I'm seriously considering voting for Obama...

Question for you. Is it really uniting two sides by having a democrat as president as well as having a democrat majority in both houses? Sure it would be easier to get things done along party lines, but would this scenario really bring both sides together? It seems to me like this scenario would lead to more divisiveness in congress because there would be no reason to cooperate with one party in charge of the presidency and both houses. I am just trying to understand your reasoning behind this statement.

 

Well, Obama being a Democrat definitely has the easier task than McCain would, but that's kind of my point - I don't think McCain would accomplish anything. It's not simply because he's a Republican, but because I don't think he's good enough to overcome the circumstances.

 

You cannot punish the ones who grease the wheels of the economy. Why is that so hard to understand?

 

Maybe we're just screwed....:rofl:

[MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju4bo26VfYQ[/MEDIA]

 

If there is anything that I'm absolutely certain of, it is that my understanding of economics is not lacking.

The tax burden is one which we must all carry - the super rich & big business are no different.

 

When it comes to income taxes the top 1% of income earners pay 40% of all income taxes. Why do you think this is not enough share of the tax burden?

"The last time tax rates were as high as Obama wants them -- the Carter years -- the rich paid only 19% of all income taxes, half of the 40% share they pay today. Why? Because they either worked less, earned less, or they found ways to shelter income from taxes so it was never reported to the IRS as income."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121659695380368965.html?mod=opinion_main_review_and_outlooks

View attachment 11385

 

And yet Obama defines the super wealthy as individuals earning 200k, and couples earning 250k. Since so many small businesses file as individuals, they will be taxed higher as well.

Post #8 of this thread showed that Obama has received a great deal more $ from "big business" for this campaign than McCain. The democrats own the house and the senate. Not sure how the boogey men republicans/big business can rule the roost. More like the dems/big business will rule it now.

And yet Obama has no significant record of this and McCain does. For example, this latest financial crisis. Obama said, "call me and I will come if needed". House dems told McCain to go ahead and get out of town when he stopped his campaign(speeches, fundraisers, tv ads, etc). McCain actually got the republicans involved in the process of this bailout.

Dems want to now censure Lieberman for supporting McCain. How's that for bi-partisanship? Forget about voting your conscience, you must vote the party line or be punished.

Pelosi herself stood up today and while asking for support on the bailout vote, and blasted repubs for the entire sub-prime mess. This is the moron heading up the majority party in the house.

Barney Frank made a sarcastic remark about the hurt feelings of 12 repub congressmen(the number needed to pass the bill), but ignored that 12 democratic congressmen on his very own committee(House Financial Services Committee) chose to vote against this bill. 95 democrats voted against it total. Wonder why that is? Because the dems are so interested in bi-partisanship?

If you thought a repub prez and congress was bad, wait until you see Part II, starring the dems. We are in big trouble.

This is the party that Obama is leading, and bi-partisanship is not the mantra. For what it's worth, congress scares me a lot more than the prez does, because they make every law that governs us, and take every cent we pay in taxes. The prez gets $ only if they allow it.

The more I look at this upcoming govt, the more I want a stalemate and that will require two parties being involved.

 

And you call yourself undecided.