And McCain chooses...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgredline

Raising taxes is not the answer...By raising taxes there will be more layoffs, less jobs, less people spending money, more small businesses closing the doors and more product being manufactured in China and other third world countries...

---

I think the opposite is true but of course I doubt either of us is an economics expert.
I base my conclusion on the state of our economy NOW which is the result of Bush's economics and McCain's are only slightly different.

We'll find out soon, won't we.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frog

I think the opposite is true but of course I doubt either of us is an economics expert.
I base my conclusion on the state of our economy NOW which is the result of Bush's economics and McCain's are only slightly different.

We'll find out soon, won't we.

---

Well if History does have something to teach us is this. The fastest way to fix a bad economy is to have a war. Well the war (which I am not happy with as stated before) is here. Once the war is over ''officially'' as in we leave, then you will see the economy get fixed..Until then, regardless of who is in office, the economy will not get better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgredline

Sounds good, what is him 233 :p :D

---

Hymn 233 in Baptist Praise & Worship (the UK denominational hymn book) is:

When I survey the wondrous cross by Isaac Watts :D

Cheers
Mike the hymn announcer :aureola:

I think the Republicans should move away from Reagonomics. It clearly doesn't work. They need a new economic plan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Didache

Hymn 233 in Baptist Praise & Worship (the UK denominational hymn book) is:

When I survey the wondrous cross by Isaac Watts :D

Cheers
Mike the hymn announcer :aureola:

---

That is one of my favorite all time hymms. It is a real shame that many churches are moving away from classic hymms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg McCary

I think the Republicans should move away from Reagonomics. It clearly doesn't work. They need a new economic plan.

---

Wow, have not heard that term in a long time. Certainly it needs to be modified to fit todays day and age.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgredline

Wow, have not heard that term in a long time. Certainly it needs to be modified to fit todays day and age.

---

Well, it is really called supply side economics, or Laffer's curve http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve .. Basically it is a theory that if you cut taxes that they extra $ the rich have will be invested and that the extra business will be taxed and will balance out the loss of taxes caused by the tax cut. Balancing it out through volume instead of a high rate.

Did it work? Not IMO. Reagan shot up the deficit in a massive way. It was ~ $60 B when Carter was in office. I believe it was ~ 200 B a year under Reagan. It was even worse under Bush 1.

I believe that taxes should be as low as possible. But I most strongly believe that you MUST BALANCE YOUR BUDGET (!) I can't afford to live in a mansion on a cliff overlooking the Pacific, so I don't. I don't pretend that I can afford that - I'd go bankrupt! You can't just massively cut taxes like GWB did and keep spending as they always do. What do you think will happen if you do that...? Exactly what has happened - massive, MASSIVE deficits. Good God.. And I thought the Repubs were supposed to be great businessmen or something?.. they come in and drive the deficit right through the sky. Seems to me they simply want it both ways - low taxes AND massive spending to hide the fact that we aren't paying for what we buy. Push off the debt to the future, let it go up and up and up till it will bankrupt us. Destroy the environment by denial and fighting any attempt to tie science to global warming. Don't worry - right before we all implode or die, God will reappear on our planet and take us to heaven. (sorry for being a little dramatic, but it is Friday !)

But I guess we're all to blame - we keep going through politicians until we find one that will tell us what we want to hear :rolleyes:

I found this site today that fact-checks many of the current politicians' statements being made at the conventions, in interviews etc.

Who is lying? Who is telling half-truths? Who has "flip-flopped" on the issues?

Take a look:
<a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/">Politifact.com</a>

This is the most trusted source.
http://www.factcheck.org/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walterick

I found this site today that fact-checks many of the current politicians' statements being made at the conventions, in interviews etc.

Who is lying? Who is telling half-truths? Who has "flip-flopped" on the issues?

Take a look:
<a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/">Politifact.com</a>

---

This organization is known for not only leaning left, but falling down to the left...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GB1

Well, it is really called supply side economics, or Laffer's curve http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve .. Basically it is a theory that if you cut taxes that they extra $ the rich have will be invested and that the extra business will be taxed and will balance out the loss of taxes caused by the tax cut. Balancing it out through volume instead of a high rate.

Did it work? Not IMO. Reagan shot up the deficit in a massive way. It was ~ $60 B when Carter was in office. I believe it was ~ 200 B a year under Reagan. It was even worse under Bush 1.

I believe that taxes should be as low as possible. But I most strongly believe that you MUST BALANCE YOUR BUDGET (!) I can't afford to live in a mansion on a cliff overlooking the Pacific, so I don't. I don't pretend that I can afford that - I'd go bankrupt! You can't just massively cut taxes like GWB did and keep spending as they always do. What do you think will happen if you do that...? Exactly what has happened - massive, MASSIVE deficits. Good God.. And I thought the Repubs were supposed to be great businessmen or something?.. they come in and drive the deficit right through the sky. Seems to me they simply want it both ways - low taxes AND massive spending to hide the fact that we aren't paying for what we buy. Push off the debt to the future, let it go up and up and up till it will bankrupt us. Destroy the environment by denial and fighting any attempt to tie science to global warming. Don't worry - right before we all implode or die, God will reappear on our planet and take us to heaven. (sorry for being a little dramatic, but it is Friday !)

But I guess we're all to blame - we keep going through politicians until we find one that will tell us what we want to hear :rolleyes:

---

Jimmy Carter was the worst President we have ever had. What a Joke... LOL.....

McCain has said he will appoint judges with the intent of overturning Roe v Wade. But remember that if Roe v Wade is overturned, it will simply defer abortion laws back to the states, where each one will make up its mind (which in most cases they already have.)

Looks like both sites are taking it to both parties pretty hard :) Thanks for the additional resource.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgredline

Wow, have not heard that term in a long time. Certainly it needs to be modified to fit todays day and age.

---

Call it what you will. The Republican economic plan has never changed or worked. Make the rich, richer and the money will trickle down to the middle class. Don't get me wrong. I liked much about Mr. Reagan. He was a true world leader and had everyone in the world eating out of his hands for the most part. But he ruined the American economy and Mr. Clinton had it going back into the right direction. I voted for both. I hang my hat with neither party. A good President can have both sides meet, Republicans and Democrats and work through tough decisions and move in a positive direction, Mr. Clinton had that ability. A rare one. Except for his very bad judgement on a personal level, I remember eight years of prosperity in the economic area. Bill also had great admiration world wide as a leader. The current Pres has the whole world hating America. Our credibilty as a Nation has fallen. Due to bad judgement on the White Houses part.
But in the very words of President Reagan. "Are you better off now than four years ago?" I say no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walterick

McCain has said he will appoint judges with the intent of overturning Roe v Wade. But remember that if Roe v Wade is overturned, it will simply defer abortion laws back to the states, where each one will make up its mind (which in most cases they already have.)

---

I heard Bill Clinton make that very statement on a radio talk show about three years ago.
I think you are right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg McCary

Call it what you will. The Republican economic plan has never changed or worked. Make the rich, richer and the money will trickle down to the middle class.


Don't get me wrong. I liked much about Mr. Reagan. He was a true world leader and had everyone in the world eating out of his hands for the most part. But he ruined the American economy and Mr. Clinton had it going back into the right direction. I voted for both. I hang my hat with neither party. A good President can have both sides meet, Republicans and Democrats and work through tough decisions and move in a positive direction, Mr. Clinton had that ability. A rare one. Except for his very bad judgement on a personal level, I remember eight years of prosperity in the economic area. Bill also had great admiration world wide as a leader. The current Pres has the whole world hating America. Our credibilty as a Nation has fallen. Due to bad judgement on the White Houses part.
But in the very words of President Reagan. "Are you better off now than four years ago?" I say no.

---

no, no no....Bill Clinton was the benefactor of two things...
1) He was there to take the Credit for what Reagan and Bush 1 did with ''reaganomics'' It worked...
2) Bill was fortunate that he was at the helm during the .com explosion...

George W Bush had the misfortune of taking over the White house after those crazy evil Muslims attacked us and killed innocent women, children and men...

Whoever wins the white house next will also benefit with a great economy as this war will end. History tells us that after every war, the economy goes up...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walterick

McCain has said he will appoint judges with the intent of overturning Roe v Wade. But remember that if Roe v Wade is overturned, it will simply defer abortion laws back to the states, where each one will make up its mind (which in most cases they already have.)

---

Yes and no.
True, that the intention is to overturn Roe Vs Wade...If it then becomes federal Law, then the states have can't do anything about it...

This next president as I said earlier will likely appoint the next three supreme ct justices... I fight against Barack because the thought of what those Liberal Judges who make Law from the bench instead of interpreting the law, scares me...and Osama will appoint liberal judges as his voting record affirms...He is after all the most radically liberal senator, even more than Ted Kennedy and John Kerry and that is saying allot....

I don't remember the economy going up after Viet Nam or Korea. And actually it went down for a while after wwii as all of a sudden all those defense jobs were gone.

Common claim for conservatives to say Clinton inherited Reagan and Bush economic gains. All I remember is ramapant inflation in the Reagan years.

The national debt went through the roof during the Reagan years. Bill started to get it under control and also had a balanced budget. We haven't had one since. The tide has turned again and the national debt is out of control again. I agree in a couple of areas, GW really got a raw deal when he first went into office with the terrorist, but with that said he over reacted lead by false information and his Texas gun slinging additude got us right smack in an middle of an unwinable war.
But on the other hand his conservative Supreme court appointments were right on. That is one area we need to be tough and conservative

Also right now McCain seems to be distancing himself from the Repulican party. Wonder why? If he could get somewhere in the middle of it all and try to bring the parties together he would get my vote. In my opinion the biggest problem is the polarization of the two parties and their lack of compromise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg McCary

The national debt went through the roof during the Reagan years. Bill started to get it under control and also had a balanced budget. We haven't had one since. The tide has turned again and the national debt is out of control again.

---

A few things to note here. If not for Ronald Reagan, we would have a pathetic military. Remember star wars (not the movies)
Secondly, it was ''bill clinton'' who made China a military power. He provided them with ''OUR'' technology, our missile guidance system...He was an extremely corrupt president with a trail of murders left behind him...

Quote:

---

I agree in a couple of areas, GW really got a raw deal when he first went into office with the terrorist, but with that said he over reacted lead by false information and his Texas gun slinging additude got us right smack in an middle of an unwinable war.

---

Well, I really do believe Saddam had WMD's and where moved to Syria before the attack. As far as the war being un-winable, guess what. We are winning and will win it....Having said that, I believe this war is a disaster..The Mistake is that this war was being run by Congress instead of our military leaders like it is now...

Quote:

---

But on the other hand his conservative Supreme court appointments were right on. That is one area we need to be tough and conservative

---

I have often said that ''atleast'' he got this right..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg McCary

Also right now McCain seems to be distancing himself from the Repulican party. Wonder why? If he could get somewhere in the middle of it all and try to bring the parties together he would get my vote. In my opinion the biggest problem is the polarization of the two parties and their lack of compromise.

---

I agree and it is good that he is distancing himself from the ''republican'' party because I do believe they have lost their way, but right now the alternative is the democratic party who has ''really'' lost their way and are the Liberal party now...

Wasn't it the democratic congress who got Rumsfeld out and made this a military leadership? The one good thing a rather do-nothing congress has accomplished.

Anyway, JG, why should China not have military technology? Why do you think that makes Clinton crooked and murderous? I think your sentiments are bordering on racism. And to call Clinton 'corrupt' in wake of the last 2 terms of presidency, where do you get off? I'm not a Clinton fan myself, but I'm just wondering where any sense of objectivity has gone. Are you capable of the same harsh criticisms towards a republican politician?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anbesol

I think your sentiments are bordering on racism.

---

I am on my way out right now, (photo hunt with my son) but I would like you to explain this to me. I will answer your complete post in detail when I return, but this statement you made, you made out of ignorance. Please explain....

Maybe I misunderstood what you were saying. What is wrong with Chinese knowing our technology? It sounded like you see China as an American enemy, and as a lesser country. That was what I was talking about as 'racism'.

I'd also like to ask, what does the word 'win' even mean?? Winning in Iraq means what? Al-Qaeda becomes completely annihalated and destroyed? You know that Al-Qaeda is still recruiting - the US occupation has rallied the Al-Qaedas base and cause. Dont you think that Iraq needs to take their own country into their own hands and take care of their own civil war?