bid for $150,000?

    To afford the trillion+ in spending he is pursuing, Obama will have to increase taxes on individuals who earn at or < $42,500. There’s no other way he can do it – unless, of course, he’s lying and doesn’t intend to do one-tenth of the spending he’s now tricking naive voters into believing he will – which would be a blessing, should he win, if only his supporters would stop and think about it.

37. #137
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:41 am, watershed said:

    #131

    Good luck planning that militant uprising against the next president, you rightwing William Ayers type you!

38. #138
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:41 am, FamilyMan said:

    watershed said:
    I know you think that a living wage and education and health care are all bad things for every American to have, I just don’t know why.

    I never said that. I said the constitution should not guarantee those comforts. The constitution only guarantees you the protection to pursue those goodies.
    I know it’s scary. BUT YOUR ON YOUR OWN SPORT.

39. #139
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:42 am, granite said:

    There is no middle ground with the trolls.

    They hold a 180-degree-opposite worldview from the overwhelming majority of posters on this blog.

    The trolls are statist, and condemn, despise, and fear individualism, even as they bray about fairness.

    They believe that this worldly existence is all there is…all there ever has been; all that there is now; and all that there will ever be.

    They ridicule, mock, despise, disdain,…and, ultimately, fear epople of faith; because the people of faith just might be on the right track – which the trolls ferociously deny.

    Trolls deny the existence of a soul…they are existentialists.
    They mock those who believe in the existence of a soul.
    Again, because trolls fear that people of faith just might be right.

    Thus, logically, the existentialist trolls focus on money, sex, and power:

    Hence, the support for statism; the redistribution of wealth; the punishing high, progressive levels of taxation on income (and confiscation of wealth, if they could get away with it, and if they could convince the Soroses, Kennedys, Lewises, etc. to allow their wealth to be confiscated); the defense of pornography, vulgarity, and coarseness; the desire to prevent the public from protecting and defending itself with firearms; the antisemitsm and anti-Christian ferocity; the relentless anti-Americanism; their antimilitary position; the support for barbaric Muslim radicals; the support for Communists; the support for anti-American dictators and states; the devotion to the U.N.; the adoration of Europe….

    There is so much more; but, I have work to do…diagnoses to render.

40. #140
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:43 am, ArizonaNeanderthal said:

    Please: Troll diet

41. #141
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:45 am, watershed said:

    #139

    Or we could just be, as McCain says, decent family men citizen who you happen to have disagreements with.

42. #142
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:45 am, old_texan said:

    IGNORE THE TROLLS.

    The trolls on this blog are Obama plants that are being paid to disrupt all of the conservative blogs. Go to any conservative blog and you will find trolls saying the same stuff as the ones here. Ignore them and let us discuss what WE want to discuss.

    Obama is the single worst threat to America and capitalism as anyone EVER. Even knowing what I know about Jimmy Carter I would vote for him before Obama. Obama WILL bring down government!
    Bet on it.

43. #143
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:46 am, Laree said:

    Craig Crawford making the same comment I have been making here on Michelle’s blog.
    Craig Crawford was on this Morning Imus in the Morning.

    How would you brainwash the masses, with Hope and Change message, turns out it isn’t a new strategy.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_medium_is_the_message

    I love what Craig Crawford said, this morning about Oprah Winfrey picking our President. I have been making that comment for the last couple of days on Malkin’s blog (check, I finished my comment stating, I was only half kidding)..I hope your happy Oprah..she is trying to give the country a make over. Kinky Friedman was right, the People who read People Magazine will decide this election, the same folks who read People Magazine watch Oprah Winfrey. BUT when she wouldn’t give Gov Sarah Palin, equal time, there was a boycott of Oprah started, some of those housewives are not to happy with Ms Oprah, and her fondness for Beta Males, and them being challenged by a strong Woman.

44. #144
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:46 am, watershed said:

    #138

    Then we disagree. No uprisings, no violent takeovers. Just a political disagreement. It’s been happening that way for centuries here in the US, and will continue as such.

    You see? Isnt that easy?

45. #145
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:47 am, Laree said:

    and them (Beta Males) not being challenged by a strong woman.

46. #146
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:47 am, watershed said:

    #142

    OBAMA PLANTS!!! Awesome. What incredible paranoia you have here.

    No ones out to get you, cupcake. I am just an American on the internet, like you.

47. #147
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:49 am, old_texan said:

    Yeah, right!

48. #148
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:49 am, DBNinKY said:

    The rich are responsible for your existence? Whatever happened to personal responsibility??

    What are you squawking about it? Personal responsibility comes in when people realize they have to get out seek a job for themselves – from someone who can actually afford to hire them – and not rely on government to provide them with a means of subsistent survival, usually in the form of welfare and food stamps!

49. #149
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:50 am, FamilyMan said:

    ajmontana said:
    Fam, Bidet already moved the goal posts to 150k. lol

    WHEN DID THAT HAPPEN?

50. #150
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:50 am, sonofdy said:

    I never said that. I said the constitution should not guarantee those comforts. The constitution only guarantees you the protection to pursue those goodies
    ————
    Another misquote from watershed? say it isn’t so…

51. #151
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:50 am, wighttrasch said:

    &%$#@$%–I must be asking questions that ‘those who live under bridges’ cannot answer.

    I am also ‘out of here’.

52. #152
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:50 am, John Deaux said:

    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:22 am, sausage said:
    Well put watershed. I post this occasionally as it really nails it:

    “I think what the Republicans have done in past elections is brilliant. Because, they’ve convinced a lot of people to vote for them against their own economic self-interest, and they’ve done that by skillfully manipulating a handful of social issues, primarily abortion and gay rights and sometimes gun control,” he says. “And the Republicans have used those to scare a lot of people into voting for Republican candidates. It’s skillful manipulation.” – John Grisham.

    Wow. If a celebrity said it, then it must be true. Sorry, but much like the NYT, Grisham writes fiction for a living.

    I also think it’s funny that the “middle class” is such an issue when the only one who knows what middle class is like is Sarah Palin. Why don’t we ask who she’s going to vote for?

53. #153
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:50 am, Misscheryl said:

    granite – Absolutely agree 100% with your post.

    Honestly, I could care less about one’s race or politics, but these people are viscious haters and I include everyone of them who post here. They seem to compete with each other as to who can be the biggest smart ass to others. I’ve seen them pat each other on the back for hurting someone and then cry that someone is being a racists if you don’t like their behavior. I, personally, have never been called a racists in my life until I came here. A soul isn’t black or white, young or old. A soul isn’t male or female. A soul is either kind or ugly, cultivates mercy and grace or cultivates hatefulness..it is the being, the essence of a person.

54. #154
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:52 am, old_texan said:

    The answer to all our ills is education. And since the dems have created a union driven, politically correct education system there is no education being given.

55. #155
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:53 am, FamilyMan said:

    watershed said; Then we disagree. No uprisings, no violent takeovers. Just a political disagreement.

    We’ll see. It’s a scary world out there.

56. #156
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:53 am, Flyoverman said:

    Watershed,

    I asked you on two prior occasions in other threads objective questions, which you selectively ducked, because quite frankly they dealt with Obama’s own words in full context.

    Rather than defend your position or indicate that I had perhaps made a sound point, you chose silence.

    So don’t waste the keystrokes commenting on my posts. You have shown by your silence that your views are unimportant.

57. #157
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:53 am, old_texan said:

    Misscheryl – awesome post!

58. #158
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:54 am, Misscheryl said:

    sonofdy – COME BACK!!!!

59. #159
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:55 am, John Deaux said:

    The Times claims it promised a source it wouldn’t show the tape.

    President Bush needs to sign an immediate executive order declaring the tape as classified Top Secret. The NY Times will have it front page in tomorrow’s edition.

60. #160
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:56 am, watershed said:

    #148

    Look up “corporate welfare” on your googles. Not just the poor who can claim that one. Your argument damning the poor doesnt hold up.

    And please tell me more about how you wouldnt be here if it weren’t for the rich. Its a fascinating argument, onhe i havent heard used so blatantly in their behalf before.

61. #161
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:56 am, old_texan said:

    See…the trolls score again.
    sonofdy come back and discuss with us!

62. #162
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:58 am, FamilyMan said:

    OH THE POOR POOR MIDDLE CLASS. THEY LIVE IN SUCH PATHIC CONDITIONS/sarc

63. #163
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:58 am, fluffy said:

    I don’t like all this talk of ignoring trolls. I asked a question of watershed in comment #133 and he is ignoring me. He probably thinks I am a troll.

64. #164
    On October 29th, 2008 at 10:59 am, watershed said:

    Oh flyover. Sweetie.

    I have so many responses (which I hope you notice) that I dont answer yours immediately, and you take that as some kind of grand WIN. I am not playing win/loss, I am just telling my side. I think I have gone back on a couple occasions and tried to answer your posts. I will look for them sometime.

    We are all just talking politics on the nternet here. You go ahead and play gotcha though. Its cool!

65. #165
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:01 am, watershed said:

    Bush’s tax cuts help the wealthy, who dont need as much help, MORE than they help the middle class. They should be repealed. That will help YOU, the middle class.

66. #166
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:01 am, old_texan said:

    watershed you an Obama hack paid for by George Soros through illegal campaign contributions! Begone evil one!

67. #167
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:02 am, FamilyMan said:

    The trolls are beginning to implode now. Back away from your screens. It may get messy.

68. #168
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:03 am, watershed said:

    #166

    booga booga booga! BOO!

    (I’m not.)

69. #169
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:03 am, John Deaux said:

    Can we please trade watercloset for Blind Mule? Please?

    This troll is just annoying. He regurgitates Obama talking points, glosses over criticism and recites nonsense as if it was fact. When asked a direct question, he either changes the subject or questions why the question is being asked. Hey! Is that you Joe Biden?

70. #170
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:03 am, fluffy said:

    No numbers?

    BTW, I don’t mind if someone who makes 5 times my salary pays the same tax rate. The same percentage of the bigger pie is a bigger slice.

71. #171
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:04 am, Flyoverman said:

    Watershed,

    The effective range of an excuse is ZERO meters.

72. #172
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:05 am, watershed said:

    #169

    OK. Ask me a DIRECT (gasp) question. It’s not like I’m hiding from anyone, guy.

73. #173
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:07 am, happyscrapper said:

    Unbelievable that in 2008, a campaign can very possibly literally buy victory. Unreal!

    Yes, thanks to those untraceable donations from Saudi via the internet.

74. #174
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:08 am, watershed said:

    Remember Ronald Reagan and Supply Side Economics? In the early 1980s, Reagan promised the nation that if we lowered tax rates on the wealthy, the economy would grow so much the federal budget would be balanced “within three years, maybe even two.”

    Of course that never happened, and the deficit EXPLODED. It quadrupled.

    It’s a trojan horse, designed to keep money in the pockets of the rich at the expense of the US budget and the majority of Americans, the middle class. They dont give a DAMN about you.

75. #175
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:09 am, old_texan said:

    It’s funny that the liberals know nothing about anything. The mean old rich folks have all the money, so lets just take it away and give it to others. How stupid is that! Business will relocate, jobs will be cut, tax collection will take a hit and all in all things will get worse. This is a CAPITALIST society. Mean old big business drives the economy (when liberals aren’t screwing it up) and makes it produce jobs. Sorry but taking from one to give to the other is pure communism.

76. #176
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:10 am, DBNinKY said:

    Look up “corporate welfare” on your googles.

    Name one – ONE – corporation that totally absorbs the cost of a tax increase w/o passing it on to consumers in the form of higher prices, or to it workers in the form of pink slips?

    And please tell me more about how you wouldnt be here if it weren’t for the rich.

    Very simple, I attended a private college on endowments and scholarships that were entirely funded by large corporations and very rich alumni; as a public school teacher, my school is funded and my salary paid through taxes on homes, autos and other personal and private property – the higher the value of the property, the more money my school system has to spend on technology, learning activities, and new teaching methods and training. The top one percent are vital to us all – they get hurt, we feel the pain.

77. #177
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:11 am, watershed said:

    Between 1992 and 2000, the U.S. economy produced the longest sustained economic expansion in U.S. history. It created more than 18 million new jobs, the highest level of job creation ever recorded.

    Inflation fell to half of what it was in the Reagan era.

    Why? The reversal of SupplySide economics.

78. #178
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:11 am, sambo said:

    I repeat: Bleeding newspapers really shouldn’t be pissing off readers.

    I disagree. The purchase of these papers will be mandatory under an Obama admin!

79. #179
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:11 am, fulldroolcup said:

    “Obama’s tax break limit was lowered to $200,000 three days ago. Do I hear a bid for $150,000?”

    Too late: Biden lowered it to $150,000 yesterday or the day before.

    They KNOW they’re selling BS, so they keep shifting the numbers.

80. #180
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:11 am, happyscrapper said:

    The only remedy I can see is to abandon a thread, or just not feed them. I doubt after the election, it will be much different though, they aren’t going anywhere.

    I believe the remedy is to completely ignore them. They are trying to goad us into an argument and we end up replying because we just can’t help ourselves. I am guilty of that too. We need to discipline ourselves to ignore them. We all have responses we would like to give because they say such ridiculous things. But seriously, the only way to get rid of them is the silent treatment. Skip over them and continue the thread.

81. #181
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:13 am, FamilyMan said:

    EXPLOSION IS EMINENT
    COVER YOUR FACES

82. #182
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:14 am, John Deaux said:

    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:08 am, watershed said:
    Remember Ronald Reagan and Supply Side Economics? In the early 1980s, Reagan promised the nation that if we lowered tax rates on the wealthy, the economy would grow so much the federal budget would be balanced “within three years, maybe even two.”

    Interest rates dropped, unemployment dropped, inflation dropped, and we enjoyed the longest economic growth since the Great Depression. Yeah, that really sucked.

83. #183
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:15 am, Flyoverman said:

    EXPLOSION IS EMINENT
    COVER YOUR FACES

    Grabbed my Kevlar as well.

84. #184
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:17 am, FamilyMan said:

    fulldroolcup I think $90,000 is around the corner.

85. #185
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:17 am, DBNinKY said:

    Of course that never happened, and the deficit EXPLODED. It quadrupled.

    A mere investment (a term I think liberals favor) towards preventing nuclear holocaust: For the price of a bloated deficit, the Soviets imploded – w/o a shot fired – and we ended up with a military that cannot matched or beaten. It’s easier to recover from a deficit than a nuclear winter, wouldn’t you agree?

86. #186
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:18 am, ITookTheRedPill said:

    Great work, as usual, Michelle!

87. #187
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:18 am, watershed said:

    #176

    How about a lower CEO salary first? Why should pink slips take precedent over a CEO salary? An OBSCENE unjustifiable salary?

    If you dont think my middle class taxes go to your pay, then you are hopelessly misguided. My taxes are a great part of the education structure of this country, not just “the rich”. I am responsible for your pay, as well as “the rich”. AND, there are MORE of us, in the middle class, and the top one percent have FAR FAR more money than the middle class combined. They can shoulder more of the burden, and will do NO damage to your teacher salary.

88. #188
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:20 am, old_texan said:

    Results of Obama election.

    ALL big business relocates to other countries in order to escape the huge tax increases.

    Expatriation by thousands of American citizens to other countries to find good paying jobs.

    Huge influx of illegal aliens in order to reap the benefits of new government handouts (free education, free healthcare, free citizenship)

    Massive depression lasting 10 years or longer.

    Is that enough? This man is the worst candidate for president in the history of this country.

89. #189
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:21 am, ITookTheRedPill said:

    As for terminology,

    It’s more than just “Obamedia”… it’s more than just Obama.

    It’s the Commiemedia. It’s American Pravda. It’s American TASS.

    It’s the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy.

90. #190
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:22 am, fluffy said:

    Bush’s Tax Cuts

    President Bush’s tax relief plan reflects this basic trust in the American people and confidence in the American ideal by increasing tax fairness and enhancing the performance of the economy. It includes:

    * Replacing the current tax rates of 15, 28, 31, 36, and 39.6 percent with a simplified rate structure of 10, 15, 25, and 33 percent (see Appendix for rate schedule);

    Click the link, scroll down to ‘Appendix’.

    When these cuts expire, my wife and I will pay 6% more of our income in Federal taxes. Put another way, we will give the IRS a 24% raise!!

    I’m failing to see how this benefits me.

91. #191
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:22 am, watershed said:

    #181

    Are you refrring to me? You’re cute.

    I am just having a ball with y’all. My guy is winning the presidency, and EVERYTHING I am explaining to you all will come to pass. Its gonna be a good year.

92. #192
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:22 am, Flyoverman said:

    DBNinKY, Wanna see my chunk fo the Berlin Wall?

    Seriously, the average person will never appreciate how much Reagan reduced the danger of a nuclear war in his first term.

    Peace through Strength was more than a punch line.

93. #193
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:22 am, fulldroolcup said:

    Then we disagree. No uprisings, no violent takeovers. Just a political disagreement. It’s been happening that way for centuries here in the US, and will continue as such.

    You see? Isnt that easy?

    Nossir. this time it’s different. YOUR candidate has openly expressed his disdain for the Constitution, seeing it as fatally flawed. Thus he cannot take the Presidential Oath to preserve, protect and defend it. If he does, he’s lying under oath from the instant he says “I so solemnly swear”.

    YOUR candidate, the product of corrupt Chicago machine politics he never tried to reform, consorts with known domestic terrorists (Ayers and Dohrn)), foreign terrorists, (Khalidi), communists (Klonsky) and criminals (Rezko, Giannoulias) from whom he received corrupt money and benefits.. He is a radical, a liar, and a fraud.

    The SECOND he tries take away our Constitutional freedoms, override the Bill of Rights, or to burden us with oppressive taxation to pay for unconstitutional purposes, he WILL have an uprising on his hands.

    You can count on it.

94. #194
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:28 am, watershed said:

    #193

    he WILL have an uprising on his hands.

    Fulldroolcup, is an apparently unrepentant future terrorist explaining why he will use violence against the President.

    Amazing! William Ayers would be proud.

    And there is NO difference between you two. You both think YOUR CAUSE justifies violence.

95. #195
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:28 am, ITookTheRedPill said:

    And the Commiemedia is lying to you about the polls.

    In an honest election, McCain/Palin will win in an electoral college landslide.

    When was the last time a Democrat got over 50% of the popular vote?

    1976, when Jimmah Carter got 50.1%.

    When was the last time before that when a Democrat got over 50% of the popular vote?

    1964, LBJ, when the country was still recovering from the murder of JFK and voted for stability.

    We don’t have to defeat Obama’s politics. We have to defeat the MASSIVE FRAUD which is being carried out on Obama’s behalf.

    Christians, please pray.

96. #196
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:28 am, sambo said:

    watershed said:
    Then we disagree. No uprisings, no violent takeovers. Just a political disagreement. It’s been happening that way for centuries here in the US, and will continue as such.

    Excuse me but if the government tries to take away our (the peoples) constitutional rights, al la (or allah) Chavez…then it is our duty as Americans(which might leave you out)!

97. #197
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:30 am, watershed said:

    #188

    Hang on, give me a minute…I’m copy and pasting your post for my superiors at Soros camp.

    OOPS! Did I say that out loud? Abort! Abort!

98. #198
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:30 am, DBNinKY said:

    An OBSCENE unjustifiable salary?

    The perception is that quality costs; that’s why a Maybach sells for half a million. So if a board is ridiculous enough to offer a potential CEO an outrageou$ contract, I’m not about to blame that individual for accepting it.

99. #199
    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:32 am, John Deaux said:

    On October 29th, 2008 at 11:05 am, watershed said:
    #169

    OK. Ask me a DIRECT (gasp) question. It’s not like I’m hiding from anyone, guy.

    Please explain how redistributing income through refundable tax credits, along with guaranteeing health care as a right, are not socialist.

100. #200
     On October 29th, 2008 at 11:32 am, watershed said:

     #196

     And another. None of you guys see the unbelieveable IRONY here of calling for a violent uprising against an American adminstration?

     This place is truly hilarious. Best of all is that you’re serious! Pathetic and sad, but serious.