The Respectfully Republican Conversation

suzfive · October 2008

BinVa - I didn't mean everyone. I know there are people like you who will still work hard to get ahead but there are some people who will not - they are quite happy with what they have now - which isn't much.

Read this:

From Thelma Gutierrez and Traci Tamura
CNN American Morning

CALISTOGA, California (CNN) -- Bill and Sharon Kastrinos practice the ultimate in minimalism. They've squeezed into a 154-square-foot home that looks more like a kid's playhouse than their previous 1,800-square-foot home.

The Kastrinos moved into this tiny home from an 1,800-square-foot place.

With the economy crashing, the Kastrinos traded in their spacious kitchen for one that stretches barely an arm's length.

It hasn't been without its challenges, but Sharon Kastrinos says it's exhilarating to no longer feel compelled to keep up with the Joneses. "There's a tremendous burden that's off your shoulders," she says. "Small is OK, and it might even be better."

Her husband adds that most Americans "want to be seen in their big house with a big car." But not them, not anymore.

"I don't think bigger is better," he says.

Bill Kastrinos had been in the construction business in Southern California. But when the real estate market went bust, it forced the couple to reconsider their lifestyle.

Now, they live in a place so small, he and his wife use a ladder to climb into their bed every night. The downstairs has a sitting area, tiny kitchen and bathroom in a space that's 98 square feet. The upstairs loft has a bed in 56 square feet of space. They keep extra clothes in their car.

"It's a very simple lifestyle," he says. "The downside of it is it takes a readjustment. You can't have 100 pairs of shoes in the closet or 50 outfits."

The upside?

The house cost them $15,000, and the utilities are a mere $15 a month. The couple now live on property owned by their daughter in California wine country, where the average home in 2007 cost $725,000. If they want to leave, the home has wheels and can be pulled behind their vehicle and plugged into any RV park in the nation.

The family still has their 1,800-square-foot home, but they will probably sell it. The house is too expensive, they say, costing them about $1,500 a month in mortgage payments, plus another $160 in utilities.

The change to their shed-like home has been so dramatic that Bill Kastrinos is now building the tiny homes to sell. He's sold 11 in six months, most of them in the range of $15,000 to $20,000. Clients range from people on welfare to retirees on fixed income, he says. Inquiries about the homes are on the rise, he adds.

The Kastrinoses might be extreme in their shedding the traditional American dream, but others are trying it too.

In nearby Sebastopol, California, Jay Shafer designs tiny homes and has even started a blog about living on less. His homes have a designer feel -- interior wood paneling, stainless steel kitchens, built-in bookcases -- packed into a space about the size of walk-in closets of upscale homes. His smallest home has 65 square feet; his biggest (a three-bedroom place) has 774 square feet.

"I look around and I do see a lot of people who seem they're slaves to their homes," he says. "I didn't want to pay rent or a mortgage forever. So my plan was to escape the rat race."

Is he trying to make a political statement, or is his new way of life about being practical?"It's both," he says, his head touching the vaulted ceiling from his bed. "It's a very practical thing for me. If I didn't have a 100-square-foot house, I probably wouldn't be able to afford to live in this county. Aside from that, politically speaking, I like the idea of showing people how little a person could need."By sizing down, he says he's living on a total of $15,000 a year. He doesn't have to worry about not making a mortgage payment and gets to work a job that he enjoys."Living in a small house has allowed me to do what I love doing, which is designing more small houses," he says.He, too, has purged junk and other items, donating most of it to the Salvation Army and to friends. "It does feel good," he says. "I don't miss the extra books, the extra clothes I never wore."He's married, but there's not enough space for his spouse in his place. He's designing her a nearby place that's about triple the size of his: 280 square feet. He admits a tiny house isn't for everybody. But with the economy in a tailspin, he says, he doesn't worry one bit about it, thanks to his newfound lifestyle. It's peace of mind you can't put a price on."I don't think I have anything to worry about," he says. "I've made more money, and I can save all of it and still go out to eat."Obama spent how many years "reforming" Chicago schools:Study: Chicago kids struggling with mathPublished: Oct. 23, 2008 at 11:23 AM. CHICAGO, Oct. 23 (UPI) -- Children at Chicago public schools earned math scores similar to students at schools in third world countries, the findings of a new study indicate. Illinois State University math professor John Dossey, who co-wrote the report, said the study compared math test scores at 11 large U.S. urban school districts and dozens of foreign school districts, The Chicago Sun-Times said Thursday.Dossey said while math scores by Chicago public school students have increased since 2003, those scores fell far below math scores earned by students in Japan, Singapore and Taiwan.The professor said with only 13 percent of eight-graders in Chicago public schools earning math proficiency scores, the city's school system ranked near third world countries like Bulgaria, Cyprus, Jordan and Macedonia. "Our urban district students are performing no differently than many third world nations,'' he said. "It doesn't bode well.''School system spokesman Mike Vaughn acknowledged such educational problems exist citywide.

ibcspouse · October 2008

To Pam, Bessie, Summer and other Canadians

It was a pleasure going over to the good book thread, it is good and thoughtful discussion of our political race.

Rosemary44 · October 2008

BinVa,

Obama's credit for school comes with a price. I think I heard 3 years of community service. Where does he think he's going to find the money for all these plans he's throwing out there? Like they say in the business, I got a shiny dime and a red apple for you, come vote for me.

"Obama's plan is offering an additional 10% off the regular mortgage interest write-off. That's a pretty big incentive to work hard and own your own home"

What's this something new? I hope it has a cap.

Rosemary44 · October 2008

By J. KENNETH BLACKWELL

Signing Social Security into law: FDR said the program should never become a charity - but Obama's "rebate" plan starts transforming it into just that.

Posted: 4:17 am
October 23, 2008

THANKS to Joe the Plumber, we now know for sure that Barack Obama wants to "spread the wealth around." But the Democratic candidate still hasn't come clean on just how much of a European-style socialist he is.

Look at the "tax cut" he says he'll give to 95 percent of Americans. In fact, this is simply a government check he'd hand out - including to millions who don't pay income taxes, since each year 38 percent of Americans already get a full refund.

In other words, his "rebate" is a welfare plan, plain and simple.

When called on this, Obama's answer is that those 38 percent still pay payroll taxes, so he's rebating part of those payments. But that actually puts him deeper into the socialist hole. Here's why.

Payroll taxes go to fund Social Security and Medicare - the main US social-insurance programs. The taxes are dedicated because these are insurance programs - you're paying so that you'll be covered when you hit retirement age.

But, down the line, these programs face a financial crisis even worse than the housing mess that we're in now. They need literally trillions more dollars (above what they're set to take in) to meet their current obligations. By federal law, absent those new funds, every retiree will automatically have his or her benefits cut.

If Obama means to rebate those payroll taxes from the Social Security/Medicare funds, he's accelerating the bankruptcy of those programs. If not, he's still transferring money from people who pay income taxes to those who don't.

There's more: Either way, Obama is effectively changing these cores of American retirement from social insurance programs to European-style social welfare programs: Instead of each of us paying into the fund, and later collecting on that basis, some people will be paying in less to collect the same benefit.

That's a flat-out repudiation of President Franklin Roosevelt's vision in founding Social Security, and of the promise that's always underlain Medicare. Neither was ever supposed to become a charity program - but Obama's pointing down just that road.

The Obama double bind is either bankrupt our nation's retirement programs or put the nation on the path to European-style socialism. Which is it?

No wonder Obama is so popular is Europe: The Europeans finally found an American who thinks like they do. (And they won't mind in the least when we start suffering the sky-high unemployment and lack of economic growth that socialism has given them.)

Of course, Obama knows that the term "socialist" would kill his plan, so he calls it a "refund" instead. But there's no way it's not socialist; he's either:

* Giving a "refund" on taxes people never paid to start with,

* Moving us drastically closer to the day Social Security and Medicare go bankrupt, requiring a massive bailout by other sources of taxation,

* Or outright turning the core federal retirement funds into welfare programs.

So, which is it? Of course, the mainstream media won't force him to answer that question - they're shamelessly in the tank for him.

So it's up to voters to force Obama to answer - to explain how his tax plan is (somehow) neither socialism nor a deadly blow to Social Security and Medicare.

The deficit now runs hundreds of billions of dollars per year. Yet Obama proposes almost $1 trillion of new spending - and promises to also give "rebates" to the 38 percent of us who pay no income tax. Where is that money coming from?

He's put himself in a fiscal box.

suzfive · October 2008

Rosemary - you are right - you want the credit you have to do "voluntary" service for it. You can actually get that right now with Americorps http://www.americorps.org/ .

Before you flood the colleges with students they need to make sure that those students have the skills to be there. My dh is a college professor and he is appalled at the quality of students coming out of high school - many can't do simple math or write a complete sentence.

suzfive · October 2008

Rosemary -that is a good article. Some over <-------- think that Social Security and Medicare are socialist - uh no - you pay in so that when you retire you can collect. And it was never meant to be your sole source of income in retirement. Obama plans on increasing the SS tax on the rich. I believe you pay SS tax on the first $102,000 of income currently. He wants to keep that but then collect on any income above $250,000 again. So if you earned $350,000 you would pay SS tax on the first $102,000, then nothing on the next $148,000, and then again on the last $100,000. Not sure if it will be all at the same rate. This might be a smart plan if it was to help keep SS solvent and if he also put the money in a "lock box" so that they could not raid it for other spending. He will also increase the corporate tax rates. He will most likely increase taxes on those making more than $75,000 a year because that is probably now considered "rich".

suzfive · October 2008

Oh, and all of a sudden "deficit spending" is in vogue!

ibcspouse · October 2008

One short story of why I do not trust Obama with Veteran's Affairs.

In 1999, my hearing aids feel apart. These are from the VA as my hearing loss was service connected. I called the VA Hospital to get an appointment for some more explaining that my income came from a service business that required direct dealing with people, If I could not hear, I could not work. They made an appointment at first available time, 13 months later. After my polite comments, I was informed that I would not be allow on grounds without security escourt. That was after 7 years of Clinton, spending the peace divident(big word for cutting all defense spending) and the appointment of his cornies to high level VA positions.

Under GWB, the rules are simple, No specialty clinic appointment will be beyon 30 days. Mostly get in within a week.

Obama has already said in the primaries that he would pay for his programs in part by making big cuts in defense department budget. Believe what the man has said and what his record is, not what he says this hour or how he has reworked his past votes.

Anonymous · October 2008

IBC, yep, you're a bullier! That's just how much "they" know about you. Would you please clue me in on how you have bullied women on this board? PLEASE!

Shirley

Anonymous · October 2008

Daffodil, this will be a sort of personal attack, ugly post, but not as ugly as some of them other <--------------------------------- have posted. Everyone, take another look at this picture. I don't think Nancy will be able to post for Penthouse our Playboy. I think it's time for another botox treatment!

Now, I need to read the article. [Review & Outlook]

Anonymous · October 2008

Daffodil, this will be a sort of personal attack, ugly post, but not as ugly as some of them other <--------------------------------- have posted. Everyone, take another look at this picture. I don't think Nancy will be able to post for Penthouse our Playboy. I think it's time for another botox treatment!

Now I need to read the article. [Review & Outlook]

Anonymous · October 2008

Obama Explains 'Spread the Wealth' Comment

By Mark Impomeni
Oct 22nd 2008 11:00PM At a press conference in Virginia today, Sen. Barack Obama tried to explain what he really meant when he told Joe Wurzelbacher, the now famous "Joe the Plumber," that Obama's tax plan was designed to, "spread the wealth around." Obama now says that he was not implying that he wanted to spread the wealth around when he said he wanted to "spread the wealth around." Obama says that he meant to say "spread the opportunity."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The simple point I was making was that even assuming he's at a point that he wants to buy a business that he hopes will generate more than $250,000, the point I was making was that ten years ago or five years ago or even a year ago when he was making a lot less than that, he was having a tough time. ... We don't mind people getting enormously wealthy because of their skills and their talents and their drive. But we always want to make sure that the playing field is such where everybody who's got a good idea has a chance to succeed. Everybody's got a chance to get financing. Everybody who works hard is able to raise their family. Everybody has an opportunity if they act responsibly to send their kids to college and retire with dignity and respect. And in that sense, that does involve us spreading around opportunity."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But the explanation is far more confusing than the original statement. When Obama encountered Wurzelbacher, he did mention opportunity for those "behind you" economically. But Wurzelbacher's question was about Obama's plan to raise taxes on families and small businesses that make more than $250,000 per year. It was not a question about opportunity. It was about money. And clearly, Sen. Obama told Wurzelbacher that he was going to take more money from his business, so that others could have more opportunity.

"I just want you to be clear - it's not that I want to punish your success - I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you - that they've got a chance at success too.

"My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. If you've got a plumbing business, you're gonna be better off if you've got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and right now everybody's so pinched that business is bad for everybody and I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

Left unanswered is how raising taxes on small business makes the economy any better. Tax increases kill jobs. And, increasing taxes causes businesses and individuals to make decisions that expose them to less tax liability, leading to decreasing revenues to the Treasury. Since nobody wins when the government imposes heavy tax burdens, it remains a mystery as to just where all the "opportunity" Sen. Obama wants to spread around is going to come from.

Anonymous · October 2008

OBAMA'S FOREIGHN POLICY EXPERIENCE:

http://www.hypemovie.com/?gclid=CNfJ0dqavpYCFQpuGgodCGB4xQ

Nov. 20

"The strongest experience I have is in in (he stuttered here) foreign relations is the fact that I spent four years living overseas when I was a child."

Anonymous · October 2008

Well, I see I'm talking to myself again.

What do these quotes (empty words) mean.

Quoted from Obama.

"I'm asking you to believe."

"We are the ones we have been waiting for."

"Yes, we can!"

"Change." Kool-Aid (Koolaid)

"Hope."

Why are people falling for these "words?" Been thinking...Believe what? Yes we can do what? Change what? Hope in what? I wonder if someone over <-------------------------------------- can answer these questions for me. <img src="http://www.justbball.com/forums/images/smilies/commentary/smiley-puzzled.gif" border="0" alt="Smiley Puzzled" title="Smiley Puzzled" />

ibcspouse · October 2008

Shirley

You are never talking to your self. Sometimes your words say it all, the feeble atempt by me to add or detract only confuse. I have tried to understand why words over record gain so much credence. Maybe it's the nature of American to not want to believe that a posible President will not lie to them (I never had sexual relations with that woman) Americans are good, and look for that goodness in others.

Rosemary44 · October 2008

Our problems are huge and offering more spending programs isn't the way to go about it. Asking the rich to pay for everything. Just think about it some. We owe so much out that even if Oprah, Warren, and a few of their friends in the top 20 earners gave a billion each towards our debt, it would do nothing. It would be a drop in the bucket. Ok, so let's go down the list and now ask the top 40 to invest in America. We wouldn't feel it. Keep working our way down the list, let's say the top 100 to give a billion each.

So my point is even if we tax the hell out of the rich, we are so far over our heads, it is so out of control, how far down the list do we have to go? I don't know if we even have 100 billionaires to help pay down our debt. Now add new spending of about $1 trillion. There we are..back where we started.

I'm not done yet. Add a billion more to what every corporation pays now in taxes who makes over $10 Bil a year. We're still in hock.

suzfive · October 2008

I just drove my dd to work and there was an ad on the radio "Where to put your money tax-free". If you have $10,000 or more you can call them and they will send you a list. Don't think people who have money are going to just say "tax me to death" "it is my patriotic duty".

Shirley - you are not talking to yourself!

Harley44 · October 2008

Shirley-

I agree 100%!! You are NOT talking to yourself!

IBC,

We HAD a Harley, but dh traded it in for a ..... BMW Motorcycle!! That German Engineering!

I liked the Harley (Ultra Classic) better....

I am not supposed to be on these 'political boards' anymore.... dh says I get too riled up when I go on here and read... please, no one tell him I'm here, ok?

Harley

Anonymous · October 2008

Wanna hear something funny? I just heard Geraldine Ferraro say people don't know who Palin is. I almost laughed my gut out. Who's Obama? He won't answser questions about his time in college, his REAL associations with characters. He finally had to answer the question about taxing the top 5% largest rage earners.

JOE BIDEN:.JOYS has three letters in it.

JOE BIDEN: Sompun bads gonna happen in the first six months of Obama presidency..we need you..you might not think what he's doing right..but just hang in there.

JOE BIDEN: I spend a lot of time in Hom Depot..I talk to people..When I go to (forgot the name of the restaurant) blah blah restaurant and talk to the people...GUESS WHAT JOE..THE RESTARUANT CLOSED DOWN, OH, ABOUT 20 OR MORE YEARS AGO..SO WHAT IS IT..YOU ARE A LIAR OR YOU'RE HAVING A SENIOR MOMENT? Surprised

JOE BIDEN: I'd be proud to serve with John McCain.

JOE BIDEN: We don't have time for "on the job training." Referring to Obama for president.

JOE BIDEN: Barrack, if you vote against funding the troops it's political. You'll be putting young men and women in harms way. Barack voted against funding the troops.

When is the last time you have seen Biden do an interview. Has the MSM picked up Biden's last gaffe about some activity he's expecting after Obama's sworn in?

How do you feel about the $150,000 worth of clothes the RNC "bought" Balin. BTW, the clothes go back, donated or auctioned. She doesn't have many clothes. And guess where she shops in Alaska...thrift shops.

Hmmm...Rumor has it MO has some stylist from Oprah. Perhaps her hair stylist. jUst a rumor I just heard, but sounds pretty good.

When has the N.Y. Times done a front page article on MO? When's anyone TRIED to find out WHO THEY ARE. Why don't they celebrate b'days and Christmas with gifts for their children? I find that strange living in this country. I could understand why not Christmas if they were of the Jewish faith...I think Jehovah Witness do not either...but why doesn't he.

I've just got a bunch of questions on my mind. Since the women over <--------------------- want to call Palin names that are not used in a way to describe women BY women I thought someone might want to come over here and answer questions. They don't have valid questions or valid answers so we are not welcome over <----------------------------------------------- All they want to do and talk ugly about a woman they do not know. Freedom of speech over there is not welcome. Is this how our country is going to be run. After all, Obama's groupies, e.g. MSM, cable news (especially MSM and just recently more on CNN) and even the women over <-------------------- want to shut us up!

Okay, I'll stop blabbering.

Anonymous · October 2008

One more thought before I say nite nite.

Have any of you heard that by the Obama pundits are saying that this administration has nationalized institutions...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...what a freaking laugh. It was the Dems who were all for this BAILOUT. They would not take the heat so they would not take the unamimous vote. Then, our repubs had to cave in. The DIMs (oops mispelled) are really digging deep trying to blame the vote for the bailout on the administration. I wish they repubs had voted against it and made the dems make the majority. Okay, off of here.

Shirley

LuAnnH · October 2008

Oh my goodness both sides of this discussion talk to much for me to be able to follow anything. My meds have been making me very tired lately and trouble concentrating. I answered on the on the other side but will put my answer here so I know you saw it.. You all kept asking why someonw would want to vote for Obama, here is my thoughts.

First off, the last 8 years of the way the gov't was run was horrible. We are in such deep debt and turmoil it isn't funny. McCain is so close with Bush it isn't funny. I don't see any reason he would deviate from the Bush way of running the gov't. I hate people that do alot of bashing in elections. It may be wrong but sometimes I intentionaly not vote for someone who puts out nasty ads. John McCain has been the king of bad ads during this campaign. I only ever hear his complaints about Obama and nothing about what he would like to see happen in America. Not one commercial I have seen has told me that. I try to be fair and listen to speeches on both sides. You can't get too far into a McCain speech without bad words about Obama coming up or bill Ayers name and domestic terrorists. I am so sick of hearing this. Most of the US opposed the vietnam war, I know I was a very young child when that was going on but can't people change? Even if this guy didn't change where is proof he is in bed with Obama or will be in his cabinet? It's just not there. Then if things were bad enough he announced Sarah Palin as VP. To me that was a manuver to try and get the Hillary Clinton votes since Obama didn't pick up on hillary as a VP. At first I thought wow a woman this might be good. The more I learned about her the more I learned she is just as corrupt as the people in washington.

Now I don't know as much about Obama as I would like but I do know that McCain is getting to the age that our country feels is time to retire so why would I want to vote for him to take one of the hardest jobs in the country. I just don't have a good feel about McCain and I sincerely do not like Sarah Palin. Call it women't intutition but I just don't like her. So since this is America then I can vote for who I want so I am going to other direction in hopes it stirs the pot and gets America back on track.

So now you know why I am voting for Obama and not afraid to tell anyone so please stop harping on that. I have another huge problem when it comes to our troops fighting overseas. I am a HUGE supporter of our military! I married a man who was in Army for 20 years, we were married 12 of those 20 years and my oldest son is now serving in the US Army in Iraq. I may not agree with being in certain places but I put my faith and trust in our US soldiers and their dedication to their country. Willing to put their lives on the line for our freedom to have discussions here.

We waste money to no end over there. I gave an example when shirley mentioned the marines pulling out of falluajeh. Instead of putting equipment over there to be used for the duration we are constantly moving heavy expensive equipment back and forth that has to cost a fortune. When my sons unit arrived last year in December, they brought all their own tanks, hummers, tents, weapons, ammo, gear, you name they took it. When they leave in the next few months all that equipment goes home with them and the next unit brings all the same stuff over there. So how many tanks have we flown from the US to Iraq? How many unnecessary times have we flown them? And how much wasteful spending does that make? When we are saying we are abusing oil what worse abuse of oil than that? I would imagaine all branches would work the same as the army and that is absolutely insane. A third grader would be able to figure out that is wasteful. Why can't we give them a good amount of equipment that stays for the duration and comes home when the war ends? Wouldn't that make sense?

I agree that Suddam had to be taken care of but it should have been handled properly with the proper support and proper approvals. So many young people have died because we were bullied into being somewhere our president put us because he wanted us there no matter what the correctness of the situation was. If it were anyone else they would be looking for ways to prosecute them for the deaths of all the young people that died inappropriately.

I know Bush isn't running but McCain and his ideals are so similar it's scary. Oh and then when I hear him say I was there when the cuban missle crisis happened, I know how to be challenged. He was a member of the armed forces that was sitting there waiting to do what his commander in chief said. He was not making any decisions so there he goes distorting the truth again. I commend him for his service to the United States over his years but I do believe it is time for him and his billionaire wife to take their money and retire. Enjoy their retirement years. That is why they refer to them that way. There is no ill will in that statement but I do believe he needs to learn how to sit back and learn to relax and live life without all the stress that goes with working in high stress jobs.

Ok, this got very long and I said I wouldn't post here anymore but I keep reading stuff that upsets me. So much in the press that gets distorted on both sides, so much anger from people that would normally be friends. It's just awful! But you wanted to know why I want to vote for Obama and not McCain. You got my answer, you may not like it but I live in American and make my choice anyway I want

Take Care and you all have a very nice evening! I cannot wait til this is all over and these petty arguements will stop.

ibcspouse · October 2008

LuAnnH

Welcome back, I would like to answer a couple of the army and marines statement you made. Unlike Vietnam, units train together and deploy as a unit. The equipment they have is specilized to the type unit they are. Tanks may all look alike, but the electronic's, tracks armorment is customized somewhat. Your like depends on your equipment, you want what you know, what you have serviced, what you have trained on. It is to save lives, and save money in refitting. After a year in service, in sand, bullets and bombs, the vehicles need to be totally rebuilt. It's not fun going in to combat with worn out equipment, trust me on that. As for the statement with the Marines motto of first in first out, that has not been the case since WW!!. At that time marines was the assaut troops station on ships, they stormed the beachhead, cleared the landing fields and harbors, then the Army came in to clear the island. The marines moved on with the navy. Since WWII Marines have been deployed for tours just like the Army.

You asked how we know the surge worked. The easiest way is to look at the numbers.. In the last half of 06 thru the first half of 07, American Killed in combat in Iraq was averaging close to 80 a month.. Sept of this year 8 US servicemen were killed in combat. A 90% reduction. Last year, almost 1500 Iraqs were killed per month, last month it was about 250, Sunnis have now registered to vote, up from the 3% that voted in last national election. You said the Foriegn fighters are pouring in over the Syrian border, In fact, the US closed it's border bases last month because foriegn fighters are gone or leaving.

We like you here, it gets boring singing to the choir. I will always give what facts I have, I don't expect to change your vote, it seems to be something you have given much thought.

P S You better say something about the good news about my wife or I will never accept a HUG from you again.

LuAnnH · October 2008

Didn't I tell you I was glad to hear her good news???? Sorry but these darn drugs are getting the better of me. I'm either in pain or too much meds that make me sleep.

I can buy some of your arguement on reshipping the stuff, but the guys coming in to replace my sons unit is from his base, doing the exact same job and they really do a great job of keeping their equip up to par but it is a plausable explaination but I don't but into too much.

We may think the borders are closed but given the terrain there are still places they can sneak in and out easily.

Your stats may be accurate on US soldiers being killed but how about add into that how many iraqi soldiers are being killed. they are working side by side with the us as we have trained them. They are just trying to take control and step into buildings first so more of their soldiers are dying instead of ours. But if you tally it up you probably still have the same amount of deaths if not more.

Yes they voted but I found it interesting that because the people didn't like how the election ended they weren't going to follow the rules of the people voted in charge so it seems like a stale mate to me.

The US really looks like the bad guys over there and lots of the people want us out of there badly. For example where my son is there is no running water or electricity anything modern for the most part is not working. They blew up their own stuff in the hopes of keeping out the enemy. Not sure if I said this before but they blew up a bride over the Tigres River to stop people from coming into their village and attacking them, But they forgot until after they blew it up that they had no way out and were stranded with no supplies.

Our solders are ridiculed by people of all age over there. Alot of the young children will actually drop their drawers and swing their private parts at our soldiers as they drive by in disrespect. It is just awful. We are in a no win situation, we lose if we leave and we lose if we stay so now what????

IBC, honestly I can't stay because I work myself up too much. I just saw a huge flame war on the Obama thread and Shirley and maybe someone else said just tell us why you want to vote for Obama, then things really went crazy. I just wanted to say why I was choosing my vote. Of course you guys probably already know that and like to use me as your punching bag (kidding....I think) LOL LOL

Keep taking care of your beautiful wife and I'll pray for many many many more positive reports on her cancer!!!!`

Daffodil · October 2008

Those tiny houses might prove difficult for those "retirees" with disabllities, arthritis, or ladies doing the Arimidex shuffle!!! I'm picturing climbing in and out of that loft!!

Re economic issues for all and the link I posted, I received this opinion:

The thing that I object to in this whole discussion is that what he wants to spread around is NOT wealth. He wants to spread around INCOME. Wealth and income are not the same things. Income creates wealth if the person earning the income is fortunate enough and smart enough to amass some wealth by investing their income. Once some wealth is accumulated and if this is handled the right way, it's pretty damned hard to near impossible for the government to get their hands on very much of it it. This is why I think that "spreading the wealth around" isn't an accurate description. "Wealth" is Democrat code for "Those fucking no-good rich bastards." "Income" really isn't even the best way to express this either. The best would be "Paycheck redistribution" or perhaps "salary redistribution".

Most troublesome of all is the $250,000.00 "wealth threshold". Who picked that out? What were the criteria? How might this change in the future? Who's going to make this determination?

Blundin2005 · October 2008

I was reading my financial newsletter this morning. I really like Richard Russell. He's 84 and lived those years understanding the organic farming of economics.

He added this quote to his letter.

Quote of the week, how's this for a phenomenal forecast? Russell

'I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.'
Thomas Jefferson 1802

This might be the "flaw" that Greenspan didn't notice.

We're way too far beyond blame game now. It's survival time.

I'll go with a closet socialist who knows and respects the Constitution of the US. Maybe he's throwing 'hail mary' passes with Warren Buffet to engage the market in a buy instead of stampede sell. I can think of worse things to try.....like ensighting a country from the bully pulpit to attack each other. Now is when we'll need each other more than ever. Unemployment will go to 10% and I can remember those days before....it's painful. McCain/Palin offer no immunity to this fact....NONE.

Now I know that my opinion here will be met with the ire of many on this thread for a variety of reasons. But I write here because I still cherrish my sisters who I've battled with before....everyone of you....and I trust on that level that I will not be run out of Dodge.

I'm not now or ever been a 'drive through' to my mind of thinking. I wish I could spend more time in conversations of this nature, but I simply can't do that in this moment. I do, however, continue to think of each and every one of you every day. Not because of McCain or Obama. Because of our common enemy....cancer....the crisis that brought us all together.

No matter who wins, there is much work to do.

Best wishes to all as always,

Marilyn

Anonymous · October 2008

Just want to make a statement about the Chicago School Systems. I have lived in Chicago all of my life and it's silly to blame this on Obama. It is related to how the schools are funded. If you happen to live in a fancy suburb with lots of money your taxes goes to your schools. As a result they draw better teachers, have better equipment, and education in general is better. If you live in the city of Chicago, there is alot less money going to the school systems. Lower pay for the teachers, not enough books, etc.

Obama is not responsible for this. It's the way the state of Illinois is set up. When it comes to school the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Just wanted to clarify that.

Nicki

Rosemary44 · October 2008

Marilyn,

Good Morning. Unemployment will go up there is no doubt about that. The idea here is to keep it at a reasonable level. Raising taxes on corporations who do the hiring isn't exactly the way to go to keep it at reasonable levels.

Margaret Thatcher got her country off of socialism and finally into the 20th century by getting the gov't out of business, and allowing business to improve upon itself by lowering business taxes. They've always seem to have a very strong pound over our dollar. Capitalism works, it brought Russia out their dismal lives and into the 20th century.

Fully knowing that socialism doesn't work, overtaxation of businesses doesn't work, we have plans to do just that. This will be a very interesting 4 years ahead of us while we're on our way back to the 20th century.

Barney Frank has proposed that heavy tax burdens on business are coming. Sen. Hatch yesterday says the democrats in the House has a plan up their sleeves to increase taxes by going after our 401K plans. They ran out of time on the show, so I couldn't get any further info.

We all are going to get pillaged and looted so they'll have money for hand-outs. Campaign promises that shouldn't get the time of day, will.

What we need instead is McCain who said he'll cut gov't spending by going through all those depts and get rid of the waste which I think will be Sarah's job, since she did it so well in Alaska. End corruption in congress by getting rid of earmarks. Keep businesses running by lowering taxes so our unemployment levels don't exceed acceptable levels till we get back our economic footing. Drill so money will come in instead of out, use that money to begin other projects in energy that create jobs. Fix our infrastructure which also creates jobs.

Instead from the dems we have a list of hand-out programs with not enough money coming in and welfare programs at the ready. We will still have the corrupted in congress, Frank, Waters, Chris Dodd, and all the rest who are on the top ten of the Fannie Mae campaign fund hand-out list. Do we trust them to get our country running again? There they'll be come Jan. 20th. Pelosi and Reid again at the helm. God help us all if we don't have a Republican President with a heavy veto pen in his hand.

Rosemary44 · October 2008

Gov. Palin is a self made woman. We do have plenty of them running around here in the U.S., but we hardly hear anything about them though. She is being underestimated. Under that veneer of a happy face lurks a powerful woman who took them all on and they never saw it coming.

I listened to a show where the guys were talking about her who was running against her for Governor. I can't remember exactly what they said, but it went something like this: Don't discount her because it will be a huge mistake. She kept the respect of the citizens of Alaska because she fulfilled her promises to them, and more that wasn't expected. She just did it.

Actually, her credentials are pretty lengthy considering she was only a Governor for 2 years. As Margaret Thatcher said, If you want something said, ask a man. If you want something done, ask a woman.

As the men learned the hard way, don't underestimate her power. Those who think of her as a pussycat, will find underneath lurks a tiger.... with lipstick.

Bren-2007 · October 2008

That's what I think about McCain, Linda. Since the die-hard repubs are not happy with McCain because he crosses party lines, you'd think that he would be the UNITER. However, I have noticed that the dems are not quite as hard on McCain as they are on other repubs.

The above is a quote I copied from the first page of this thread that Shirley made.

And I believe it to be 100% true. The old McCain, the one that disappeared after getting bad guidance from his campaign handlers, and after the quasi-vetting of Palin, would have been my choice for Pres, even though I'm a dem. There were other comments on the first page of this thread that stated there was hope that Colin Powell would accept the nomination for VP. That would have cemented my choice.

I wish McCain had stayed true to himself. He jumped the shark, and lost the support of many undecided voters and dems. The dems who were not ready for Obama were looking for somone who was comfortable working across the aisle.

Palin is positioning herself for a future role in Washington politics. She's already distancing herself from McCain and, in my opinion, she used McCain to get there, at the expense of his future Presidency.

I've never voted Republican, but this election I was for the first time. I can't now. I chose to stick with my party.

Yes, I believe there is a tiger under that pussycat facade. And she does indeed wear lipstick.

Rosemary44 · October 2008

Let's talk about Joe Biden. He embarrassed himself at the debate. He embarrassed himself during the fund raising dinner. He called into question his own candidacy and brought it home that Obama lacks the experience of being a leader. He said it, Obama will be tested. It's the first time I ever believed one word Joe ever said. He's got that right. We can't afford any kind of tests because we put someone in office who can barely find his way around because he wasn't there long enough. He certainly couldn't find his way into the leader of the Senate office to do crossing the aisle business and get some good legislation voted on.

Joe even admitted Hillary would have been the better choice than he is for Vice President. Yep, but the man making the right choices made the wrong one. I can expect that to happen on many occasions should he win this. Joe Biden represents Washington politics as usual in a fumbling kind of way. Plus, he told us he will share the presidency with Obama. Be at all the meetings, give his great advice especially his voting against the surge. That would have been wonderful advice. Partition Iraq, beautiful. Great advice.

Joe is hiding from the press and they're letting him do it. He really doesn't have to hide because our in the tank media would only ask him what time it is anyway. No tough questions for Joe.

"Palin is positioning herself for a future role in Washington politics"

Yes, she's going to be our next Vice-President so she is positioning herself well and has the credentials to do an excellent job. I have to agree with you there.

The Respectfully Republican Conversation

Comments

Categories