Lay Off My Wife

[spoonbill]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

Faux patriotism is not a real issue.

Social Security is a real issue. I look forward to an honest President who will warn me rather than scare me. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080518/ap_on_el_pr/democrats;_ylt=AtE39qhbHasW4dnJatwhnnqs0NUE

As a boomer, I am fearful the amount promised me by our government will not be there for me.

Name the new 7 states and the reason for you inserting them into this thread.

If you are planning on government, i.e. ME, taking care of you when you are old, you are a very sad person.  "The amount promised you" is a small fraction of the amount stolen from you by your government.  Don't forget that!  

I've paid over 2.5 million lifetime dollars to my government in the form of Social Security.  I will probably only see 300k back.  

You have drank the cool-aid and are singing the mantra, but it's obvious you carry no understanding!

[rwarn17588]

quote:Originally posted by spoonbill

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

Faux patriotism is not a real issue.

Social Security is a real issue. I look forward to an honest President who will warn me rather than scare me. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080518/ap_on_el_pr/democrats;_ylt=AtE39qhbHasW4dnJatwhnnqs0NUE

As a boomer, I am fearful the amount promised me by our government will not be there for me.

Name the new 7 states and the reason for you inserting them into this thread.

If you are planning on government, i.e. ME, taking care of you when you are old, you are a very sad person.  "The amount promised you" is a small fraction of the amount stolen from you by your government.  Don't forget that!  

I've paid over 2.5 million lifetime dollars to my government in the form of Social Security.  I will probably only see 300k back.  

You have drank the cool-aid and are singing the mantra, but it's obvious you carry no understanding!

Considering this is the same poster who made the incredible claim that the federal deficit is "imaginary," I'll give that rant the attention it deserves.

But the fact is that most people receive more money from Social Security benefits than they put in during their lifetimes.

And, frankly, people receive a lot of other benefits from the taxes the government collects -- Medicare, Medicaid, good highways, education, college grants, unemployment benefits ... I could go on and on.

To suggest the government is "stealing" from you and you're getting nothing in return is wrong.

[custosnox]

First off, let me state that I am registered as a republican, though I am not a hard core or mainstream republican.  I do my best to step back and look at any issue from the broadest veiwpoint, and come to a fair discision on it, and now what one party or the other tries to push on me.  

Now that that is out, and since the whole thing about racism has come up, I will put my two cents in on it.  I have yet to make up my mind how I will vote, but things do not look good for Obama for it.  I have several reasons for this, and yes, race is one of them.  Not because I don't think that a black man (or woman) can't be a good president, but because he has ran too much of his campaign on the fact that he is (half)black.  This, in itself, I think, adds to the racist views of America.  Because someone wants to be treated differantly because of their race ("vote for me because you want to empower a black man" is wanting to be treated differant based on race)it promotes a speration of race.  Now if he would have gotten up there and said "vote for me, and yes, I know, I'm black. What about it?" I might be a little more prone to vote for him, but he has blundered in other ways that still would make me reconcider voting for him, in addition to what type of person he comes off to me as being.  So yes, him being black can cost votes, but not always because the voter is racist.

[spoonbill]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

quote:Originally posted by spoonbill

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

Faux patriotism is not a real issue.

Social Security is a real issue. I look forward to an honest President who will warn me rather than scare me. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080518/ap_on_el_pr/democrats;_ylt=AtE39qhbHasW4dnJatwhnnqs0NUE

As a boomer, I am fearful the amount promised me by our government will not be there for me.

Name the new 7 states and the reason for you inserting them into this thread.

If you are planning on government, i.e. ME, taking care of you when you are old, you are a very sad person.  "The amount promised you" is a small fraction of the amount stolen from you by your government.  Don't forget that!  

I've paid over 2.5 million lifetime dollars to my government in the form of Social Security.  I will probably only see 300k back.  

You have drank the cool-aid and are singing the mantra, but it's obvious you carry no understanding!

Considering this is the same poster who made the incredible claim that the federal deficit is "imaginary," I'll give that rant the attention it deserves.

But the fact is that most people receive more money from Social Security benefits than they put in during their lifetimes.

And, frankly, people receive a lot of other benefits from the taxes the government collects -- Medicare, Medicaid, good highways, education, college grants, unemployment benefits ... I could go on and on.

To suggest the government is "stealing" from you and you're getting nothing in return is wrong.

Oh you remember.  How sweet!
I don't mean to offend your religion, but government run social security does not pay out more except to support those who paid very little to begin with.  Anyway, why would you think this a good thing?

I said nothing of any other taxes, I was just speaking of SS.  It's a bad system that allows government to steal from it to fund other interests.  If it continues to exist, it must be separate, and therefore private.

But, I don't have to prove this point, If you are reliant on this system it will make it's own point eventually.  Good luck!

I am fortunate enough to have provided for my own comfortable retirement.  I feel sorry, and in many cases angry, when I see my friends trying to live on government beans, when they could have been very comfortable, had they not bought into the myth that SS would take care of them.

[rwarn17588]

quote:Originally posted by spoonbill

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

quote:Originally posted by spoonbill

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

Faux patriotism is not a real issue.

Social Security is a real issue. I look forward to an honest President who will warn me rather than scare me. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080518/ap_on_el_pr/democrats;_ylt=AtE39qhbHasW4dnJatwhnnqs0NUE

As a boomer, I am fearful the amount promised me by our government will not be there for me.

Name the new 7 states and the reason for you inserting them into this thread.

If you are planning on government, i.e. ME, taking care of you when you are old, you are a very sad person.  "The amount promised you" is a small fraction of the amount stolen from you by your government.  Don't forget that!  

I've paid over 2.5 million lifetime dollars to my government in the form of Social Security.  I will probably only see 300k back.  

You have drank the cool-aid and are singing the mantra, but it's obvious you carry no understanding!

Considering this is the same poster who made the incredible claim that the federal deficit is "imaginary," I'll give that rant the attention it deserves.

But the fact is that most people receive more money from Social Security benefits than they put in during their lifetimes.

And, frankly, people receive a lot of other benefits from the taxes the government collects -- Medicare, Medicaid, good highways, education, college grants, unemployment benefits ... I could go on and on.

To suggest the government is "stealing" from you and you're getting nothing in return is wrong.

Oh you remember.  How sweet!
I don't mean to offend your religion, but government run social security does not pay out more except to support those who paid very little to begin with.  Anyway, why would you think this a good thing?

Because it keeps retired people from going into poverty.

I mean, that's one of the real success stories that few people talk about. The Social Security system has kept millions of elderly people from being on the poverty rolls. Back in the old days, elderly people who didn't have a nest egg, often for no fault of their own, had to keep working until they dropped, or move in with their children. Social Security offers the elderly a lot more flexibility and freedom. I see that as a good thing.

It seems like you've done well enough for yourself, so I don't know why you're bitter about paying more than some people.

[midtownnewbie]

I just found this link on another forum, I have no idea if it's true or not but it's definitely interesting...  If it's true, depending on when it's released it could potentially impact the democratic nomination process or the election.

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/19/obama-freakout-over-michelle-video-the-ticking-whitey-time-bomb/

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by midtownnewbie

I just found this link on another forum, I have no idea if it's true or not but it's definitely interesting...  If it's true, depending on when it's released it could potentially impact the democratic nomination process or the election.

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/19/obama-freakout-over-michelle-video-the-ticking-whitey-time-bomb/

I heard about that last week but didn't want to elaborate.  Supposedly it was acquired by a Clinton campaign operative, and she can't figure out how to release it because it is quite vile in nature, and would surly backfire if Hillary simply let it out.

It was referred to as "Hillary's November Surprise".  

I don't know if she will use it before the convention or simply rely on her 2012 plans, and allow it to be presented by the McCain camp when the time is right.

I bet it will get leaked before then.  

[RecycleMichael]

I have read about this tape on the blogs for a couple of days now. I assume that the story is a lie.

First, if a tape of Michelle Obama existed saying terrible racist things, I think it would have surfaced by now. Secondly, who uses the word "whitey"?

[Gaspar]

Supposedly now the story is that Larry Johnson, retired CIA, has viewed the tape, and it is in the hands of the McCain camp.

There is also some Billionare Republican who hates McCain, and wants to pay a million dollars to anyone who will deliver the tape to him without leaking it so that he can destroy it.

I love the internet rumor mill.  You can't make this stuff up, or can you? [:O]

[we vs us]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

Secondly, who uses the word "whitey"?

Karl Rove  []

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

Secondly, who uses the word "whitey"?

Karl Rove  []

I prefer Cracker.  It just rolls off the tung.

[RecycleMichael]

Here is today's USA Today editorial...

Responding to an ad from the Tennessee Republican Party that reruns Michelle Obama's now famous "proud of my country" line, Barack Obama warned Monday that his opponents should "lay off my wife." Regardless of whether the Republicans listen to him, he is trying to establish some limits. On the Republican side, John McCain's campaign is also trying to set some spousal limits. Following the lead of Cindy McCain, the campaign insists that her tax records are none of the public's business.

It's natural that candidates want to shelter their spouses, who aren't on the ballot, from scrutiny and criticism. And it's understandable that they would seek to apply some parameters of privacy and decency to a campaign likely to have little of either by the time it's all over. But it's hard to see why these spouses deserve the protections the candidates advocate.

In Mrs. Obama's case, she is an accomplished professional who has campaigned vigorously on her husband's behalf. If the Obamas seek the benefits of having her do so, they must be willing to accept the scrutiny that her words — and gaffes — attract. This is not to say that all criticisms of spouses are fair. The Tennessee GOP critique of Michelle Obama based on one line in February about being proud of her country for the first time in her adult life — she later said she meant that she was proud of the political process for the first time — is, at best, a manipulative effort to suggest that the Obamas are unpatriotic or ungrateful.


In Mrs. McCain's case, her vast wealth raises legitimate questions about potential conflicts of interest and how she could be indirectly aiding his campaign through such practices as allowing him the use of her company's jet. For her, the issue is less a personal attack than it is a criticism of her secrecy on money issues. Her situation is similar to that of Teresa Heinz Kerry, an heir to the Heinz ketchup fortune, and wife of 2004 Democratic nominee John Kerry, who eventually agreed to release a portion of her tax forms. In both cases, the imperatives of ensuring open and honest government trump the privacy desires of candidate spouses. (The third candidate spouse, Bill Clinton, raises a number of issues as well, but neither he nor his wife, Hillary Clinton, has tried to suggest that a former president isn't fair game.) The fact is, candidate spouses are a legitimate consideration for voters. At least since Eleanor Roosevelt, they have played political roles and represented the nation in various ways. Even Pat Nixon, one of the more traditional political spouses in modern times, served an important function in the rise of her husband. In 1952, when questions were raised about Richard Nixon's finances, the then-vice presidential candidate famously told television viewers that he had not been able to provide a mink coat for Pat, but that she looked great in her "respectable Republican cloth coat."

Since then, the role of most spouses has grown larger. And the more involved they are in campaigns, the more legitimate they are as a topic of debate. Like it or not, spouses have become an important part of the process. They do not deserve to be dragged into the mud. But nor are they entitled to blanket immunity.

[FOTD]

MSM! Who owns that rag?

Let's drag the spouses into it.

Cindy McCain, what are you holding?

I want her tax returns. Now!

And BTW, there is not a black woman on the face of America who does not have a racist view of their country. Too bad. It's well deserved. Our white people need to accept it just as we have learned to accept Bush/Cheney. Obama still is more acceptable than the neo con because his response will not be "so".

[FOTD]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fK6pGQZXN8

[pmcalk]

quote:Originally posted by custosnox

First off, let me state that I am registered as a republican, though I am not a hard core or mainstream republican.  I do my best to step back and look at any issue from the broadest veiwpoint, and come to a fair discision on it, and now what one party or the other tries to push on me.  

Now that that is out, and since the whole thing about racism has come up, I will put my two cents in on it.  I have yet to make up my mind how I will vote, but things do not look good for Obama for it.  I have several reasons for this, and yes, race is one of them.  Not because I don't think that a black man (or woman) can't be a good president, but because he has ran too much of his campaign on the fact that he is (half)black.  This, in itself, I think, adds to the racist views of America.  Because someone wants to be treated differantly because of their race ("vote for me because you want to empower a black man" is wanting to be treated differant based on race)it promotes a speration of race.  Now if he would have gotten up there and said "vote for me, and yes, I know, I'm black. What about it?" I might be a little more prone to vote for him, but he has blundered in other ways that still would make me reconcider voting for him, in addition to what type of person he comes off to me as being.  So yes, him being black can cost votes, but not always because the voter is racist.

When has Obama ever made "being black" part of his campaign?  When has he ever said, vote for me cuz I'll empower the black man?  What did you expect him to do, put white shoe polish on his face before he decided to run?  According to some news reports, Obama's campaign offices have been vandalized and had racist graffiti spray painted, yet he has not raised this in his campaign.  I imagine it is because he knows that a black man pointing out racism scares a lot of white people.  And any reference to race makes white people like you refuse to vote for him.