Biden already dropped it to 150k or 100k forget which now during his last debacle of an appearance.

Btw for those that do not know.

If you are against Obama you are

A. a racist.
B. a neo con
C. Someone not to do biz with.

I am making my own list of people that say they will not do biz with someone over another's political opinions. its pathetic. :disgust

What I got out of this story is that you better make sure not to get the same waiter again if you go back to that restaurant.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

if people only knew that you voted for Obama...

That's it, republicans are now officially retarded.

jesus your posts just get dumber. (and I thought that would be impossible after some of your past ones.)

sure ... you gave $ 15.00 ... :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

It's hard to argue against that point.

Amazing how so many people have no knowledge in civics or economics. They both have progressive tax systems. McCain wants to give health insurance rebates to people. He wants to buy up shitty mortgages from poor people. They are both redistributing wealth, just as every President in our nation's history has.

If a 4% tax difference in the highest tax bracket makes one a socialist and the other a free market capitalist, your view of the country is a tad distorted.

Well said and what makes it really amazing is most of people complaining here arent even close to that bracket. Its like do you like voting against your own best interests?

The Community Reinvestment Act accounts for only a few percent of the bad subprime loans in this country. The overwhelming majority of the bad subprime loans were made by investment banks and mortgage lenders who were not under the umbrella of CRA. Only 1 of the top 25 subprime lenders in this country are regulated under the CRA.

What you posted was a lie. It shows you have zero understanding of how the financial system works. Ask a broker one day how this works before you continue to make a fool of yourself on issues.

Spreading the Wealth
 

While I respectfully disagree with you since it is your right to have an opposing position on Obama and his potential voters I don't think it is fair for you to place all of Obama's supporters into clueless lemmings. I did my research on both candidates and as an independent voter made up my mind to vote for the candidate with the best judgment and vision. McCain's choice of Palin was a reckless political move that has positioned this woman entirely too close to the presidency. That in and of itself was very bad judgment and in no way puts "country first" but more "campaign first". Not to mention his prior record of voting against minorities and women's issues was abysmally poor to say the least. I used factcheck.org to find the candidate that came closest to addressing issues and facts rather than mudslinging which McCain is infamous for.

As far as "spreading the wealth" is concerned you need to see the entire you tube video of Obama's conversation with Joe the Plumber to understand his take on how the middle class need a tax break. It's an easy concept to understand so allow me to break it down for you...When people (middle class) have more income then they will spend more on goods and/or services thus STIMULATING the economy. So lets say Joe the Plumber has saved an additional $2000 dollars in taxes then he is likely to spend it on a down payment for a new car. Then GM makes some $$$. :) See? that was easy!

Also, I have some server friends and I suggest you DO NOT go back to that restaurant unless you want to eat food that has been tainted in some disgusting way. :)

There's also the little savings and loan scandal called....the Keating 5! Which would have been the Keating 4 without Mr. McCain's involvement.

He didn't write that. He just copy and pasted it from another site. Don't expect many independent thoughts to come from partisans.

Waiters talk and I'm sure he's told his cronies to make sure his next visit will be awful. It's nasty what some pissed off servers will do.

Redistribution of wealth is great, as long as it's not your money getting redistributed. The $250k income level is pretty arbitrary, if the cut off income was chosen to be $25k instead, most people wouldn't be so thrilled about the whole "wealth redistribution" plan :2 cents:

Bingo. Im under the $250k line and I can not see the moral justification of allowing the government to take those peoples money by gun point and handing it over to me. I am sure if I really was hard up I could find something to sell for the $500 I would get under obamas plan.

And YES McCain and Obama are the same as many people pointed out. So why are you voting for either? :helpme

looks like you had no problem redistributing that story from the original owner:

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&cl...Searc h&meta=

yeah, the Obama supporters are such fucking sheep. They just can't understand that "redistribution" of wealth is only ok when it goes to the wealthy and they can't see how well that has worked for the past 8 years. God, what a bunch of dumb asses. Why can't the middle class understand that a tax cut will not help them, only tax cuts for the wealthy will make things better for them.
To use your analogy, under McCains plan, you would have given that $15 to the owner of the restaurant or even the owner of the strip mall it was in.

from what i figured out in 5 minutes of reading, everyone is responsible for your sub-prime mortgage bs

But... what if the restaurant was in poor financial shape, there were rumors that it might close down any day now, and it happened to be your favorite restaurant, one you eat out at almost every day? You really don't want that restaurant to shut down, and so you have 3 choices of who to give the money to:
a. guy pen handling outside
b. waitress
c. restaurant owner

Which of these 3 choices will help to achieve your goal of making sure the restaurant doesn't shut down?

The problem for McCain is that 95% of America (not a made up statistic) is the bum in your example.

In the sorry state of the restaurant, is the owner profiting above or below $250,000 a year?

What is the income level of the average customer? Which tax plan gives them more money to spend at the restaurant? Including tips, which help keep employees from barking at the owner for a raise.

95% IS a made up number.

Might not be in such bad shape if 95% of the people had a bit more money to spend on eating out here and there. We've tried the other way for the past few years and it doesn't seem to be working. Let's try something else.

You might be right, but one must consider the consequences of the "restaurant" (economy) shutting down... if "restaurant" shuts down then all 3 people involved are screwed, panhandler would need to find a new place to panhandle at, waitress is out of a job, and restaurant owner is out of income too. All 3 are then in pretty hopeless situation, especially considering "restaurants" in other cities (countries) are in similar or even worse financial position...

The bush tax cuts made the rich richer but wages dropped. Sorry tickle down doesn't work.Sara palin taking money from oil companies giving to the citizens of alaska isnt redistributing wealth?

Only counts if Democrats do it.

Try thinking for yourself and doing some research. You really shouldnt base your vote on chain letters and myspace bulletins, which that obviously is.

here is the real answer.


every politician is full of shit, they tell you whatever the polls say you want to hear.


looks at their character, associations, passed voting records, donors


thats when you can predict what their real agenda is.


obama DOES want to redistribute wealth in the layman terms of give more to the poor to help "his people"


read between the lines you fucking sheep

Got to love oversimplification of complex issues by people who clearly don't even understand them in the first place.

So Sarah's hubby belonging to a party that wanted to break away from the united states is ok? Or taking from the money from oil companies and handing out checks isnt redistributing the wealth? OR Mccain taking 50k from Charles Keatings law firm is ok ? Seems a little more redistributing wealth then setting percentages back to clinton rates when fortunes were made and wages were up. Does anyone from the right ever use facts not pundit talking points or show how an actual plan that is better? Wait they dont have a plan I forgot.

the lesser of 2 evils is mccain

im not voting for mccain

im voting against obama

Dude ....

No one is going to take from the rich and give to the poor here. There will be a slight tax increase (or a repeal of tax cuts depending how you look at it) for people in a certain tax bracket, however it's not like this money is going to be funneling directly into the hands of 'poor' people.

how ? Are you not paying attention to the economy?

Thank you also you cant fight terror on the chinese credit card forever.

This post = BRILLIANT

Your judgment of "evil" is inverse to mine.
How did you arrive that McCain is less evil than Obama?
I'm actually quite curious as it's sometimes enlightening reading from both sides.

This post is an excellent illustration that the Republican's and McCain's campaign's use of fear mongering and race baiting does work and how it comes full circle.

So, do you fuckers think that if a Socialist(Obama) gets in the onerous laws against our industry will magically disappear? All of these fucking child protection laws were voted aye's by dems and repub's when they came up, all for the sake of 'protecting children' I'm not a McCain fan, and quite frankly, I am ready to let these democrats take over both houses of congress and the white house just for a sick, evil experiment. See you in two years 5 days beeeatches.

By the way, I thought all the libs moved to canada or aus after 2000? how on earth can Obama win? Progress/Change

You better contact the government and let them know their data is wrong then...

http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/03200.../new06_000.htm

What laws against the industry? They've all been struck down by the Supreme Court when tested. You can thank the liberal leaning justices for that.

The next president could appoint up to three justices. Do you want McCain putting in ultra conservatives that do not consider adult materials to be protected free speech? Things could change real quick around here if that happens.

And let's not forget how the Aussies are getting a mandatory internet filter against all porn and what their government deems "controversial" material. That wouldn't fly in the US...... under the current Supreme Court makeup that is. But who knows what it looks like if McCain appoints the wrong people.