Obama's tax plan cuts taxes "for 95 percent of all working families."

With a plummeting stock market grabbing headlines, Barack Obama tackled the economy in a speech in Elko, Nev.

"Change means a tax code that doesn’t reward the lobbyists who wrote it, but the American workers and small businesses who deserve it," Obama said. He then went through a litany of his tax proposals, including, "I will cut taxes — cut taxes — for 95 percent of all working families."

We've checked out many claims on taxes. It's a subject area that's ripe for distortion and attack.

But with this affirmative claim, Obama appears to be on solid ground. (more)

Your rating: None Average: 3.4 (5 votes)

Check his record at EasyVoter or SmartVoter (or any of the others) and history says he's all for raising taxes.

And he's definitely against the 2nd Amendment! That alone cost him my vote!

Obama's claim was verified by PoliFact and by FactCheck. And we've all seen the tax table comparisons.....Obama's tax cuts are larger for a larger portion of Americans.
GG, I defy you to provide proof that Obama is "against the 2nd Amendment". I don't think you can do it.

People like Pink Slip

Pink Slip

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_obama.html

He said McCain would fail to lower taxes for 100 million Americans while his own plan would cut taxes for 95 percent of “working” families. But an independent analysis puts the number who would see no benefit from McCain’s plan at 66 million and finds that Obama’s plan would benefit 81 percent of all households when retirees and those without children are figured in.

Then a later one states differently - which creates some confusion...

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/a_new_stitch_in_a_bad_pattern.html

Other sources:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-04-fact-check...

Quote: "I will cut taxes — cut taxes — for 95% of all working families."

Facts: The Tax Policy Center says that when retirees and children are included 81% of Americans would get a tax cut under Obama's plan.

The most recent analysis by the Tax Policy Center for those really wanting details:

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411750_updated_candidates_sum...

Compared to current law, TPC estimates the Obama plan would cut taxes by $2.9 trillion over the 2009-2018 period. McCain would reduce taxes by nearly $4.2 trillion (see Summary Revenue Table and Tables R1 and R2). These projections assume the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire in 2010 and that the Alternative Minimum Tax is fully effective with 2008 exemptions.

The Obama plan would reduce taxes for low- and moderate-income families, but raise them significantly for high-bracket taxpayers (see Figure 2). By 2012, middle-income taxpayers would see their after-tax income rise by about 5 percent, or nearly $2,200 annually. Those in the top 1 percent would face a $19,000 average tax increase—a 1.5 percent reduction in after-tax income.

McCain would lift after-tax incomes an average of about 3 percent, or $1,400 annually, for middle-income taxpayers by 2012. But, in sharp contrast to Obama, he would cut taxes for those in the top 1% by more than $125,000, raising their after-tax income an average 9.5 percent

So, the difference between Obama & McCain for the average middle income family is $800.00 per year in taxes.

We don't remember days only moments...

Just to clarify my point, here's what FactCheck said about Obama cutting taxes on 95% of all working families:

"Obama is right about his plan's effect on working families." (source)

People like Pink Slip

Pink Slip

Obama is right about his plan's effect on working families. More broadly, though, the plan cuts taxes for 81.3 percent of all households in 2009, according to the Tax Policy Center.

Right from the same link we've both used...Not everyone agrees his 95% number is accurate, it's been the source of many a fact check. I don't understand the attempts to be purposely misleading by saying you are clarifying your point, when we both know the link states it's not 95%.

It's one thing to say that Obama will provide a higher tax cut to the middle class, the numbers show $800.00 more a year, why everyone has to insist on playing spin games is beyond me since then we waste time on something anyone who has actually read the fact check sites and the actual documentation knows.

We don't remember days only moments...

How is it misleading when FactCheck says "Obama is right about his plan's effect on working families"?

The next line changes the parameters of his statement: "More broadly....if you include retirees and people without children....81.3 percent of all households". But he DIDN'T say "ALL" households. He said "working families". And with this, FactCheck agreed. So I don't think it's misleading to say FactCheck agrees with Obama's statement.

You do understand that when FactCheck says 81.3 percent of all households----that's not what Obama said, don't you Lisa?

People like Pink Slip

Pink Slip

Here's my problem - Obama is on the stump telling people:

"Let me tell you my plan," Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, told some employees of the SCHOTT glass company in Duryea, Pa., earlier today. "Ninety-five percent of Americans would get a tax cut under my proposal."

He repeated the number. "Ninety-five percent," he said, "95 percent. Nobody disputes this, nobody disputes it.

He's also stated:

"The way that he's characterizing what I'm prescribing is just wrong. So let me be clear. My tax reform plan would cut taxes for 95% of workers. I'll repeat that. My tax plan will cut taxes for 95% of workers,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziNdSC5vzhE

Video if you don't believe me...Where he says he will cut taxes for 95% of all Americans. No mention of working families...

You and I are intelligent enough to realize that you are adding the additional "working families" but that's not what is being stated out there. In some instances he adds the "working families" but not all.

Then of course the real truth of the matter, his tax plan would have to be approved by Congress...While no one could dispute the fact that middle class tax payers would get around $800.00 more a year under Obama than under McCain. If congress approves either one of their plans.

All politicians lie, spin and stretch the truth, but I think we both believe that honesty is important.

We don't remember days only moments...

Lisa, if he's misrepresenting his tax cuts on the stump, then he needs to be fact checked. This thread (and I have mentioned it a couple of times) refers to his statement during his acceptance speech, in which he said he would cut taxes on 95% of working families. FactCheck verified it, as did other sources. Of course if you change the statement, you change the meaning.

People like Pink Slip

Pink Slip

The problem is even if you only want to focus on his acceptance speech he's out there phrasing it differently. You could also get into the definition of "family" since some do believe they are a family even if they do not have children. Quibble? Yes, but the problem is one of consistency which creates these issues. You can point to one time he said it correctly, I've provided three where he was misleading and I know there are more out there.

Should it be a huge issue? It's about consistency and it's one of the things that McCain has been nailed on so it's fair to expect there to be an equal level of expectation.

Fact check is only helpful relating to the exact ad or speech they are checking and to give us a basis of where the truth does exist. If you want to give him credit for stating it correctly for that acceptance speech, that's fine, but that doesn't change the reality, that he is out there on the stump, making misleading statements.

as an additional comment, I don't disagree with you that for middle class families, with children, they will benefit tax dollar wise from Obama's plan if Congress does adopt it. Of course will those being taxed higher just raise prices so that we end up paying more, is not something that often gets addressed. But...from a tax proposal to tax proposal on their face value? If that $800.00 or so you will get is your main motivating factor? Obama would be the candidate for you.

We don't remember days only moments...

You won't see me defending any politician for exaggerating their policies. However, the true effect of Obama's actual tax plan has been verified by a couple of different sources. I think this is more important.

People like Pink Slip

Pink Slip

You bet he's against it. He always has been and it's on his voting record back to 2001.

http://www.sportsmenforobama.org/content/view/42/

My personal favorite is when he explains that we also need to ban the SALE of ammunition as well as guns: “I would support banning the sale of ammunition for assault weapons and limiting the sale of ammunition for handguns.”

http://www.sportsmenforobama.org/content/view/14/27/

And if those links don’t satisfy you need for knowledge, try this one:

http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm

Or, you could just listen to him say it himself:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzMEI8RDABE

The end result is dependent on what Congress passes onto be signed into law, unless of course the ever expanding use of Executive Orders is taken to new heights, and the I will then becomes I failed because the other side did not work with me on it.

That's such a pile of crap it takes two turds to explain it:

Turd One:
95% of all Americans now dont pay taxes, how's he gonna cut taxes for those people who already arent paying anything? (rhetorical question, he'll use that wonderful thing called a 'tax credit' - that's when you dont actually PAY taxes, so if they want to give you money, calling it a 'refund' would be stupid, so they just steal money from the producing public and "credit your account". Kind of like when they tell welfare people what they're getting is their "entitlement", rather than telling them theyre being given money for nothing that was taken from someone who actually earned it)

Turd Two:
And to further what GGuy says - the National Taxpayer Union gave him an F for fiscal responsibility (www.ntu.org)

I dont know about YOU, Charlie Brown, bit if Lucy tells me that THIS time, despite everything she's done in the past, she'll hold that football still for me, I'm gonna tell her to shove the thing up her ass!

Here is Business Week (not a liberal magazine by a long shot) rating Obama's and McCain's tax cut plans...

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jun2008/db20080611_2...

So where does the reality lie? According to a new analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, a joint venture between the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, two Washington think tanks, this round goes to Obama. The TPC took a look at the various tax proposals put forth by the two candidates and estimated that Obama's plan would lead to a boost in aftertax income for all but the highest earners, while taking a smaller bite out of government tax revenues than would McCain's plans.

Isn't Republicans who talk about being fiscal conservative? They're the ones who keep taking the foot ball...

How many balanced budgets did Bush and the Republican congress produce?

How did Bush and the Republican congress reduce the size of government?

Why did you vote Bush and the Republican congress? To reduce the size of government and balance the budget?

You could easily replace Bush and Republican congress with Taft and the Ohio legislature…you’d get the same results.

While you’re waiting on your back wondering where the football went, take a look over the Republicans…

WHAT ARE YOU ON????

You seriously think everybody pays their fair share today?

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/1410.html

You first said 95% of Americans don't pay taxes and now it's about questioning whether everybody pays their fair share.

Not exactly the same thing.

.

Ok, I see the confusion - I didnt mean that 95% of americans dont pay taxes. I guess I wasnt putting my thoughts down right.

I meant that he cant cut taxes to 95% of all households, because not that number of households PAYS taxes.

I meant that he cant cut taxes to 95% of all households, because not that number of households PAYS taxes.

Billy, the Tax Policy Center states:

• 95 percent of all tax filers (working and nonworking) will get a cut in their individual income taxes.

• 95 percent of all families with children (working and nonworking) will get a cut in their total federal taxes

Furthermore, "if you make less than $200,000 a year and you work, we can't see how your taxes would go up under Obama's proposals. IRS data show that 97 percent of tax filers make less than $200,000, so there are even two percentage points worth of leeway there. We rate Obama's statement True."

People like Pink Slip

Pink Slip

Just YESTERDAY, Joe Biden said it was our "patriotic duty" to be happy to pay more taxes.

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

What? Did you even watch the video? He never uses the world "ALL"...

He was referring to those making over the magic $200,000 mark, not everyone, and mentioned that they would still be paying less than they were under the Reagan presidency. And perhaps they would be the ones who have been enjoying the majority of the tax cuts over the past 8 years in the first place.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/18/1419074.aspx

“Catholic social doctrine as I was taught it is, you take care of people who need the help the most,” he said.

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

Libs has manipulated facts and diluted comments to fit his bias.

It's such a good thing some of us have "free will".

Libs, with as much misinformation you've shared and the hours of time and resources you take to post stuff easily debunkable, what exactly is the purpose of your posts again?

You're just reason #7 why I'm chosing Obama, just to cancel your vote out.

It has been proven on this very website, that if a Republican had said that, it would have generated a robust tirade about the "seperation of Church and State" and how the "right wing religious nuts" have taken over the RNC.

Like this thread did. http://swampbubbles.com/bubble/palin-iraq-war-task-god

Where is that "outrage" now that OBiden has claimed he is making decisions based on his “Catholic social doctrine" as he was taught it ?

Or is outrage and demands for seperation of church and state only an arguement made to inflame their base?

BTW, I'm still waiting for some Liberal to demand that OBiden keep his moraliy to himself.

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

I personally think Biden is wrong to base the decision of tax cuts on his religious beliefs.

That being said---Libs, what are your thoughts on Palin's "task from god" comment?

People like Pink Slip

Pink Slip

It might surprise you to discover that I am agnostic.

And, since I have no belief in a "higher power", I support the 1st Amendment totally and completely. I appreciate it when those with religious beliefs put them on display. I have no problem with people wishing "gods blessings" on me or wishing me a "Merry Christmas". I understand the meaning behind those statements and am tolorant of the meanings AND the words while I also appreciate the thoughts behind those statements.

But because I am agnostic, I support other peoples' right to freedom of religion. Otherwise I may have religion forced upon me by law. I also understand that 82% of Americans believe in some sort of diety, which puts me in the minority. Since I am in the minority in regards to belief in a "higher power", I am the one who has to be tolorant of the majority.

After all, Democracy is the majority rule.

Either way, I understood the meaning behind both of the statements the candidates made although I think both could have choosen better wording. But, like the thought behind "Merry Christmas", I understand the meaning.

Sometimes it is necessary to fight for our way of life. Fight for freedom. And, looking back at history, I have come to believe that striking BEFORE a facist is able to raise an army is probably the right thing to do. WWII could have been avoided if Hitler were delt with sooner and stronger.

I also agree that we need tax cuts. But I would prefer tax cuts across the board. Those who work for their money should get the same percentage as those who work harder for their money and for those who don't work at all for their money.

That is fair. If the "poor" get a 10% tax cut, then the middle class should get a 10% tax cut and the "rich" should also get a 10% tax cut. But to single out one group of people is prejudicial. Call it "class envy", call it "race baiting" call it whatever you want. But to single out one group for different treatment is what America has been fighting against since 1776.

As I explained above, since I am not a member of any religion, I fight for other peoples rights to their religion. Since I am not a member of a minority group, (racial, religious or monitarily), then I fight for those groups rights also.

And I expect those who are not a member of my "group" to fight for me also.

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

0bama never met a gun control measure he didn't like. He's possibly THE most anti-gun candidate ever to run.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080419/pl_politico/9722http://www.gun...
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/0...
http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/06/AR200804...
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/630645/barak_obamas_gun_control...

"We're all riding on the Hindenburg, no sense fighting over the window seats"-Richard Jenni

"We're all riding on the Hindenburg, no sense fighting over the window seats"-Richard Jenni

He doesnt even think you should be able to use a gun to protect yourself INSIDE YOUR OWN HOME!!

Sorry Barry, but somebody breaks into my house when my family's home?? Boom, Boom, Out go the lights!!

Q: Is the D.C. law prohibiting ownership of handguns consistent with an individual's right to bear arms?

A: As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms.

http://www.ontheissues.org/domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm

"But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can't constrain the exercise of that right, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use it."

Toledo has a home rule that restricts, not bans, but restricts.

Even Scalia said that some forms of gun control were ok. Does that make him "against" the 2nd Amendment?

People like Pink Slip

Pink Slip

Recently, the Supreme Court stood up for the 2nd Amendment, but the asses in D.C. ignored it. As of 09/17/08, and with the help of the NRA, the "Second Amendment Enforcement Act" overturned the District of Columbia's gun control restrictions that defied the recent Supreme Court ruling.

Chicago and Illinois' strict laws will be next. (Hey, isn't that where Obama is from? Well, Gooollllyyy!!!)

Over D.C.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_D.C.

And there is legislation proposed about the D.C. ban

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/politicalinsider/entri...

This is an interesting situation for Congress.

D.C., with THE most restrictive gun law also has one of the highest murder rates and violent crime stats per capita in the nation.

Yet, the D.C. powers that be will, in their infinite wisdom, will not permit law abiding citizens to defend themselves!

(One has to wonder if 'karma' will come to pass on these elected officials.)

...it is coincidence. Detroit, Newark, New Orleans, Baltimore all surpass DC (OK, it seems they all go back and forth) in many violent crime stats (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_cities_by_crime_rate - FBI data chart)
Gun laws are much less restrictive in some of these other cities. So is owning a gun there make them violent? Of course not.

Coincidence? D.C., with THE most restrictive gun law also has one of the highest murder rates and violent crime stats per capita in the nation.

I would say it's more of a chicken & egg scenario. DC felt they needed the restrictive gun laws because of the high murder/violent crime rate.

It's interesting--the special emphasis placed on the second amendment. Are there organizations that rate members of Congress on other amendments? For instance, what of the members of Congress that want to skirt the establishment clause? What of the 4th amendment and warrantless wiretapping? Does the 2nd amendment have special emphasis because of the lobbying power of the NRA?

People like Pink Slip

Pink Slip

Why is the right to own a gun, so important, to so many?

Our economy is in a nose dive, jobs are not being created in numbers sufficient to support the nation and yet we argue and bicker about gun ownership.

Nice distraction maybe, from the real problems that confront us.

This is a nice distraction also covers guns, religion, etc., it is a spoof and if taken seriously, oh well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fb-in0vEN5E

There are plenty of scumbags who would rather prey on decent folks NOW, how bad is it going to get if the economy gets any worse? Besides, it is a constitutionally protected right, it's the presidents job to uphold the constitution, ALL of it, not just the parts he/she likes.

"We're all riding on the Hindenburg, no sense fighting over the window seats"-Richard Jenni

"We're all riding on the Hindenburg, no sense fighting over the window seats"-Richard Jenni

Guns are a non- issue and they are directly mentioned in the constitution.

Income tax isnt

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes,
from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several
States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

---------

"Show me a man who lives alone and has a perpetually dirty kitchen, and
five times out of nine I'll show you an exceptional man." -Charles
Bukowski

There's a city full of walls you can post complaints at

Guns are a non- issue and they are directly mentioned in the constitution. Income tax isnt

Isn't it in the 16th Amendment?

(edit) --sorry Headbanana, you beat me to it....

People like Pink Slip

Pink Slip

What B. Hussein Obama isn't telling you is that he is not going to renew the bush tax cuts, which in essence is a tax increase.

Seems he will do what liberals do best, raise taxes.

"Last thing we need now is a permanent tax cut
We heard the President say he wants to make tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans permanent, when we know that at a time of war and economic hardship, the last thing we need is a permanent tax cut for Americans who don't need them and weren't even asking for them. What we need is a middle class tax cut, and that's exactly what I will provide as President.
Source: Response to 2008 State of the Union address Jan 28, 2008 "

http://www.issues2000.org/economic/barack_obama_tax_reform.htm

I'm not a wealthy American, at least not in material items.

This reference never fails to make me laugh. Conservatives and their stupid little games.

Trying to confuse people into thinking he's like maybe Saddam's brother or cousin? Maybe some WMD-carrying terrorist? Oh, couldn't be that; they were never really in Iraq, anyway.

Direct from Barry's "hometown" newspaper, The Chicago Tribune.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0703250340mar25,0,412...

"Obama and his mother moved from Honolulu to Jakarta to join Soetoro in 1967, when Obama was 6. Here, Obama became "Barry Soetoro."

In their first neighborhood, Obama occasionally followed his stepfather to the mosque for Friday prayers, a few neighbors said. But Soetoro usually was too busy working, first for the Indonesian army and later for a Western oil company."

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

The kid took the name of his step-father for a time. What does that have anything to do with the here and now?

But thanks for the link, which is more instructive in shedding light on other perceived Obama 'scary' issues:

"But initial reports have distorted the reality of the four years Obama spent in Indonesia, from 1967 to 1971. In fact, Obama's religious upbringing in Indonesia depended more on the conventions of the schools he attended than on any decision by him, his mother or his stepfather. When he was at a Catholic school for three years, he prayed as a Catholic.

When he was at a public school for a year, he learned about Islam.

Obama's stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, was much more of a free spirit than a devout Muslim, according to former friends and neighbors. And the school described as an Islamic madrassa in media reports actually was a public school, so progressive that teachers wore miniskirts and all students were encouraged to celebrate Christmas.

Interviews with dozens of former classmates, teachers, neighbors and friends show that Obama was not a regular practicing Muslim when he was in Indonesia, despite being listed as a Muslim on the registration form for the Catholic school, Strada Asisia, where he attended 1st through 3rd grades.

At the time, the school most likely registered children based on the religion of their fathers, said Darmawan, Obama's former teacher. Because Soetoro was a Muslim, Obama was listed as a Muslim, she said.

The enrollment form from the Catholic school, which has been cited as evidence that Obama was a Muslim in Indonesia, also was rife with errors. It listed Obama as an Indonesian, listed his previous school incorrectly and failed to list his mother, Ann, at all.

Mosque visits rare"

What B. Hussein Obama isn't telling you is that he is not going to renew the bush tax cuts, which in essence is a tax increase.

Yep, on THREE percent of the population---which would restore those tax rates to the very prosperous Clinton years. Whereas McCain's health care plan is really a tax hike for millions in the middle class.

People like Pink Slip

Pink Slip

You really don't understand where the bulk of the tax revenues come from do you?

The top 1% pay 39% of ALL TAXES.
The top 5% pay 59% of ALL TAXES.

Maybe if those top 5% of wage earners had some more of their own money, then there would be more to invest in say, business? WOW what a Concept!

A wise man once said - "You can't tax your way to prosperity"

Yeah, I understand it. But the concept of progressive taxation seems lost on you. Adam Smith understood it and advocated for it, as do most economists.

Maybe if those top 5% of wage earners had some more of their own money, then there would be more to invest in say, business?

They got more of "their own money" with the Bush tax cuts. How'd that work for the economy?

People like Pink Slip

Pink Slip

Not "ALL TAXES"...

Just income tax...

This does not include social security tax which is very regressive against the poor and middle class.

Someone making $95,000 pays the same into social security as Bill Gates

We know Obama is going to raise that so that those who make over $95,000 pay more into Social Security. Yet, will they then collect more when they retire from Social Security? If so, then what real difference does it make except for a temporary increase into what's taken in that will later have to be accounted for.

We don't remember days only moments...

Shows those in the $100,000 under $200,000 paid more income taxes

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/06in35tr.xls

I'm just curious as to how he plans to fund all of these nice programs and ideas of his, if he's going to cut taxes for 95% of all families?

Is he expecting the other 5% to pay for everything?

That's what makes me so skeptical about Obama - how's he planning to fund all of his "change"? Or, like most politicians, is he just making empty campaign promises?

Obama's campaign said he would pay for his proposals by closing corporate tax loopholes, cracking down on international tax havens and raising the top rate on capital gains and dividends.

The bulk of the new tax cuts for the middle class would be funded by raising the taxes on the rich to what they were during the prosperous Clintons years.

How is McCain going to pay for his change?

How is McCain going to pay for his change?

No one knows. He says he'll balance the budget, but refuses to provide specifics.

People like Pink Slip

Pink Slip

You know, as a political independent, I am still in the process of deciding which candidate I will ultimately pinch my nose and vote for. Still, I utterly detest the attempts by GOP operatives and KoolAid-drinking Internet goons to try and link Obama and Islam in a fear-mongering and transparent effort to frighten potential voters.

Perhaps Obama's supporters should start referring to Senator McCain as "J. Sidney McCain III" to reinforce his elite life as a child of military privilege and his marriage into the world of the super-rich. If the GOP can make snarky and disigenuous asociations with Obama and Islam, then the Democrats ought to make McCain look like a blue-blooded American aristocrat who plays Baccarat Chemin de Fer and who enjoys a snifter of the world's most expensive bottles of cognac.

:-{

Of course, I would prefer that the candidates actually debate the issues, but I don't live in such a world.

http://historymike.blogspot.com/

In my lifetime I can remember hearing our past Presidents referred to as

  • John Fitzgerald Kennedy
  • Lyndon Baines Johnson
  • Richard Milhouse Nixon
  • Gerald Rudolph Ford (I think)
  • James Earl Carter
  • Ronald W.(?) Reagan
  • George Herbert Walker Bush
  • William Jefferson Clinton
  • George Walker Bush

    Sorry I can't remember any before that or Reagans. My point is I do not believe his name is interpeted as fear mongoring more then any other and personally I do not have an issue with using McCains, Palin's or Biden's middle name either.

    Barack Hussein Obama is the name he chose to live as and he should be able to shoulder any reference people draw from it or he can simply change it.

    - Just the KAT, thinking out loud again.

  • If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth. ~Japanese Proverb

    but I'm not out campaigning for the person I'm voting for.

    I'v been forced to chose between one of these two assholes.

    any other alternative in this political environment right now would be a wasted vote.

    Biden is a panderer with nefarious connections, Palin is not qualified, well, unless spying on Russia out your kitchen window with binoculars is her definition of foreign affairs.

    of course it doesn't surprise me that there is so much dirt on people but with me it's going to be the one with the best platform to provide the safe, efficient and responsible workings of this country in the World's market.

    McCain is just Bush, except for that 8% he voted against, Palin is just window dressing for revenge on Hillary not being nominated and soaking in Hillary's voters, Obama has yet to clearly define his definition of "change", and Biden went straight home every day after work.

    See, fortunately for me, I have family outside this country and have access to information that's not being spoon fed us by the American media and internet outlets. and right now there is a dire need to re-secure ourselves in the global environment, we need to re-establish and heal these damaged relationships with other countries, and there are quite a few of them, a need to re-establish our credibility and our relevance in the global market, as well as establish education, health care, and jobs for Americans.

    Jobs without money-sucking union influence. Shame it will never happen under either administration.

    and my selection provides me an avenue which comforts me in this next administration.

    I would not have stated the case quite the same as you Brian, but I have to generally agree with your sentiments.

    Life is generally about making decisions that have trade offs between good and bad. I don't expect either candidate to be able to live up to their promises because they are made with how many voters will swing my way. I have to look at who best represents my view of the problems and solutions knowing that any action in a democracy will be made with a number of compromises. Then I ask myself what chance this individual has of impacting the problems in a positive manner.

    It is a shame but life is not about perfect.

    of Hillary, I find it mighty odd that she would be so against Barack Obama. I am wondering if she is one of the ones who won't vote for Obama based on the color of his skin or can she still be bitter? Either way, it is time to jump on the Obama bandwaggon and help close this book.

    If my role model put 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling and they told me to jump, I would say, "how high?"

    Anyone who wants 10 more days of Bush (much less four more years) and his progeny is just not thinking clearly. Hillary said, "No way, No how, No McCain!"

    Obama/Obiden?Ohio/08

    If Obama were white and McCain were black would you still be voting Obama?

    - Just the KAT, thinking out loud again.

    If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth. ~Japanese Proverb

    Just because I don't support Obama, despite your frequent insinuations that myself and my website was "racist" you prove once again you have no clue.

    For anyone paying attention - I didn't vote for Kerry and he was in hindsight much more appealing than Obama, though not by much at least he was more experienced.

    I voted Libertarian in 2004 because I thought both Bush and Kerry sucked...I've never had a problem pointing how who I disagreed with, nor is that ever going to change.

    There's an old saying about what happens when you assume things about people...Perhaps you should look it up.

    Now you made another little jab at me because my blog is "for white people only" - now that you have your answer? I hope you can manage to move on without worrying about me.

    :-)

    ps...not that you ever let facts bother you, but I was an Edwards supporter for much longer than I was a Hillary supporter...From a campaign standpoint I thought Clinton was the stronger candidate of the two left, and from the looks of it? I might not have been wrong.

    We don't remember days only moments...

    I am very curious as to why you find Hillary so much more appealing than Obama, to the point where you won't vote Obama in November.

    You don't believe Hillary-Obama's stances on the majority of the issues are extremely similar, at least compared with those on the Republican ticket?

    I'm curious to that as well, McCaskey. If you look at the remaining candidates, who's views and policies are Clinton's most closely aligned with? McCain, Nadar, Barr?

    People like Pink Slip

    Pink Slip

    She accuses Lisarenee: I am wondering if she is one of the ones who won't vote for Obama based on the color of his skin or can she still be bitter?

    When the reason Twila IS casting her vote for Obama IS just the color of his skin.

    always humorous to see the hypocrites crawling about.

    Bringing up the 'Race Card' again, eh Twila? (As Always!!)

    Your comments (both here and other blogs) like "not voting for Obama because he's black" make it very clear that the sole reason you are voting for Obama is the fact that he is black. How much more racist can that be? McCain has much more experience, but he's white, and that's why you're not voting for him. That's not racist? Will you agree that there are blacks in the U.S. that are NOT voting for Obama? Why do you think that is?

    You, like more and more racist blacks, appear to be attempting to try and 'shame' the whites into voting for Obama by laying on a guilt trip - 'make whitey feel guilty because the candidate that they want to vote for has more experienced in running the country and happens to be white'.

    You talk of 'White Code Words' (of which I still don't have my magic decoder ring) but here's a version of the 'Racist Negro Code Words': "If Obama loses, we're going to claim it's not because of a difference of policy and experience, but because we're such a racist country. His radicalism is not wrong, nor are his racism and comments in San Francisco. There's nothing wrong with his sexist comments about Hillary and Palin. It doesn't matter that Obama has 300 days of experience and was only on the floor 49% of the time, compared to McCains over-7000 days of experience". No, the 'Racist Negro Code Words' will be that America is predominately filled with Caucasian racists and whitey wasn't ready for a Negro President. Mark my words - take that to the bank!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Obama's membership in a church AND friendship with the church's 'minister' that is an avowed Anti-American ("God Damn the USA") isn't supposed to affect Americans? Of course not! The 'Negro Code Words' spell out "If he loses, it's because Whitey isn't ready for a Negro as President."

    Twila, since you're voting 'black' as the sole reason, you go ahead and have delicate brain surgery performed on you or one of your children by a black man with 300 days of experience over a white surgeon with over 7000 days of experience. On that trans-continental flight, you fly the airlines with the 300 hours of experience of a black pilot over the white one with over 7000 hours.

    You go ahead and help lay the 'Negro Guilt Trip' on Whitey, Twila. If Obama loses, It's all because of Whiteys Racism. You and your other racist friends go ahead and help spread the word.

    And, YOU have the GALL - the audacity to insinuate that Lisa is a racist and that her blog is 'for white people'? A PRIME example of 'The Pot calling the Kettle black', as it were.

    You come on here - and other blogs - always - ALWAYS the first (and only!) one to bring up the 'black v white' issue. It's always gotta be 'black v white' with you. You are so full of hate and prejudice that you read the blogs and scheme a way and a proper time to inject your racist and inane predjudical spoutings!

    But, of course, it's never 'you'. You're always right - it's 'whitey' and whitey's still stuck back in the days of slavery. Obama won't be President because of Whitey. There are more blacks in prison than white because of Whitey. And I'm sure that blacks prefer menthol cigarettes because of Whitey.

    They've found out!!
    The 'Cat's Out of The Bag'!

    (We can only hope no one finds out that Glass City Jungle is funded by the KKK, Nazi's, Skinheads and those other White Supremacist Groups.

    (Yup, LIsa hates Hispanics too!)

    you really need to calm down.

    will never change

    nice to see more of the community appreciating who you really are, tho

    racism, alive and well, because twila, the black old lady, won't let that door stay locked

    Brian, you and I aren't the only one's that see her for what she is.

    She also will not address any issue or questions posed in response to her accusations and assumptions. Unable to carry on a meaningful or non-racist dialog when someone 'calls' her on one of her racist remarks/accusations.

    When asked about blacks that are not voting for Obama or the question of why her (or anyone) voting for Obama based solely on his skin color is any different that a white not voting for Obama for the same reason is any different, all we got was her telling me "you really need to calm down."

    (And Chris, I do apologize for this exchange. I just hope SwampBubbles doesn't get labeled as a 'just for whites' blog, like someone accused another blogmeister of.)

    there were no frequent insinuations that you and your website are racist. What I said was that GCJ should have a sign that says “whites only” because whenever I write about anything, your bloggers accused me of being racist. If I said the sky was blue one of your bloggers would accuse me of being racist. If I said trees were green, I was accused of being a racist. I have been called names, told to cut and wash my hair and you never said a word. Which is cool because I can take care of myself. But I did think you should have managed some of the disrespectful comments better. We don't have to like each other but a little respect should have come into play on several occasions. If I had a blog and someone said some of the things said to me on your blog, I would have stopped it.
    I am not worried about you, but my question was, why if you are a staunch supporter of Clinton and Clinton’s policies are more aligned with Obama than Bush why are you making all of these excuses to vote for Palin/McClain and not vote for Obama? Whether you were a Edwards supporter or a Hillary supporter, both endorsed Obama but you can’t seem to make that leap. My question was why.

    Billy, You don’t know me and you don’t why I am voting for Obama. Actually I am voting for Obama because I am ready for a change and you should be also, everyone in America should be ready for a change, any change. I am ready for the war that was started with a lie to be over and the money spent on it to be spent in America to rebuild the cities, I am ready for food and gas prices to be affordable, I am ready for the food supply to be made safe, I am ready for better schools, I am ready for a systemic change in the way that Americans treat each other, I am ready for a more American Supreme Court, four more years of a fake Bush and his policies is more than I can stomach and I really like Michelle Obama. I also don't think we need another gunman/woman as vice president!

    As far as LisaRenee and her stance on Obama just makes no sense unless you take into account that according to the Pollsters, Obama might lose because a lot of white democrats won’t vote for a black man.

    GraphicsGuy the word “Negro” went out in the sixties.

    Brian where ever the Hell you are: In case you didn’t realize it but “the black old lady” (referring to me) has sexist, ageist and racist connotations. I am proud to be Old, Black and a Lady. I don’t intend to change until people like you realize that you are not superior. Of course anyone reading Swampbubbles or GCJ would realize that, especially when you and your friend “El” get it on.

    If Obama were white and McCain were black would you still be voting Obama?

    If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth. ~Japanese Proverb

    If Obama was white, with the black Obama's vision, plan and strategy and McCain was black with the white McCain's vision, plan and strategy, I would be voting for Obama. Now I have a question for you. What color would Biden and Palin be?

    your post at 20:01states:

    "When asked about blacks that are not voting for Obama or the question of why her (or anyone) voting for Obama based solely on his skin color is any different that a white not voting for Obama for the same reason is any different, all we got was her telling me "you really need to calm down."

    How can I tell you about "blacks" that are not voting for Obama? I don't know every "black" in America, I don't even know all of the "blacks" in Toledo, as a matter of fact I don't even know all of the "blacks" on my street, so how can I tell you what other "blacks" are thinking, feeling or how they are voting. If I recall, I saw a group of "black" people in Coral Gables Florida carrying "Blacks against Obama" signs and protesting against Obama. So all "blacks" aren't voting for Obama.

    I do agree it is difficult to carry on a "meaningful" dialogue with some of you on this blog. I always ask myself, "why are you blogging with people you wouldn't even talk to in real life?"

    just thinking out loud, but you haven't answered MY question!

    I was too busy working so that I can pay for someone elses Healthcare, bail someone out of their foreclosure, put foodstamps in their pocket, and HELL...why not mow their lawns too!

    Not that the race of #2 on a ticket is relevent in the way I would vote for #1 on the ticket so let's just leave them out of the mix.
    They can be Black or White to me it doesn't make a difference.

    The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it.
    P. J. O'Rourke

    - Just the KAT, thinking out loud again.

    If man has no tea in him, he is incapable of understanding truth. ~Japanese Proverb

    why does it make a difference or as you say relevent the race of the person in #1?

    Comment viewing options

    Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.