By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Obama... Man Were We All Fooled...

steven787 on 16 September 2008
akuma587 said:
TheRealMafoo said:

 

So when the Republicans have a slight lead in Congress, everything that happens is the Republicans fault. And when Democrats have a slight lead in Congress, everything that happens in Republicans fault. LOL

Democrats could have ended this war. They didn't. That's why they have the worst approval rating in US history.

They say "It the Republicans fault we have high gas prices, put us in Office and we will lower them". Then when they are in office, the party line is "Gas prices are high due to a Global economy, and there is not much that Congress can do to lower it". (which is true, but it was true with a Republican run Congress).

They all lie. If you think Democrats lie less, or care about you more, your a fool. They all lie.

I do know they care about me less, you know why, because my family's income puts me in the top 1% of Americans (who the Democrats want to raise taxes on).  And my parents both vote Democratic as well.

I am able to put my country's needs before my needs, and mine and other people's personal freedoms ahead of some extra money. 

All politicians lie, I agree, but some politicians are willing to do what is best for the country rather than what gets them reelected.  Even John McCain would agree with that!

 

I just want to point out that the 109th Congress Senate had 55 Republicans to 44 Democrats.  Not enough to turn over vetos but enough to control with a president from the same party.

49 to 49 in the Senate isn't very powerful, it's deadlocked actually that's why very little gets done, good or bad.  The two independent members do caucus with the Dems, but neither is in line with the party platform.

Right now, polls look to lead the senate 56D-43R for this year.  In 2006, polls didn't predict the Democrats gaining as many seats as they did.

 

Oh, and the democrats did get some things done.

Rules Channges

  • Rule XXII - House and Senate relations: This new rule bans the practice of changing a conference report after it has been agreed upon and signed by conferees, a not-uncommon tactic used by the House Republican leadership in previous congresses.
  • Rule XXIII - Code of Official Conduct: This new rule aims to end the "K Street Project" by prohibiting members from threatening to retaliate against firms that hire employees who do not have similar partisan affiliations, prohibiting members from using funds (official, personal, or campaign) to pay for the use of privately-owned airplanes and requiring members to disclose all earmark requests and confirm that neither they nor their spouses have a financial stake in those requests.

Legislation.



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.

Around the Network
colonelstubbs on 16 September 2008

Poor Bigjon getting banned. Bigjon + politics = comedy fireworks



I hope my 360 doesn't RRoD
         "Suck my balls!" - Tag courtesy of Fkusmot

Jackson50 on 16 September 2008
steven787 said:

 I just want to point out that the 109th Congress Senate had 55 Republicans to 44 Democrats.  Not enough to turn over vetos but enough to control with a president from the same party.

49 to 49 in the Senate isn't very powerful, it's deadlocked actually that's why very little gets done, good or bad.  The two independent members do caucus with the Dems, but neither is in line with the party platform.

Right now, polls look to lead the senate 56D-43R for this year.  In 2006, polls didn't predict the Democrats gaining as many seats as they did.

 

Actually, Joe Lieberman voted with the Democrats 86.6% of the time which was a greater percentage than 28 other Senators. Bernie Sanders voted with the Democrats 95.3% which is a greater percentage than Harry Reid or Ted Kennedy. I would say that is fairly consistent with the Democratic platform. Maybe not Lieberman as much, but Sanders most definitely is.

 



TheRealMafoo on 16 September 2008
akuma587 said:

I do know they care about me less, you know why, because my family's income puts me in the top 1% of Americans (who the Democrats want to raise taxes on).  And my parents both vote Democratic as well.

 

That's over 350K a year, and I assume you mean your parents. It's is funny how you include yourself in the same tax bracket as your parents.

Playing with other peoples money as if it was yours ... You are the prefect Democrat ;) 



bouzane on 16 September 2008

Obama appeared to be the ideal candidate until he selected Biden as his running mate. If I lived in the USA I'd be voting third party this time around.



Around the Network
steven787 on 16 September 2008
TheRealMafoo said:
akuma587 said:

I do know they care about me less, you know why, because my family's income puts me in the top 1% of Americans (who the Democrats want to raise taxes on).  And my parents both vote Democratic as well.

 

That's over 350K a year, and I assume you mean your parents. It's is funny how you include yourself in the same tax bracket as your parents.

Playing with other peoples money as if it was yours ... You are the prefect Democrat ;) 

First:

Read the last sentence.

And my parents both vote Democratic as well.

 

Second:

 

95 Percentile in total population(Top 5%)            

Registration of total registered voters/Perectage of sample.

Democrat    2.11%/50.24%                     

Republican   2.09%/49.73%

http://www.princeton.edu/~bartels/income.pdf



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.

Jackson50 on 16 September 2008
steven787 said:

 

Second:95 Percentile in total population(Top 5%)

Registration of total registered voters/Perectage of sample.

Democrat 2.11%/50.24%

Republican 2.09%/49.73%

http://www.princeton.edu/~bartels/income.pdf

 

This is a strange phenomenon. The least educated and the most educated tend to be Democratic and those in between tend to be Republican. As education is usually congruous with income, the same can be said for income. In regards to those two demographics, I suppose Republican suppport could be described as a bell curve and Democratic support as an inverted bell.



akuma587 on 16 September 2008
Jackson50 said:

 

This is a strange phenomenon. The least educated and the most educated tend to be Democratic and those in between tend to be Republican. As education is usually congruous with income, the same can be said for income. In regards to those two demographics, I suppose Republican suppport could be described as a bell curve and Democratic support as an inverted bell.

Yup, that is pretty much how it works out.  And did bigjon actually get banned?  I have to go check this out.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

akuma587 on 16 September 2008
TheRealMafoo said:
akuma587 said:

I do know they care about me less, you know why, because my family's income puts me in the top 1% of Americans (who the Democrats want to raise taxes on).  And my parents both vote Democratic as well.

 

That's over 350K a year, and I assume you mean your parents. It's is funny how you include yourself in the same tax bracket as your parents.

Playing with other peoples money as if it was yours ... You are the prefect Democrat ;) 

I stand corrected, my family is only in the top 2% of Americans.  But those same tax raises would still affect us for the most part.  And thanks to steven for pointing out the my family ALSO votes democratic.

Percent of Total
Number Households
Total Households 105,539,122 100.00%
Less than $9,999 10,067,027 9.54%
$10,000 - $14,999 6,657,228 6.31%
$15,000 - $24,999 13,536,965 12.83%
$25,000 - $34,999 13,519,242 12.81%
$35,000 - $49,999 17,446,272 16.53%
$50,000 - $74,999 20,540,604 19.46%
$75,000 - $99,999 10,799,245 10.23%
$100,000 - $149,999 8,147,826 7.72%
$150,000 - $199,999 2,322,038 2.20%
$200,000 and above 2,502,675 2.37%

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

TheRealMafoo on 16 September 2008
akuma587 said:
TheRealMafoo said:
akuma587 said:

I do know they care about me less, you know why, because my family's income puts me in the top 1% of Americans (who the Democrats want to raise taxes on).  And my parents both vote Democratic as well.

 

That's over 350K a year, and I assume you mean your parents. It's is funny how you include yourself in the same tax bracket as your parents.

Playing with other peoples money as if it was yours ... You are the prefect Democrat ;) 

I stand corrected, my family is only in the top 2% of Americans.  But those same tax raises would still affect us for the most part.  And thanks to steven for pointing out the my family ALSO votes democratic.

  Percent of Total
  Number Households
Total Households 105,539,122 100.00%
Less than $9,999 10,067,027 9.54%
$10,000 - $14,999 6,657,228 6.31%
$15,000 - $24,999 13,536,965 12.83%
$25,000 - $34,999 13,519,242 12.81%
$35,000 - $49,999 17,446,272 16.53%
$50,000 - $74,999 20,540,604 19.46%
$75,000 - $99,999 10,799,245 10.23%
$100,000 - $149,999 8,147,826 7.72%
$150,000 - $199,999 2,322,038 2.20%
$200,000 and above 2,502,675 2.37%

 

 

I have no problems with what your parents vote. It’s their money. I have a problem with the other 98% telling those 2% what they need to do with their money (like you for example :p).

If there was a flat tax, and when we needed to raise taxes, it was raised on everyone, I would not take issue at all with anyone voting for that raise.

But money is time. It takes effort to earn. And when you are allowed to vote to take someone else’s time and effort away, in exchange for your own time and effort returned to you, I find that very un-American.

There is something very wrong with that philosophy in my eyes.

Oh, and I am not in that top 2%, so my views are as self sacrificing as your parents.