posted October 14, 2008 06:08 PM            

Obama: “It’s not that I want to punish your success, I just want to make sure that everybody that is behind you, that they have a chance for success too. I think that when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/13/spread-the-wealth-swallow-the-crap-sandwiches/

But, Americans don't believe any such thing. Americans are against Socialist policy of taking away from one person to give to another...as government policy.

Americans oppose redistribution of wealth by a very large majority.

June 27, 2008
Americans Oppose Income Redistribution to Fix Economy

Half say the government is doing too much, 43% too little to solve country's problems
by Dennis Jacobe, Chief Economist
PRINCETON, NJ --

When given a choice about how government should address the numerous economic difficulties facing today's consumer, Americans overwhelmingly -- by 84% to 13% --prefer that the government focus on improving overall economic conditions and the jobs situation in the United States as opposed to taking steps to distribute wealth more evenly among Americans.

Lack of Support for Wealth Redistribution Spans Political Party, Income Groups

Americans' lack of support for redistributing wealth to fix the economy spans political parties: Republicans (by 90% to 9%) prefer that the government focus on improving the economy, as do independents (by 85% to 13%) and Democrats (by 77% to 19%). This sentiment also extends across income groups: upper-income Americans prefer that the government focus on improving the economy and jobs by 88% to 10%, concurring with middle-income (83% to 16%) and lower-income (78% to 17%) Americans.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/108445/Americans-Oppose-Income-Redistribution-Fix-Economy.aspx

It's O'Bomber who is out of step with America.

posted October 15, 2008 02:16 AM            

That statement of Obama is clearly marxist.

What a hippo politician this Obama, who does not share his wealth with his brother in Kenya but how dare he panders to masses?

posted October 15, 2008 01:02 PM            

By Jason Szep
Reuters
Tuesday, October 14, 2008; 5:11 PM

BOSTON (Reuters) - The billionaires and others in the wealthiest strata of U.S. society traditionally vote Republican, but that's changing this year, say advisers to the wealthy.

Despite plans to boost tax rates for the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans, Sen. Barack Obama is making the deepest inroads into wealthy voters in more than a decade for any Democratic presidential nominee, suggesting the November 4 election could mark a fundamental shift in voting patterns.

Running out of time to reshape a White House race that appears on the verge of tipping decisively toward Obama, Republican Sen. John McCain also faces a drop in support from a once-reliably Republican segment of society: the wealthy.

"McCain does not enjoy the kind of plurality in the wealthy space that Republican candidates have enjoyed in the past," said Jim Taylor, vice chairman of the Harrison Group, a market research and strategy firm in Waterbury, Conn.

Taylor, who produces a quarterly "Survey of Affluence and Wealth in America," said the wealthy were once a solid Republican majority. "It's not anymore," he told the Reuters Wealth Management Summit on Tuesday, citing the findings of his latest survey of 614 affluent individuals taken September 19-23.

That showed McCain had 40 percent of the "affluent and wealth vote," compared with 33 percent for Obama, and given the recent stock market slide Taylor says he would be surprised if Obama's support hadn't risen further in the past few weeks.

In the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections, in contrast, about 80 percent of the wealthy supported the Republican nominee, Taylor said.

For the wealthiest American households, who have at least $1.6 million set aside each year for discretionary spending, McCain was favored over Obama by 49 percent to 28 percent.

"That may sound like a lot but but there was a time when it was 100 to zero percent," Taylor said.

'SENSITIVITY TOWARD PEOPLE'

Obama's appeal to the wealthy is complicated by his plan to eliminate personal income tax cuts that benefit the rich: Americans earning more than $200,000 a year and married couples earning more than $250,000.

According to Taylor's findings, the wealthy view McCain more favorably on foreign policy and even the economy, an area where Obama enjoys a perceived edge in recent national opinion polls during the current turmoil in financial markets.

"What Obama wins is an understanding of and sensitivity toward people," he said. "And as a general rule, people have agreed at the wealthy end they can afford some more taxes."

Richard Feurtado, head of wealth management at BlackRock Inc, the largest publicly traded U.S. asset management firm, said about 50 percent of his ultra-high net worth clients are Obama supporters. "People do things for all sorts of reasons, and maybe one of them is financial but there are many other reasons for the way people vote," he said.

Some rich Americans expect taxes to rise regardless of who wins the White House race, and some expect it even if the foundering U.S. economy tips into recession.

"Everybody believes that taxes are going up ... no matter who gets elected," said Timothy Vaill, chairman and chief executive of the wealth management arm of Boston Private Financial Holdings, a money-management firm.

Some wealthy foreign investors with big investments in the United States are unnerved by McCain's running-mate, Alaska governor and self-described 'hockey mom' Sarah Palin, said Charles Lowenhaupt, chairman of St. Louis-based Lowenhaupt Global Advisors, which advises ultra-high-net-worth families.

"The non-U.S. wealth-holders I've talked to, in India for example, were feeling very negative on Obama. And all of sudden the Palin thing has flipped that because as naive as Obama looked they think Palin looks more so," he said.

He said wealthy individuals in India are highly critical of Obama's willingness to strike against terrorists in Pakistan without approval from Islamabad.

"They would say 'oh, Obama is terrible.' I just kept running into that when I was there. But when McCain chose Palin, they said 'oh Palin.' They just don't understand the whole culture around her, the 'hockey mom' idea."

(Editing by Gary Hill)

posted October 15, 2008 01:18 PM            

The wealthiest of the wealthy routinely vote demoscat and have for a very long time. The most wealthy in the Congress are demoscats.

Think Buffet, Soros, Lewis and Gates and you begin to get the picture.

When O'Bomber was looking down his long elitist nose at..."those who cling to their guns and religion"...he was talking to the wealthy elitists in San Francisco.

It's utter bullshiiit but I can see where it would be a talking point for O'Bomber supporters in and out of the press...in fantasy land were the truth doesn't matter.

posted October 15, 2008 03:56 PM            

What I said is true and the people I cited are most certainly among the richest on earth and most certainly among the richest in the United States....and they are demoscats, not Republicans.

But why are you attempting to change the subject of this thread acoustic?

posted October 15, 2008 04:06 PM            

IT'S A LEAK! Barack Obama tells Ohio plumber Joe Wurzelbacher he intends to "spread the wealth around."

Last updated: 1:37 pm
October 15, 2008

WASHINGTON - You won't find it in his campaign ads, but Barack Obama let slip his plans to become a modern-day Robin Hood in the White House, confiscating money from the rich to give to the poor.

Conservatives yesterday ripped Obama after he was caught on video telling an Ohio plumber that he intends to take the profits of small-business owners and "spread the wealth around" to those with lesser incomes.

The fracas over Obama's tax plan broke out Sunday outside Toledo when Joe Wurzelbacher approached the candidate.

Wurzelbacher said he planned to become the owner of a small plumbing business that will take in more than the $250,000 amount at which Obama plans to begin raising tax rates.

"Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?" the blue-collar worker asked.

After Obama responded that it would, Wurzelbacher continued: "I've worked hard . . . I work 10 to 12 hours a day and I'm buying this company and I'm going to continue working that way. I'm getting taxed more and more while fulfilling the American Dream."

"It's not that I want to punish your success," Obama told him. "I want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success, too.

Then, Obama explained his trickle-up theory of economics.

"My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

Critics said Obama let the cat out of the bag.

"It's clear that his main goal is redistribution of wealth, not growth," said Andy Roth with the anti-tax group Club for Growth. "He's perfectly happy to destroy wealth as long as he can redistribute it."

Obama has been meticulous, Roth said, to conceal the "socialistic" nature of his tax plans. "But every once in a while, he lets it slip," he said.

Republican candidate John McCain yesterday charged that Obama's comment was telling.

"This explains how Senator Obama can promise an income-tax cut for millions who aren't even paying income taxes right now," he said in Pennsylvania.

"My plan isn't intended to force small businesses to cut jobs to pay higher taxes so we can 'spread the wealth around.' My plan is intended to create jobs and increase the wealth of all Americans."

Meanwhile, a New York Times/CBS poll last night showed Obama moving into a commanding 53-39 percent lead.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10152008/news/politics/obama_fires_a_robin_hood _warning_shot_133685.htm

posted October 15, 2008 04:09 PM            

I don't think Buffet and Gates are stupids.
Perhaps they simply don't care after achieving or probably they think America will never go Russia's route. But heh who would have thought banks would be nationalized some day in America, but it did happen.

posted October 15, 2008 04:22 PM            

Paul Krugman? He's mentioned in the article, but he's not the one who did the study I posted. Do you dispute what Krugman wrote? On what grounds would you dispute what he wrote? Do you have any facts to the contrary? (I know how you hate facts) How about that study? No comment? That's on par with what I'd expect.

I'm not attempting to change the subject. In fact, your opening post doesn't even deal with your own subject. You seem to interpret Obama's words to imply wealth redistribution, but he's released no such plan, and indeed intends to give people tax breaks. Are you going to show how he's taking from one to pay out to the other? And where's your Gallup info for the typical Republican plan of borrowing from communists to finance government and stimulus packages? I bet that's real popular with the people as well, wouldn't you say?

posted October 15, 2008 04:35 PM            

And also check his 'global poverty tax' which is going to cost tax payers a lot of money:
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-global-tax-proposal-up-for-senate-vote/

posted October 15, 2008 06:51 PM            

More Proof of O'Bomber's Marxist Economic Policy

Of course my first post on this thread talked about what is classic Marxist economic policy. Don't blame me if you don't recognize..."to each according to his need, from each according to his ability" in O'Bomber's excuse for taxing Joe the Plumber more..."to spread the wealth around".

That's explicit in what O'Bomber said to Joe the Plumber.

I think your real problem and the problem with other O'Bomber supporters is that YOU want to be on the receiving end of someone else's wealth..instead of creating your own.

Listen acoustic, Paul Krugman isn't an authority on anything at all. To use an article which referenced Krugman is to invoke laughter in those who hear or see it..because Paul Krugman is a political hack posing as a journalist and economist and not to be taken seriously.

posted October 15, 2008 11:15 PM            

What O'Bomber is proposing is out and out theft from some citizens to give to other citizens.

Beyond that, O'Bomber is lying through his teeth when he says 95% of Americans will get a tax cut under his plan. O'Bomber and his so called economic advisors never heard of "Sub Chapter S" Corporations and have no idea what a small business really is. About 40% of Americans pay no income tax to begin with. How in the hell can a tax cut be given to those who pay no income taxes.?

{{{{DRUDGE POLL}}}} WHO WON THE FINAL PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE?...

MCCAIN
73% 69,845

OBAMA
25% 24,145

NEITHER
1% 1,352

Total Votes: 95,342

posted October 16, 2008 02:41 PM            

quote:

---

Of course my first post on this thread talked about what is classic Marxist economic policy. Don't blame me if you don't recognize..."to each according to his need, from each according to his ability" in O'Bomber's excuse for taxing Joe the Plumber more..."to spread the wealth around".

---

Yeah, I don't recognize it, because he didn't say it. It's not even close to explicit in what Obama said. That's a total mischaracterization.

quote:

---

I think your real problem and the problem with other O'Bomber supporters is that YOU want to be on the receiving end of someone else's wealth..instead of creating your own.

---

Well, I know you happen to be wrong there.

quote:

---

To use an article which referenced Krugman is to invoke laughter in those who hear or see it..because Paul Krugman is a political hack posing as a journalist and economist and not to be taken seriously.

---

posted October 16, 2008 07:11 PM            

I must say I was quite pleased with the debate last night. Despite McCain's lack of consistency and skill in the communicative arts, I think he did a pretty good job at putting out some of the concerns that many have been holding under their breaths.

I just feel like making a few points here about some of the things I've heard around my environment lately. (This isn't directed at anyone here.) No matter what people are saying right now, the McCain campaign's focus on Obama's ties to Bill Ayers and ACORN are neither a) racist nor b) petty. The people have a right to question the character of a candidate running for the presidency and the questioning of Senator Obama's character is not a result of racism or the desire to smear him (although it cannot be denied that smears seem to be unavoidable by both parties). Rather, this questioning is Obama's own fault for the clear, observable differences between what he says and what we know. Anyone running for the presidency should be well-prepared for a rigorous, public scrutinizing of their past.

The bulk of what I hear in discussions is that Obama "has been cleared" of his connections with Ayers and ACORN. It stumps me as to how certain people sound when they say this, as if they knew the man. As if the information that they have so astutely digested was so perfect and pristine that it would be impossible for them to have less than 100% faith in it.

My point: If you really don't care whether or not Obama is even remotely associated with Ayers or ACORN, then, for heaven's sake, just admit that already. Just don't go around like you have God's gift of seeing the innermost soul of every human being when you really don't. And don't act surprised or shocked when you find yourselves confronted by those of us who do care.

posted October 16, 2008 07:39 PM            

I also know that Republican investigators into some of the ACORN cases have been of the opinion that ACORN didn't do anything wrong. As ACORN has said, they were defrauded by the people hired to canvass for legitimate, unregistered voters. When ACORN receives questionable registrations, it flags them for state officials.

posted October 16, 2008 10:39 PM            

It is those snickering smile some watched during the last debate that tells you he is guilty of everything you accuse him of.

And its not one or two events that makes him suspicious of his intents but a series of them.

posted October 17, 2008 10:57 AM            

..."to each according to his need, from each according to his ability"

quote:

---

Yeah, I don't recognize it, because he didn't say it. It's not even close to explicit in what Obama said. That's a total mischaracterization....acoustic

---

That's not a mischaracterization of what O'Bomber said at all. It's explicit in what he said about taking money from one person to give to another...spreading the wealth around....by the misapplication of tax revenues. You really do have a problem conceptualizing don't you acoustic.

"I think your real problem and the problem with other O'Bomber supporters is that YOU want to be on the receiving end of someone else's wealth..instead of creating your own."

quote:

---

Well, I know you happen to be wrong there....acoustic

---

Of course I'm not wrong acoustic. What other possible reason could anyone have for supporting O'Bomber than to be on the receiving end of government handouts? Certainly, there couldn't possibly be anyone voting for O'Bomber because of his experience...O'Bomber having no experience, judgment or qualifications whatsoever to be President.

"To use an article which referenced Krugman is to invoke laughter in those who hear or see it..because Paul Krugman is a political hack posing as a journalist and economist and not to be taken seriously."

quote:

---

I would venture that most people have no idea who he is, so I believe your premise is completely off-base. If you can only try to smear his name without speaking to what he said, then I think its clear that he probably said something you don't have the ability to refute. That would be logical....acoustic

---

Because Krugman is a political hack and also ignorant...at best...economist, "most" people who know a thing about Krugman never bother to read what he has to say. Having done so in the past gives rise to the correct analysis that Krugman has nothing of worth to add to any political or economic discussion. Krugman does have credibility in some circles of the brain dead...those who rely on the NY Times for their news. But, those are people who freely admit that only 21% of them believe all or even most of what the Times prints. That puts the other 79% of Times readers among the brain dead cadres who know the Times is lying to them...but read the lies anyway....because it fits their own leftist ideology.

quote:

---

I do know with 100% certainty that Obama has never been charged with any illegal activity in association with either ACORN or Ayers. I also know that Ayers isn't in jail for breaking any law in modern times. There seems to be lots of suggestion that Obama is influenced adversely by all these people, but its not Obama's campaign that had to remove his phone to ensure that he stayed on point....acoustic

---

You continue to establish new thresholds for voting for presidential candidates acoustic...and I mean new low thresholds...as in..."going down".

Incredible that a reason TO vote for someone is because he hasn't been charged or convicted of a crime. Wow, now that's a great recommendation for voting for a candidate...a new low.

Bill Ayers is not in prison for the simple reason the FBI and perhaps Justice Dept screwed up in the gathering of evidence against him. That's it, that's all. His guilt or innocence is not in question in the bombing of the Pentagon, bombing of Police Headquarters in NY and bombing of the Capitol in D.C.

Why don't we let Ayers establish his guilt by his own words as he bragged about his bombing campaign and declaration of war against the United States.

"Other charges against Ayers and Dohrn were dropped because the evidence was tainted by the Nixon Administration's illegal wiretaps. Ayers put it well: "Guilty as hell, and free as a bird. It's a great country."

This is O'Bomber's pal, fellow board member on 2 boards of leftists funneling money to the most extreme leftist groups in the United States and pal for whom O'Bomber wrote a blurb for one of his books...praising Ayers.

As for the pukes at ACORN who are attempting to overthrow the US election process...they're guilty as hell too and O'Bomber is joined at the hip with ACORN. He's funneled millions of dollars to this bunch of street thugs posing as "community organizers". He's also directly contributed $832,000 in campaign cash to ACORN in an attempt to steal this election. ACORN has been working hard on O'Bomber's behalf to do just that.

But now, it's not just local city, county and state agencies who are investigating ACORN. The FBI has joined in and are investigating ACORN for linkage between the various chapters in voter registration fraud. That's very bad news because if there's linkage then there's "felony conspiracy" and that's a very big felony NO, No.

Officials: FBI investigates ACORN for voter fraud
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93RNJOG2&show_article=1

Hahaha...and the worst you can say about McCain is that...someone took his cell phone away so he would stay on message.

BUT

O'Bomber must take his teleprompter where ever he goes campaigning or he stutters, stammers...ahhhs, uhhhhs and hmmmms in front of his adoring audiences. O'Bomber even took his teleprompter campaigning in Colorado and set it up in an outdoor rodeo ring...to stay on message and eliminate all those ummms, ahhhhs and hmmms.

NosiS is right. America doesn't know nearly enough about O'Bomber in general. He's lied about his connection with Ayers, about his racist anti America pastor, about his political mentor Frank Marshall Davis..a member of the Communist Party USA and now, he's lying about his connection to ACORN and about his connections to those who caused the meltdown in the financial markets...including his own connection which is a monumental connection.

O'Bomber refuses to release his medical records. O'Bomber refuses to release his university records...including his records from Harvard. Not one scrap of documentation has been provided on his grades, papers he wrote and indeed, there's not one scrap of paper to be found from his time as President of the Harvard Law Review. Law Review...a review of court cases...what they mean, what the justices positions were, what laws they cited in their decisions etc...reviews..as in written reviews preserved for posterity for other law students. The general opinion about O'Bomber's silence on his academic record is that his papers and opinions were so radical as to immediately disqualify him in the minds of reasonable voters from ever getting anywhere near the levers of power in the political process in the United States. Otherwise, why hide them?

posted October 17, 2008 12:29 PM            

quote:

---

It's explicit in what he said about taking money from one person to give to another...spreading the wealth around....by the misapplication of tax revenues.

---

Let me point something out to you: when you put as much money as you can into the hands of the rich, and claim that it's going to trickle down, you're talking about "spreading the wealth around," are you not?

"Spreading the wealth around" can mean anything. It does NOT necessitate your interpretation of it whatsoever. That's an absolutely unobjective take on what he said.

There is ample evidence that poverty goes down under Democratic presidents, and that's a good thing. When poverty's down there's less need for government help, is there not?

quote:

---

Of course I'm not wrong acoustic. What other possible reason could anyone have for supporting O'Bomber than to be on the receiving end of government handouts?

---

Alright Jwhop, since you seem to think you know something, what handout am I going to get from an Obama presidency? Peace? Freedom? The ability to travel without concern for the fact that I'm an American? A balanced Supreme Court? You can't get much more wrong.

quote:

---

Krugman does have credibility in some circles of the brain dead...those who rely on the NY Times for their news. But, those are people who freely admit that only 21% of them believe all or even most of what the Times prints. That puts the other 79% of Times readers among the brain dead cadres who know the Times is lying to them...but read the lies anyway....because it fits their own leftist ideology.

---

And still not a single word refuting Krugman. You really know how to argue a point there: Try to smear a guy, mischaracterize a Pew poll you've gotten your ass handed to you on multiple times over years, and never say a word to refute what the journalist said. Really lends well to your credibility, doesn't it?

quote:

---

You continue to establish new thresholds for voting for presidential candidates acoustic...and I mean new low thresholds...as in..."going down".

Incredible that a reason TO vote for someone is because he hasn't been charged or convicted of a crime. Wow, now that's a great recommendation for voting for a candidate...a new low.

---

The utter lack of reasoning ability is so bizarre in you.

Number One: I would be remiss to encourage voting for someone convicted of a crime. That would be a "low."

Number Two: Stating that a person hasn't been convicted or even investigated for any crimes with regard to one's associations does not logically constitute a request for another to vote a certain way.

quote:

---

He's also directly contributed $832,000 in campaign cash to ACORN in an attempt to steal this election.

---

That's just a retarded assumption, but I suspect everyone with any curiosity to know as much.

quote:

---

Hahaha...and the worst you can say about McCain is that...someone took his cell phone away so he would stay on message.

---

That's the worst I can say? Are you sure about that?

I'm letting you get away with the vast majority of what you say not because it's right, but because I know it will help you accept an Obama presidency easier if your hatred is complete, and then we'll see the full extent of your hypocrisy. You will act in complete and utter irony as you treat Obama in exactly the way that disgusted you while you defended your President.

posted October 17, 2008 01:41 PM            

quote:

---

Let me point something out to you: when you put as much money as you can into the hands of the rich, and claim that it's going to trickle down, you're talking about "spreading the wealth around," are you not?

"Spreading the wealth around" can mean anything. It does NOT necessitate your interpretation of it whatsoever. That's an absolutely unobjective take on what he said...acoustic

---

What utter bullshiiit acoustic, but that's your stock in trade and your only apparent asset.

The conversation O'Bomber had with the Plumber was specifically about taxes. Got that acoustic, specifically about taxes and the fact that under an O'Bomber administration, his taxes were going to be increased when he bought the plumbing business he was contemplating.

That was the context in which O'Bomber spoke of "spreading the wealth around"...which is a Marxist economic policy which hurts business, robs citizens of jobs, decreases wealth overall and throws millions on the alter of big government. I don't really know what's wrong with your logic circuits acoustic but I would check for short circuits.

As to your suggestion that poverty goes down under demoscat administrations, that's utter bullshiiit too. It's apparent you've never heard of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society and "War on Poverty". The only apparent result was to put more people in the "poverty column" after throwing trillions of US tax dollars at the alleged problem....every dollar of which was first stolen from it's rightful owner to give to someone else. This is the O'Bomber tax/economic plan and it's the straight Marxist plan.

You're entitled to your opinions acoustic but you're not entitled to your own set of facts. Factually, the government "does not put money into the hands of the rich". The rich create their own wealth because acoustic, the government does not create wealth but rather consumes wealth. I despair over the intellectual level of anyone who lives in the United States who would vote for a social, economic and government Marxist like Barack Hussein O'Bomber.

Everything you need to know about O'Bomber's tax policy and what America thinks about redistribution of wealth tactics as practiced by Marxists like O'Bomber are contained within this thread. You should try reading it...and get in step with America. That means getting out of step with O'Bomber the Marxist.

Who knows what you think you're going to get from an O'Bomber administration acoustic? Food stamps, payoff of student loans, welfare, free health insurance...as opposed to health care. Who knows but O'Bomber is making promises which total more than 1.3 trillion dollars in NEW spending and I'm sure you see something in there for you...as do all O'Bomber supporters...and it's not that you see "good government" coming out of an O'Bomber/Pee-lousi/Reid administration. This is after all the demoscat congress with only 9% job approval ratings.

I have no need to specifically refute Krugman acoustic. He's simply a nut posing as a journalist and economist. He couldn't find his ass with both hands and anyone who attempts to use his bullshiit immediately discredits him/herself. 79% of respondents did not find the NY Times highly credible, that's a fact and one you cannot spin. If that same poll were taken again today, their credibility rating would be even lower.

My credibility is intact acoustic. Yours is in tatters. I'm the one who predicted what was going to happen to the NY Times and the rest of the leftist.."can't be believed news media" and I predicted it before it happened. The fact you can't find your own ass when it comes to analysing data is "unfortunate" but a fact nevertheless.

Defending O'Bomber with a comment that he hasn't been convicted of a crime shows just how low you set the threshold for voting for a candidate, low indeed.

Hahaha, O'Bomber did give $832,000 to ACORN and then attempted to hide the purpose for which it was given. He recorded it as stage, sound and lighting preperation on the FEC report he filed....to conceal it's real purpose which was to register as many people to vote for him as possible by a group who for years has been in trouble for voter registration fraud. This is not by any means the first election ACORN has attempted to fix with phony voter registrations. Millions of dollars and man hours are now being expended by election officials attempting to unravel the voter fraud which ACORN has committed on O'Bomber's behalf. Stealing elections is a political specialty in O'Bomber's politically corrupt city of Chicago.

You're not "letting" me get away with anything at all acoutic. You're powerless and unable to argue credibly with anything I say...as your comments here amply demonstrate.

Now, you're free to say whatever you wish about McCain/Palin. Say away. So far, all I've seen is the trivality of your argument against McCain. "Someone took his cellphone away". Wow, that's very, very, very significant.

The truth is that Governor Sarah Palin is much more qualified to actually be President than either the Marxist O'Bomber or the Automatic Gaffe Machine O'Biden.

posted October 17, 2008 03:05 PM            

McCain wasn't my choice as the Republican nominee but he's head and shoulders above O'Bomber. Everyone who isn't a Socialist, Marxist, Leninist, Stalinist or Maoist down to and including Daffy Duck is head and shoulders above O'Bomber as a candidate for President.

MCCAIN DEFENDS THE PLUMBER
REMARKS IN MIAMI, FL
Fri Oct 17 2008 13:45:02 ET

It's great to be here in Miami. Florida is a must-win state on November 4th, and with your help, we're going to win Florida, and bring change to Washington, DC. We had a good debate this week. You may have noticed-- there was a lot of talk about Senator Obama's tax increases and Joe the Plumber. Last weekend, Senator Obama showed up in Joe's driveway to ask for his vote, and Joe asked Senator Obama a tough question. I'm glad he did; I think Senator Obama could use a few more tough questions.

The response from Senator Obama and his campaign yesterday was to attack Joe. People are digging through his personal life and he has TV crews camped out in front of his house. He didn't ask for Senator Obama to come to his house. He wasn't recruited or prompted by our campaign. He just asked a question. And Americans ought to be able to ask Senator Obama tough questions without being smeared and targeted with political attacks.

The question Joe asked about our economy is important, because Senator Obama's plan would raise taxes on small businesses that employ 16 million Americans. Senator Obama's plan will kill those jobs at just the time when we need to be creating more jobs. My plan will create jobs, and that's what America needs.

Senator Obama says that he wanted to spread your wealth around. When politicians talk about taking your money and spreading it around, you'd better hold onto your wallet. Senator Obama claims that wants to give a tax break to the middle class, but not only did he vote for higher taxes on the middle class in the Senate, his plan gives away your tax dollars to those who don't pay taxes.

That's not a tax cut, that's welfare. America didn't become the greatest nation on earth by redistributing wealth; we became the greatest nation by creating new wealth.

This is the choice that we face. These are hard times. Our economy is in crisis. Americans are fighting in two wars. We face many enemies in this dangerous world, and many challenges here at home.

The next President won't have time to get used to the office. He won't have the luxury of studying up on the issues before he acts. He will have to act immediately. And to do that, he will need experience, courage, judgment and a bold plan of action to take this country in a new direction. We cannot spend the next four years as we have spent much of the last eight: waiting for our luck to change. We have to act immediately. I said it at the last debate: I'm not George Bush; if Senator Obama wants to run against George Bush, he should have run for President 4 years ago. We need a new direction now. We have to fight for it. I've been fighting for this country since I was seventeen years old, and I have the scars to prove it. If I'm elected President, I will fight to take America in a new direction from my first day in office until my last. I'm not afraid of the fight, I'm ready for it.

I'm not going to spend $700 billion dollars of your money just bailing out the Wall Street bankers and brokers who got us into this mess. I'm going to make sure we take care of the people who were devastated by the excesses of Wall Street and Washington. I'm going to spend a lot of that money to bring relief to you, and I'm not going to wait sixty days to start doing it.

I have a plan to protect the value of your home and get it rising again by buying up bad mortgages and refinancing them so if your neighbor defaults he doesn't bring down the value of your house with him.

I have a plan to let retirees and people nearing retirement keep their money in their retirement accounts longer so they can rebuild their savings. I will protect Social Security so that retirees get the benefits they have earned, and I will bring both parties together to fix Social Security so that it is there for future generations.

I have a plan to hold the line on taxes and cut them to make America more competitive and create jobs here at home.

Raising taxes makes a bad economy much worse. Keeping taxes low creates jobs, keeps money in your hands and strengthens our economy.

The explosion of government spending over the last eight years has put us deeper in debt to foreign countries that don't have our best interests at heart. It weakened the dollar and made everything you buy more expensive.

If I'm elected President, I won't spend nearly a trillion dollars more of your money, on top of the $700 billion we just gave the Treasury Secretary, as Senator Obama proposes. Because he can't do that without raising your taxes or digging us further into debt. I'm going to make government live on a budget just like you do.

I will freeze government spending on all but the most important programs like defense, veterans care, Social Security and health care until we scrub every single government program and get rid of the ones that aren't working for the American people. And I will veto every single pork barrel bill Congresses passes.

If I'm elected President, I won't fine small businesses and families with children, as Senator Obama proposes, to force them into a new huge government run health care program, while he keeps the cost of the fine a secret until he hits you with it. I will bring down the skyrocketing cost of health care with competition and choice to lower your premiums, and make it more available to more Americans. I'll make sure you can keep the same health plan if you change jobs or leave a job to stay home.

I will provide every single American family with a $5000 refundable tax credit to help them purchase insurance. Workers who already have health care insurance from their employers will keep it and have more money to cover costs. Workers who don't have health insurance can use it to find a policy anywhere in this country to meet their basic needs.

If I'm elected President, I won't raise taxes on small businesses, as Senator Obama proposes, and force them to cut jobs. I will keep small business taxes where they are, help them keep their costs low, and let them spend their earnings to create more jobs.

If I'm elected President, I won't meet unconditionally with the Castro brothers, while they keep political prisoners in jail, stifle free media and block free elections in Cuba. When I am President, we are going to pressure the Cuban government to free their people. The day is coming when Cuba will be free. I will open new markets to goods made in America and make sure our trade is free and fair. And I'll make sure we help workers who've lost a job that won't come back find a new one that won't go away.

If I'm elected President, I won't make it harder to sell our goods overseas and kill more jobs as Senator Obama proposes. I will open new markets to goods made in America and make sure our trade is free and fair. And I'll make sure we help workers who've lost a job that won't come back find a new one that won't go away.

The last President to raise taxes and restrict trade in a bad economy as Senator Obama proposes was Herbert Hoover. That turned a recession into a depression. They say those who don't learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them. Well, my friends, I know my history lessons, and I sure won't make the mistakes Senator Obama will.

If I'm elected President, we're going to stop sending $700 billion to countries that don't like us very much. I won't argue to delay drilling for more oil and gas and building new nuclear power plants in America, as Senator Obama does. We will start new drilling now. We will invest in all energy alternativesÊ-- nuclear, wind, solar, and tide. We will encourage the manufacture of hybrid, flex fuel and electric automobiles. We will invest in clean coal technology. We will lower the cost of energy within months, and we will create millions of new jobs.

Let me give you the state of the race today. We have 18 days to go. We're 6 points down. The national media has written us off. Senator Obama is measuring the drapes, and planning with Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid to raise taxes, increase spending, take away your right to vote by secret ballot in labor elections, and concede defeat in Iraq. But they forgot to let you decide. My friends, we've got them just where we want them.

What America needs in this hour is a fighter; someone who puts all his cards on the table and trusts the judgment of the American people. I come from a long line of McCains who believed that to love America is to fight for her. I have fought for you most of my life. There are other ways to love this country, but I've never been the kind to do it from the sidelines.

I know you're worried. America is a great country, but we are at a moment of national crisis that will determine our future. Will we continue to lead the world's economies or will we be overtaken? Will the world become safer or more dangerous? Will our military remain the strongest in the world? Will our children and grandchildren's future be brighter than ours?

My answer to you is yes. Yes, we will lead. Yes, we will prosper. Yes, we will be safer. Yes, we will pass on to our children a stronger, better country. But we must be prepared to act swiftly, boldly, with courage and wisdom.

I know what fear feels like. It's a thief in the night who robs your strength. I know what hopelessness feels like. It's an enemy who defeats your will. I felt those things once before. I will never let them in again. I'm an American. And I choose to fight.

Don't give up hope. Be strong. Have courage. And fight.

Fight for a new direction for our country. Fight for what's right for America. Fight to clean up the mess of corruption, infighting and selfishness in Washington.

Fight to get our economy out of the ditch and back in the lead.

Fight for the ideals and character of a free people.

Fight for our children's future.

Fight for justice and opportunity for all.

Stand up to defend our country from its enemies.

Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight. America is worth fighting for. Nothing is inevitable here. We never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history.

Now, let's go win this election and get this country moving again.
http://drudgereport.com/flash1mm.htm

posted October 17, 2008 04:14 PM            

Mentally challenged man says his vote wasn't right
Posted: Oct 14, 2008 05:50 PM EDT
Updated: Oct 14, 2008 06:20 PM EDT
Assisted voting takes an alleged wrong turn
2:26

By Jennifer Emert
October 14, 2008

ALBANY, GA (WALB) - There are allegations of voter fraud, as a Dougherty County family claims the vote of a mentally challenged relative was stolen.

They say the adult day rehab program where Jack Justice attends took him to vote, without the family's permission. What's worse is Justice says the person helping him wouldn't cast the ballot for his choice for President.

Jack Justice has been voting since he turned 18. Typically his family takes him to their neighborhood precinct. This time Primus Industries, his adult day rehab program, took him to vote. His family was shocked, but what shocked them more was that Jack claims that his aide commandeered his vote.

"They told me to vote for Obama, I said no I wanted to vote for McCain," said Jack Justice, a voter.

Jack Justice says the person helping him, selected Obama's name. His sister says the family is often asked to sign a permission slips for trips, but for this they were never notified.

"No permission slips, no nothing, he just came home and said he had gone," said Nancy Justice, Jack's sister.

We questioned election officials about the procedure, who say they recall the group coming in to vote and an aide was helping the individuals, but they must sign an oath that they'll cast the ballot however the voter prefers.

"So it plainly says the person should tell the person how they want to vote and then they help them mark it," said Carolyn Hatcher, Dougherty County Elections Supervisor.

Election officials say they can't follow people into the booth to see what happens. We contacted the Albany Area Community Service Board who oversees Primus Industries. They say they do their best to protect the safety, treatment, and care of the individuals in their programs. They also said they'll look into the allegations and conduct an internal investigation if necessary. Nancy Justice is just upset the incident happened.

"For me it was kind of pushing it to the limit there to get him to vote for someone in particular who they wanted him to vote for," said Nancy Justice.

Election officials say the family's only option is to file a challenge to the election results. The Justice's are considering their options.

posted October 17, 2008 04:35 PM            

Likewise, just because Obama is running on the Democrat ticket does not mean it is impossible beyond doubt that he is not the "nice" guy he plays himself out as. Neither do any of his, imo, less important superficial attributes.

How anyone can want to open their wallets and blindly give their money to the government is beyond me. The GOVERNMENT is NOT NEEDY PEOPLE. Welfare programs have INCREASED poverty over the decades. A large percentage of that money is POCKETED or "lost" in BUREAUCRATIC processes.

Obama CANNOT give the people he is promising tax breaks to actual tax breaks ... because those people ALREADY DO NOT pay taxes.

Is this really new information or are some Americans experiencing massive denial?

Earning $100 and having $50 of those earnings forcibly taken away and given to some else without any possibility of choice on your part is not freedom or liberty or even charity ... it is tyrannical theivery. That economic "plan" only serves to keep people poorer. (1) There comes a point when anybody who earns whatever the current government definition of "alot" is at that time automatically is thrust back into a lower income bracket regardless of their work and (2) there also comes a point when people just don't want to aspire to higher positions because they will be penalized for their efforts. Advances in technology, science, and whatever you want to toss in the pot suffer without HEALTHY competition not only in the larger market but also between different businesses even small ones. Aren't these the same people who wholeheartedly agree that Walmart's practices are downright nasty? Yet you're looking forward to a Walmart style nation ... Walmart style healthcare, Walmart style monopoly, etc. with a plan like Obama's and every other socialist in Dem clothing. No competition leaves you with 1 option and little progress or innovation. These things snowball and you have to try to forsee how far reaching this idiotic plan really is.

It is @ssbackwards policy. The money is not going to the poor. It goes to the government who can do with it as they please. Maybe some people are naive enough to believe that Obama really is here to save the world because he says so despite his record. So, let's say he is elected now and ends his 4 yr term ... let's go one better and say 8 yr term. And what if, oh, I don't know, next couple of elections down the line some evil Republican "steals" another election. How about someone remarkably similar to your nemesis, GW Bush? You have to think long term. WOULD YOU WANT SOMEONE LIKE THAT TAKING ALL THAT MONEY AND REDISTRIBUTING IT AS THEY SAW FIT?

Even if you want to paint Obama as a righteous Robin Hood figure, you can't. Robin Hood did not take money for himself to amass his own wealth. He was not a wealthy figure to begin with. He and his little band of friends gave money to their community. In fact, who was the antagonist in the story? Do you remember how the people became abysmally poor in the first place? Remember John? And the taxes?

[Referring to the most well known and evolved version of the original ballads and the numerous views that stress the subversive points of the tale.]

Really, we cannot base our theories about this kind of a plan on the Hope that Obama and every one who comes after him is a saint. Even if you do want to look at it that way for your own peace of mind and sensibilities, stop for a minute and see just how awful that plan would be if an un-ideal leader was in charge.

Just really horrifies me. Give more power to the government. Give more money to the government. Take away more power from the states. Do away with annoying checks and balances. Forget "antiquated" ideas like the Republic and the electoral college because it's "too hard to understand" and because, well, who really cares what farmers and other "out in the middle of nowhere people" want or need. Pretend that the government is a loving father figure who demands firm obedience and has all the control ... like how God is to some people and how Hitler was to others. Don't question your leaders. Trust them to provide you with a decent home, to tell you how many children you can have, to provide you with the right education, to safeguard a career for you that suits you. All you have to do is give them free reign and especially so with your money. Watch tv and keep shopping. Don't worry about the poor or needy in your community because, duh, the government is taking care of things. No worries. Just be happy.