October 18, 2008

Say goodbye to Prez election debate.

Got my ballot and because we only have fraud by mail voting here.

I am for McCain+Palin as I feel they have the most experience and a better record for going against the status quo in Washington. They are a nice balance of liberal and conservative, which will work great with Congress.

Obama has no experience, questionable judgement in relationships and is too socialist in views. Biden has something seriously wrong with him and should seek help.

As such there is not any reason to debate who would make a better president. To me that's pretty obvious by now. McCain.

I will probably post something grand on Nov 5Th when McCain wins

16 comments:

flyingvan said...

Man, I pray you're right. We can't tax our way out of financial problems. I keep saying I'm voting for the Democrat, not the Socialist. Unfortunately they've already declared victory in the polls, so if they do lose it will look more like the election was 'stolen'. They're already threatening race riots. Ironically that would mean more overtime for me.....

The Happy Cynic said...

McCain plans more tax increases on the middle class than Obama, who is targeting those who make over $250,000 a year, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

McCain has no real ecomomic plan. How can you feel good voting for that?

Lee said...

I feel great voting against socialism.

keeka said...

by the way, Lee, I read the "Post Turtle" Joke to the teachers at school during our "devotion" time before school starts. Sometimes a little humor goes a long way! They loved it and asked for copies to bring home to their hubbies!
Thanks!

The Happy Cynic said...

That's a very weak argument, Lee.

http://dangerousintersection.org/2008/09/28/whats-so-bad-about-socialism/

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/09/06/freddie-mac-mccain/

Lee said...

Its not a "weak" argument it is NO argument.

I voted, others are going to vote, we will see what happens next.

At best McCain\Palin win.

At worst Obama\Biden and they get enough seats to run wild. They get voted out in four years and someone comes in to clean up the mess.

flyingvan said...

There's nothing 'progressive' about socialism, and Obama's proposals fit every definition of socialism. Why people are so willing to give up the freedoms our nation was founded on is baffling to me. If you want to give more of your money to the government, go ahead. If you want to be more regulated, join a strict religion or marry a controlling spouse. But that's not what you want---you want OTHERS to pay more taxes. You want OTHERS to be 'better regulated'.

flyingvan said...

Happy Cynic---I just read the piece you linked. Here's my problem with it--- the author implies that the rich have more to protect, so reap the benefits of fire/law, yet everyone pays for it. Bull. First, the vast majority of the taxes for services are paid as property taxes. Second, (this I know first hand) the wealthy neighborhoods have far less fire suppression and law enforcement coverage. Go to the older tenament neighborhoods---people that pay very little taxes, yet a much higher police and fire concentration. 911 is frontline medical care for sore throats, all on taxpayer dime because they won't pay for a taxi (yet have huge TV's for some reason) And schools??? I'm forced to pay an exorbitant amount for education, with a VERY left wing agenda, even if I don't want my kids to go there. So none of those pro socialist arguements hold up with me. If the fire service I work for WERE privatized, it would save the public lots of money. (Sorry Lee, my rant, your blog)

The Happy Cynic said...

That was a rant, alright. Thanks for giving me my viewpoints on things. It's amazing how you can make such accurate snap judgments about me using just a few words in the comments section.

I don't understand how any of you intelligent, articulate people can think that McCain and Republican politics can do anything good for this country at this moment.

Truly, I don't.

The last eight years have proven what Republican ideals can do to a nation. How can none of you see that? Are you saying you want more of the same? Because as you know, there isn't much difference between McCain and Bush.

IT'S NOT WORKING. Why would you want to keep doing it?

The Happy Cynic said...

I want the wealthy to pay more, yes. They make more, they can afford to pay more taxes. Poor folks can barely pay their mortgages.

The poor are already taxed to death, but THEY can't afford health care. The wealthy? Yeah, they can afford health care. And transportation. And quality education.

The poor cannot.

The middle class is disappearing, and the gap between poor and rich is widening. How far do you propose that we let that go?

We can embrace socialistic ideas without becoming a socialistic society.

shoo said...

Wow cynic: so much ignorance in one post is truly mind-boggling.

We do not need more taxes, we need more tax payers. And wealthier ones at that.

The poor are taxed to death? Last I checked, the poor pay no income tax, yet get a tax credit paid to them.

The middle class is disappearing? I keep hearing this, but no real evidence bears this out, except for perhaps the greater quantity of people becoming wealthy. The population of the poor stays the same.

I love the fact that there is a large gap between the rich and the poor. The is not a measure of inequality: it is a measure of how high you can climb. I want to live in a place where poor people can become rich, not a place where nobody is allowed to be rich.
Want a place where the gap between the rich and the poor is small: try your typical 3rd world poverty where everyone gets to share the abject poverty. You like Europe? Did you know that the average poor in the US have a better standard of living than the average middle class in Europe?

And no, we cannot embrace socialist ideas without becoming socialist. Socialism is tyranny, plain and simple. By what moral authority do you take what rightfully belongs to one person and give it to another?

The Happy Cynic said...

I am poor. Clearly, you are not. Oh, and yeah, we poor folks pay income taxes. Were you serious about that? If so, you might want to have a chat with a poor person from time to time, just to keep up with things.

I can barely afford to pay my taxes ever year. I could use that money for things like snow tires, and dental crowns, and winter clothes. I don't have extra money at the end of the year to give to the IRS.

So tell me Shoo, how do you get more and wealthier taxpayers? I'm intrigued.

From http://www.povertyinamerica.psu.edu/

"Recent Census estimates reveal that the population percentage considered severely poor has reached a 32-year high. Between 2000 and 2005, the percent living at half of poverty-level income increased by 26%. The descent into destitution spares no community or group in society. America’s urban, suburban and rural communities are all witnesses to the growth of what adds up to the “abject poor.”

And please explain how would "nobody be allowed to be rich"?

Thanks.

Lee said...

Define Poor then? Buying a Condo in Colorado poor?

People in the US get rich by hard work,Failing, learning from mistakes, Striving onwards.

Shoo did a great posting on Obama's strive to increase the Ranks of the poor http://bshoo.blogspot.com/2008/09/obama-will-increase-ranks-of-poor.html

Socialism does not work. Central planning does not work. Taking stuff away from people to give to others does not work.

The Happy Cynic said...

I bought a condo that is part of the City of Boulder's Affordable Housing Project. It cost under $100,000. Not that it's any of your business.

I don't want a socialist nation either, but there are times when socialist programs can work in this country, and have. Our welfare system--though no longer working and in desperate need of serious reform--has helped hundreds of thousands of people get back on their feet in times they desperately needed it.

And who do you think pays for unemployment? If you think it's just the former employee and former employer, you're mistaken. The business owner likely pays more, but taxpayers--all of them--end up paying for that down the line.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080910/ca_unemployment_fund.html?.v=1

You say: "People in the US get rich by hard work,Failing, learning from mistakes, Striving onwards."

Really? So you've gotten rich then? Cuz I know I haven't, and I've been doing nothing but those things since the age of 15.

Sometimes, PEOPLE NEED HELP. Unless you've ever been poor, you will have no concept of that.

shoo said...

Yes, sometimes people need help. And I for one am always ready to help in any way I can. I volunteer a great deal of my time to Boy Scouts and AYSO, and can always be counted on by friends, family, and neighbors to help in any way I can. I give generously to charities.

At times, I have been the beneficiary of help. I was nearly bankrupt a few years ago, and some major help from my family got me back on my feet faster than I could have done on my own. I was in a very desperate time: unemployed, in danger of losing my house, and my marriage. Even in the worst of times, it never occurred to me to ask the government to forcibly take money from other people to give to me.

That is your problem, happy cynic. You have no moral qualm with allowing the government, by force of arms, to take money from people who earned it, and then give it to people who didn't.

Another problem is that most poor people will never be financially successfully, no matter what aid we give them. Studies of lottery winners shows that most lottery winners end up just as poor as they were before the lottery. So, if giving someone $5 million won't take them out of poverty, I think we can safely say it isn't a money problem.

The Happy Cynic said...

So tell me Shoo, how do you get more and wealthier taxpayers? I'm intrigued.

And please explain, how would "nobody be allowed to be rich"?