Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

What if I am right about Obama?


  • Please log in to reply
85 replies to this topic

#31    BlindMessiah

BlindMessiah

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,066 posts
  • Joined:21 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 October 2008 - 01:45 AM

Fluffybunny on Oct 12 2008, 01:59 AM, said:

What is the difference between bush and obama?

Hardly anything. Obama or McCain and we get four more years of the same.


#32    MasterPo

MasterPo

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,975 posts
  • Joined:30 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Long Island, NY

  • So sue me....

Posted 12 October 2008 - 01:46 AM

Fluffybunny on Oct 11 2008, 09:37 PM, said:

Also take the time to look at Wiretapping without a warrant and the information that is coming out now regarding how that has been abused.


And again let me see the articles of how many political opponents have been tapped? (remember it was the Clintons who removed classified FBI files of their opponents!)

Let me see how many business deals have been leaked because of tapping?

This goes back to what I said sometime ago about the Constitution not being a suicide pact. Going by your thinking it's OK to let a terrorist carry out an attack rather than possibly violating his rights. Oh no. We can't have that!!


Quote

Perhaps people being taken to foreign countries to be "interrogated"? Or being held for years without being charged without a crime?


How many of your co-workers, neighbors, friends, family have disappeared?

I don't argue for one moment the great risk of the potential for abuse (which is one of the reasons I oppose Obama because Democrates have a long proven history of such abuses). But actual abuse I have not seen.



The Po File - As told to MasterPo by MasterPo

Have the courage to read it.

#33    nickoli

nickoli

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 310 posts
  • Joined:15 Apr 2007
  • Gender:Male

  • I think it better to do right, even if we suffer in so doing, than to incur the reproach of our consciences and posterity.

Posted 12 October 2008 - 01:48 AM

MasterPo on Oct 11 2008, 08:39 PM, said:

Oh, here we go!!!

You people (and by that I mean you and other Liberals) are wonderful.

We MUST have a bailout bill NOW!!!

But then rip Bush to shreds for every sentence and paragraph in it. As if he wrote every line in it.

Call your Congressman if you don't like it.

Just can't win for loosing.


I did call my congressman both of them and I spoke personally to a senator about the bailout the people as a whole spoke loud and clearly to the house with a resounding 75 to 1 against passage of the bill,they passed it anyhow thereby shredding the constitution period fact disprove it.

We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Thomas Jefferson

#34    BlindMessiah

BlindMessiah

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,066 posts
  • Joined:21 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 October 2008 - 01:52 AM

MasterPo on Oct 12 2008, 02:46 AM, said:

This goes back to what I said sometime ago about the Constitution not being a suicide pact. Going by your thinking it's OK to let a terrorist carry out an attack rather than possibly violating his rights. Oh no. We can't have that!!

Actually it is a suicide pact. However, if we were to actually follow it, we'd never come close to committing suicide.


#35    BlindMessiah

BlindMessiah

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,066 posts
  • Joined:21 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 October 2008 - 01:54 AM

MasterPo on Oct 12 2008, 01:39 AM, said:

Oh, here we go!!!

You people (and by that I mean you and other Liberals) are wonderful.

If you oppose a socialist bailout bill you're liberal?


#36    MasterPo

MasterPo

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,975 posts
  • Joined:30 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Long Island, NY

  • So sue me....

Posted 12 October 2008 - 01:58 AM

BlindMessiah on Oct 11 2008, 09:52 PM, said:

Actually it is a suicide pact. However, if we were to actually follow it, we'd never come close to committing suicide.



There's a section in the Constitution (can't find it at the moment) that says only those powers listed herein are allowed by the Federal government; All others are the venue of the states.

If we went by that 75% of the Federal Law would be null and void.


The Po File - As told to MasterPo by MasterPo

Have the courage to read it.

#37    Fluffybunny

Fluffybunny

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,136 posts
  • Joined:24 Oct 2003
  • Gender:Male

  • "Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst."
    Thomas Paine

Posted 12 October 2008 - 02:04 AM

MasterPo on Oct 11 2008, 08:46 PM, said:

And again let me see the articles of how many political opponents have been tapped? (remember it was the Clintons who removed classified FBI files of their opponents!)

Let me see how many business deals have been leaked because of tapping?

This goes back to what I said sometime ago about the Constitution not being a suicide pact. Going by your thinking it's OK to let a terrorist carry out an attack rather than possibly violating his rights. Oh no. We can't have that!!




How many of your co-workers, neighbors, friends, family have disappeared?

I don't argue for one moment the great risk of the potential for abuse (which is one of the reasons I oppose Obama because Democrates have a long proven history of such abuses). But actual abuse I have not seen.

You would gladly give up every right that the founding fathers and so many have died to give to you wouldnt you? just so that *maybe*some information might be gleaned. Oh wait, you might write something about terrorists...there goes that right...those guns...those could be used to cause terror, better give them up... oh the slippery slope of cowardice.

it makes me sick to think that people would so willingly give away that which was so hard to get.

Too many people on both sides of the spectrum have fallen into this mentality that a full one half of the country are the enemy for having different beliefs...in a country based on freedom of expression. It is this infighting that allows the focus to be taken away from "we the people" being able to watch, and have control over government corruption and ineptitude that is running rampant in our leadership.

People should be working towards fixing problems, not creating them.

#38    BlindMessiah

BlindMessiah

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,066 posts
  • Joined:21 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 October 2008 - 02:09 AM

Fluffybunny on Oct 12 2008, 03:04 AM, said:

You would gladly give up every right that the founding fathers and so many have died to give to you wouldnt you? just so that *maybe*some information might be gleaned. Oh wait, you might write something about terrorists...there goes that right...those guns...those could be used to cause terror, better give them up... oh the slippery slope of cowardice.

it makes me sick to think that people would so willingly give away that which was so hard to get.

You're going to get really nauseous over the next decade then.


#39    BlindMessiah

BlindMessiah

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,066 posts
  • Joined:21 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 October 2008 - 02:11 AM

MasterPo on Oct 12 2008, 02:58 AM, said:

There's a section in the Constitution (can't find it at the moment) that says only those powers listed herein are allowed by the Federal government; All others are the venue of the states.

If we went by that 75% of the Federal Law would be null and void.

We're called the United States for a reason. They limited the federal government to prevent the very things that are happening today. Like the republicans bid to remove civil liberties and the democrats bid to install socialism. The purpose of federal law is to ensure that state law doesn't violate the constitution; not to violate the constitution itself.


#40    SoCrazes

SoCrazes

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,312 posts
  • Joined:01 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:midwest usa

Posted 12 October 2008 - 02:16 AM

MasterPo on Oct 12 2008, 02:58 AM, said:

There's a section in the Constitution (can't find it at the moment) that says only those powers listed herein are allowed by the Federal government; All others are the venue of the states.

If we went by that 75% of the Federal Law would be null and void.

Article I establishes the legislative branch and discusses the things Congress can't do.

"The unexamined life is not worth living." - Socrates

#41    AROCES

AROCES

    Forum Divinity

  • Banned
  • 16,312 posts
  • Joined:07 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 12 October 2008 - 02:17 AM

HKCavalier on Oct 11 2008, 06:27 PM, said:

We don't have a free market in this country--we have, and have had for decades, corporate socialism; wealth redistribution UP.

There are more millionaires now than ever before and a lot of successful business people who started from scratch. You just to seem to be sour you are not one of them



#42    SoCrazes

SoCrazes

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,312 posts
  • Joined:01 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:midwest usa

Posted 12 October 2008 - 02:19 AM

MasterPo on Oct 12 2008, 02:58 AM, said:

There's a section in the Constitution (can't find it at the moment) that says only those powers listed herein are allowed by the Federal government; All others are the venue of the states.

If we went by that 75% of the Federal Law would be null and void.

The 10th Amendment, I believe, states that the Fed has delegated, or expressed powers, whereas the states have reserved powers (anything not expressly given or delegated to the fed falls under the powers of the state).

"The unexamined life is not worth living." - Socrates

#43    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 10,170 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 12 October 2008 - 02:19 AM

MasterPo on Oct 12 2008, 01:41 AM, said:

Who taking away the fruit from the lessers??

Taxation is.

Quote

Are you trying to sweet-talk me? wink2.gif

I'd love to see a flat across the board 20% or so flat tax for all!!

But that will never happen because there is too much power for the Demcrates to redistribute the wealth and foster class envy.

A flat rate of tax at the top of the scale, in my opinion, is the fairest way to do it - The main issue is Capital gains tax - at 15% - which is what many of the richest people pay, on a large percentage of their income, and distorts the overall tax percentages paid by the rich and by the poor.

I don't like McCain's idea of giving the richest the highest percentage tax cuts. I don't like Obama's idea of giving the richest a higher tax burden. I think if you're going to throw money into tax cuts, then you should target it at those with the highest consumption, which is the poorest.

The current stepped system looks like this:

$0 - $7,825            @ 10% of the amount over $0
$7,825 - $31,850     @   $782.50 plus 15% of the amount over 7,825
$31,850 - $77,100  @ $4,386.25 plus 25% of the amount over 31,850
$77,100 - $160,850 @  $15,698.75 plus 28% of the amount over 77,100
$160,850 - $349,700 @ $39,148.75 plus 33% of the amount over 160,850
$349,700 - no limit @ $101,469.25 plus 35% of the amount over 349,700

Given the choice - I'd have liked to see the candidates use the money to move the progressive steps upwards, but with the top of the scale staying where it is, squashing the 160,850 to 349,700 band, and perhaps introduce a new lower band $0 - $4000 and make it 5% - or even completely tax free, if they had the budget.

That way, everyone would have benefited, with the poorest benefiting the most. The closer the 15% step and the top step are to being together - the closer you are to a flat rate of tax.


#44    SoCrazes

SoCrazes

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,312 posts
  • Joined:01 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:midwest usa

Posted 12 October 2008 - 02:22 AM

AROCES on Oct 12 2008, 03:17 AM, said:

There are more millionaires now than ever before and a lot of successful business people who started from scratch. You just to seem to be sour you are not one of them

It isn't the amount, it is the disparity that has ticked people off.  In the 1980s, the ratio of pay between CEO to average wage-earner was 32-1.  Today that ratio is 420-1.  It isn't about being sour, it is about playing fair.  For a trickle-down econ system to work, their must be reinvestment.  420-1 is not a good sign of reinvestment. This is the major reason why we are in the mess we're in.

"The unexamined life is not worth living." - Socrates

#45    SoCrazes

SoCrazes

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,312 posts
  • Joined:01 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:midwest usa

Posted 12 October 2008 - 02:24 AM

Yes we have one of the highest taxes for the rich; however, after considering the loopholes, we have one of the world's lowest.

"The unexamined life is not worth living." - Socrates




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users