Cooler and saner minds will remember the broken republican promises of 2000 and 2004. And they'll remember the Iraq debacle . . . and the broken economy . . . and illegal immigration . . . the deficit spending . . . loss of American respect, prestige, and influence . . . the falling dollar . . . the numerous republican legal and sexual scandals . . . and that Osama bin Ladin still runs free. Who do you think they will hold accountable? I'm damned if I can understand why hard-working middle-class people like yourself feel like they have to kiss the asses of the idle billionaires. It's you that's being left to pay the bills that they evade. You wouldn't know a socialist if he jumped up and bit you on the ass. I realize that McCain is not a fascist, but I'll call him one if we must be childish about it.
Nope...this one is the lowest ever!...and falling. :wink: Who keeps blocking the appointment of judges?...oil drilling?
Cain and Bush are right on every issue. They are talking about reforming the Social Security System. It is Obama who does not want change. Making the tax cuts permanent would give the American consumer more disposable income which is beneficial to the economy - which is consumer-driven. Since the surge there has been significant progress in Iraq. Al-Sadr has announced he will disarm most of his militia and focus on social problems. Recently there have been indications that if progress continues to be made, American troops could start to be withdrawn in 2010. This is what Obama wants to change?
Clinton did not reform welfare; the Republicans did. It was part of the Contract with America. The Welfare Reform Bill was introduced under the first President Bush. The fact that a very reluctant Clinton signed it does not make it his.
For someone that claims to be a moderate I find it peculiar that you give Clinton credit for welfare reform without mentioning the greater role the Republican controlled congress had in it. http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Alt/alt.autos.toyota/2006-08/msg04211.html
The people who will decide this election will :911: . I save my animosity for those who contribute nothing yet demand to derive the most benefit. Billionaires didn't get that way by being idle. I know what a Socialist is. I also recognize smug arrogance when I see it.
that's were you're wrong. i dont have the #s, so dont ask, but i'd bet a strong majority of superrich inherited boatloads. take paris's dad (and mccain contributor) for example.
You forgot the Kennedy family and Chelsea Clinton! Seems you are being one sided and pointing the finger at rich republicans and not democrats! Btw, You don't have the #s to back it up? Why bring it up?
And your point is . . . ? In fact, most of them got rich by inheriting it and get richer by their money doing the work. If you know what a socialst is, then show me any Obama statemetn where he advocates socialism. Show me any Obama action where he practices socialism. Better re-read that definition first . . .
Paris' Dad (how is decision to contribute to McCain fits in here, is a mystery to me) and others who were born into wealth should not be scorned because they didn't "earn" their wealth. They still have to maintain it. If they are lazy bums who only want to spend and have fun, the money wont last. It all smacks of envy to me. They understand that going into Iraq was a good idea at the time; they understand that war is hell and not cheap and are not going to risk having a neophyte at the trigger; they don't believe America has lost prestige, influence etc. because those who feel that way are not friends anyway; they know that destroying the taliban and weakening al qaeda is far more important than watching some skinny old has been swing from a tree. http://www.extremeink.com/awtk/2007/11/barack-obama-explains-socialism.html
