YellowLinesandArmadillos

Ah, more the Republican McFear... I am sooo scared.... and your ptsd boy!

Normally I would except I am not portraying myself as a Walmart Mom... Back to the old Limousine Repigs at it again, tax cuts for the Rich, we support the middle class in name only.... more McSame trickle down economics.... You see how stupid this is and how it opens herself up for political attacks that McCain and his folks are more of the same! And for Dev/Null, the RNC is saying that it is going to auction the items off after the election.... I know what you want you sick @#$#@#

No I think that is inaccurate, he has a brain, but it has a weekly power outage a la Rich stadium once a week and gets disconnected from his mouth which still runs on backup power. Palin on the other hand has her brain stuck in the permafrost in AK and despite being in the real American for over two months, it has not yet thawed.

Is that the Limousine Republican in you talking or are you holding out for the Capital Gains tax reduction under McSame.

Originally, I thought this was answering a young student, but she was actually talking to the press, referring to a student's question after she had visited a school and she got it wrong.

You protest too much, I think that is your way of asking for a date... What happened you hit three years old and then just missed the rest of the maturation process???/

The sad part is that neither one of these guys necessarily wanted the fame and exposure, nor understand the full implications of it in a bare knuckles no holds bar contest for President. This is take no prisoners meat grinder DC politics. Why do you think Bush looks so old right now... it takes a toll, in 6 months he will look 5 years younger. Keep a low profile in these deals unless you are ready to be seared. Both sides are doing it and so are we. But we are not on live TV, big difference. Also, part of the reason I would be concerned about a McCain Presidency. I don't like his impetuousness, but dislike Palin's political instincts what there is of them even less.

That would be rich... I will be falling out of my chair if that happens.

And McCain hasn't, your reply is disingenuous, Keating 5, Abramoff, Oxy boy and there are others, he named a running mate whose husband was a Member of the Alaska Secessionist Party, despite their denials.

Radical Militant with ties to terrorists...pfft. ack.... Oh that is General Colin Powell.

Oh Shi#$%, they are all like Palin. No wonder they wanted the bridge to nowhere. So they could say nowhere is over there, not here....

Ironic as this is, the anti-Palin crazy protestors trying to block Palin's motorcade in Grand Junction, CO yesterday. My question is have you ever seen such a Limousine Right Wing escort! Not exactly representative of the Average Joe. I just find it ironic that Palin and her husband a government subsidized fisherman and snowmobile racer and McCain who got his wealth the old fashion way, he married it, claim they have an infinity to the average Joe, whereas Obama came from nothing and worked his way up the ladder. So who is the real example of the rags to riches and who is of the high brow the silver spoon in their mouth crowd. Please, unbelievable the Obama has not exploited this. Probably in part because of McCain's service supported by Daddy's shirt tails until he was captured. He then became a bit of a prodigal son, but recently has returned to being a punk on the campaign trail. I have been trying to find the best way to describe McCain for a while... Petulant Child? Grumpy Old Man?, Nope he is just a punk who hasn't truly left his teens when he doesn't get his way.

It is a pattern???? Plaid maybe?

Senator Chuck Hagel... if not him Bill the Cat.... ack thptt!

I believe in personal responsibility, yes. But using tax policy to balance out, not penalize rich people, who because of their richness are able to concentrate wealth and take advantage of economies of scale that those of lesser means can only dream about, is a good thing. It helps spread out wealth, provide for a freer market and a more vibrant economy. It is the difference between trickle down which has been proven not to work and a help up. The money still ends up back in rich peoples hands but it helps other obtain wealth. This is what was practiced under Clinton and we saw one of the greatest economic expansions in our country's history. So you tell me which works better???? I agree you can go too far with each deal and end hurting what you are trying to fix, everything in moderation, but we are far from that. When the rich pay far less than the marginal rate because of tax loopholes, do you think this a bad thing. Do you think the rich folks because of their privilege and ability pay more, or should the majority of the tax burden be stuck on the middle class as it currently is. http://blogs.wsj.com/informedreader/2007/0...hifts-downward/

Nice post, I agree, but that is what makes this country great, the framers made this generally vague so we could argue and adjust depending on the circumstances. Whatever works, if it is good to redistribute funds at a certain point to help out the country do it, if we need tax breaks do it. If reducing the debt and deficit become important, do it. If it works, you can call it whatever you please, labels don't really matter, but the Repigs and many Dems think they do.

As long as I could staple both of their mouths shut, I would tap either, Palin looks better, but Backman has those ice blue eyes

"General Welfare" If wealth becomes too concentrated, than the welfare of this country suffers. Spreading wealth provides for the "General Welfare of the United States. Very simple when you think about it.

Taxes by definition of the service they provide for do just what you say, move money from one segment of the population to another. So how is that socialistic???? So paying for a military is socialistic, it transfers wealth, paying a company to make and pave roads is socialistic, it transfers wealth? Who pays for those things and at what rates is politics. Control of pricing on the other hand is socialistic, regulating the service is not or if it is according to your broad based definition, it is written into our Constitution..."provide common defense and the general welfare of the United States."

What about the Constitutional definition of what taxes at the Federal Level are for???? Article I Section 8: Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; To borrow money on the credit of the United States; To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes; To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States; To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures; To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States; To establish post offices and post roads; To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

I agree on most of what you say too, and I don't disagree with your analysis. I don't believe in taxing the hell out of people and with current payroll taxes, sales tax policies at all levels of gov't and state tax policies, along with loop holes at the federal level, the middle class is getting taxed the hell out of as you say and the poor and wealth are skating by. I just think the tax burden has shifted in a bad way. To pay for the war and deal with the short term economic downturn folks with money should pay a little more. Also, from simple indifference curves from econ 102, you get that the middle class doesn't have a choice but to be the small business creators and owners, why tax the hell of them like we are now??? McCain's answer is to give Cap Gains tax relief. In this economy, that and a quarter won't get me a cup of coffee. Give something I can chew on. Obama at least exempts small business and provides relief to middle class wage earners. I think that you must strive for a balance, even if you never or it isn't even possible to achieve. Cynical I am too, that doesn't mean I give up. I too appreciate the civil give and take too.

P.S. The American Way is eminently practical, (whatever works). Hence the McCain campaign throwing anything and everything against the wall in a practice of the scientific method to see what will work to beat Obama

I believe in personal responsibility, yes. But using tax policy to balance out, not penalize rich people, who because of their richness are able to concentrate wealth and take advantage of economies of scale that those of lesser means can only dream about, is a good thing. It helps spread out wealth, provide for a freer market and a more vibrant economy. It is the difference between trickle down which has been proven not to work and a help up. The money still ends up back in rich peoples hands but it helps other obtain wealth. This is what was practiced under Clinton and we saw one of the greatest economic expansions in our country's history. So you tell me which works better???? I agree you can go too far with each deal and end hurting what you are trying to fix, everything in moderation, but we are far from that. When the rich pay far less than the marginal rate because of tax loopholes, do you think this a bad thing. Do you think the rich folks because of their privilege and ability pay more, or should the majority of the tax burden be stuck on the middle class as it currently is. http://blogs.wsj.com/informedreader/2007/0...hifts-downward/

It is unbelievable to me how during the silly season, the last month of a campaign, how folks can do such obviously stupid things. Acorn's voter registration screw up and now Backman suggesting that we should have an UnAmerican Committee style investigation. The McCain camp knows no bounds in whipping its crazy's into a frenzy and Acorn's paying workers without c hecking their work is at the very least stupid and probably criminal. Now we have this socialism accusation which is crazy. Ask Bernie Sanders what a socialist is. Obama doesn't fit the bill. But McCain would have you believe that tax and spend is okay.

Okay, how many times did he vote to lower taxes??? Probably on the same bill. This stat is disingenuous. I know the Republican P.R. machine has put this forward and the Dems have never handled it well. P.S. How would you suggest paying for the largest increase in our debt, deficit and the Iraq war, let the masses pay for while we bail out Wall Street? Oh yeh, the Republican mantra "Deficits Don't Matter" lets just borrow and spend till we run this country into the ground. Correct me if I am wrong, but who passed the Legislation that got them unelected but managed to create surpluses during Clinton's Admin. Who managed to create smaller bureaucracies at the Federal Level... Need a clue, not the Republicans. Clinton's White House Managed to Reduce the Department of Commerce and Agriculture by of 30,000 employees each, let alone what was done to Judiciary, HUD, Education, DOE and other areas of government. Please, Republicans need to get honest with their uncontrolled borrow and spending habits.