40% (all individuals earing less than $57,400/yr) control
Posted By: less than 1% of national wealth. sm on 2008-09-10
In Reply to: Yeah, O's plan was referred to today as a "fraud" - and "welfare" -Users of system will love it.
More than likely, that would include you, if you are an MT. Ask yourself this question. Do 40% of the population do less than 1% of the work? No? Then why do they control less than 1% of the wealth? This is about preventing the middle class from disappearing off the face of the nation. It's not welfare. It is about fair pay for fair work. MTs are constantly complaining about being paid what they are worth for the work they do. The relief they deserve will never come from the "right" side of pub. Don't you get that?
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Conservatives are for control over their own children and less control by govt
you want it both ways, it is dem fault with control, and when they had no control
it was their fault as well. yes GB did not get anything done, no deregulation, no war, no shift of power to the corporations, nothing.
so you are saying he was utterly incompetent?
How about if some of us are using birth control to be responsible and control.......sm
the size of our families, as almost every family has to do? And believe me, I tried the "rhythm" method, and I have my beautiful son, Alex, as a response. And I adore him, and thankfully we found ways to afford him, care for him in every way, etc., but some sexual aides and birth control are actually used by Christian couples who have been married for 28 years, gong on 29 in May. sex is also important in a loving marriage, not just to "do whatever feels good." There is nothing shameful in married, committed sex.
Control? If you mean, control of putting our country
nm
what about individuals though
What about small business people who have sacrificed for years to build something for themselves and their families and now they should "share" the results of their work? Like my BIL who built his business from the ground up by working round the clock for many, many years with my sister supporting him during that time. now they should "share" that with people who didn't work at all??? Big corporations I can agree with you on but that's not the whole picture.
Individuals, maybe. As for the party,
nm
That may be the case. But it is up to individuals...
whether or not to get down and wallow in that kind of stuff or rise above it. I just wish more would rise above it. I don't think Obama thinks, because he is running for President, his children should be fair game and he should just roll over and take it because of what he is doing in his life. At least I hope he wouldn't. And I find it sad that some of his supporters do. That is all I am saying.
Yes. We are a group of individuals.
Did you lose your dictionary?
Perhaps...as individuals are responsible for the way they act...
and the politics of personal destruction, frankly, suck. No matter who is on the receiving end. And this has been particularly nasty, hateful and sexist toward Palin...but Obama supporters are a different breed. They cut the hide off Hillary in strips too. It is a strange phenomenon.
Only from under-eductated individuals. (nm)
xx
Amazing, huh? Big companies down to individuals
nm
American businesses and individuals should all
nm
and he wants to control it all.....
the banks, the insurance industry, the automotive industry, the health care industry, the finance sector, and our entire lives. You call that strength. I call that dictatorship.
Gun Control
John Lott, Jr., a Yale social economist, did the largest study on gun control laws covering all 3000 counties in the US. His findings astounded the author himself, who had reviewed many other studies - all of which had been extremely small - that suggested guns don't deter crime.
The title of Lott's published study tells his findings in a nutshell: "More Guns, Less Crime". It's an exhaustive book filled with much more data than most of us would ever care to see, but the findings were unequivocal: the more guns there are in the hands of law-abiding citizens, the lower the rate of gun crimes committed against them.
On the strength of what he found, Lott, who had never even owned a gun or fired one except one time at a summer youth camp - purchased a handgun and got a license to carry it. Consequently, the gun-banning crazies who howled bloody murder at his research (but who haven't been able to mount a single credible counterargument in the intervening years) called him a "gun nut".
Pro birth control....s/m
I'm definitely not pro abortion, but am pro choice in, what should be, the rare event of unexpected pregnancy, and in that case I think that the woman herself should be the one to decide whether to terminate the pregnancy or not, and if so, it should remain a safe, and legal option. It's an extremely emotional, and difficult decision for most women to have to make in that situation.. I did a quick look and see that the abortion rate in the US has declined from 1996 to 2002. I'm going to look for statistics from 2002 to the present when I have more time. I think the key in the main is stressing birth control measures, and also making those measures affordable to all women across all socio-economic groups.
Birth control is....
used to prevent pregnancy......not kill an innocent child AFTER it is conceived. BIG DIFFERENCE!!!! How do you people sleep at night?
You are correct...he wants to control...
the situation, questions asked, etc, because he knows he couldn't come up with any anwers on the fly without knowledge of them first. He told Bill O to his face after one of the debates that he would come on his show after the primaries...hmm, so much for Michelle stating in her speech that he was a man of his word. Anyone who can't answer the tough questions without being prepped and coddled is not ready to lead this country.
Yes indeed. Lot of RNC damage control going on.
How do the Pubs turn Gustav into a political advantage? We already see them shameless working all the angles and considering their options, but let's face it. They need all the help they can get now that Gustav has blow the wind out of the sails of their copy-cat showcase celebrity VP pick. It's just as well. A 48-hour ride on that boat was just about all the excitement JM could stand at one time.
Any political capital the RNC is trying to get out of Gustav is doomed to fail. What's a party to do? The collective sigh of relief they all are breathing over the Bush and Cheney speech cancellations to go put on their compassionate conservative hats and polish up their leadership image is producing wind gusts up to a Category 10. How can they celebrate the debut of their golden girl on a split screen they share with the drowning of New Orleans Part II and hold their collective breaths at the same time and pray those levies don't break again? One would think they would have the sense to postpone the event until all the ruckus dies down, but if they did that, people might actually start expecting the Prez and VP to deliver their speeches again. They can't have that, now can they?
The dems will not be too worried about Bush/Cheney speech cancellations one way or the other. The RNC opening night and the leadership image role down south are equal opportunities for Bush and Cheney to show their true colors and there is no way the media is going to be polite enough not to be reminding us all about the screw ups last time around, no matter how presidential they try to appear. It's a lose/lose situation no matter how you look at it.
Must have skipped over all the sam control,
nm
As far as birth control....I have not seen anything about...
people wanting to remove birth control. Just because an individual elects not to use it does not mean they do not want anyone else to have access. With this permissive society liberals have created there is really no choice but to provide it.
Yes, there are natural causes for miscarriage. That is leaving it up to God. For us to put the life of an innocent child totally in the hands of someone else to choose whether it lives or dies, just as a personal choice, I believe is wrong. Just as those in these orphanges murdered children...it is murder. Killing an innocent for no reason other than "oops" is wrong.
What overturning Roe vs. wade would do is put it back in the hands of legislators who, by the constitution, are the only ones who can enact laws. The Supreme Court should not be enacting laws. They are to interpret...not legislate. I believe it should be overturned because it is unconstitutional. Then put it to a state-by-state vote. Some states would outlaw abortion except in cases of rape, incest, or life of mother. Some would outlaw it, period. Some would allow it in all forms. But at least it would be the will of the people.
Why do you think congress has never tried to pass an abortion law? Even when the democrats had control? Even before Roe vs. Wade? The truth is in the pudding.
Republican control
Excuse me but aren't the House and the Senate Democrat controlled since 2006? They haven't helped this country one bit since they took control, in fact it has gotten worse. By your own reasoning you are wrong about why this country is in such bad shape, it's not the Republicans alone. And the Democrafts do not concern themselves at all about the middle class, just the people who have no pride and can't get off their asses and work, only lip service in election years. Heaven forbid the lazy class take on a part time job when things get rough. I'm sick of carrying the lazy class on my back...
Look where out-of-control capitalism got us.
Hello...tightening gun control is not a ban.
out of hands of criminals and gun-free zones (that already exist, such as federal buildings, airports, etc) do not threaten your precious pistols. AK-47 assault rifles REALLY necessary for hunting and protection? If you are not a criminal, you have nothing to fear. For heaven's sake, ever hear of compromise?
Bush has no control over this. This is
Pelosi, Dodd, Frank, and Paulson's baby. They're the ones who calls the shots on how this money is to be given out and used. They were the ones with the first bright idea for this bailout.
Even yesterday, Frank decided he would give the automakers $25K with governments ownships of the automakers. Yet last night, I hear it's only a loan to them to be paid back. So, which is it?
By those organizations that want control.
*
Spending under control...huh?
Yeah.....an 825 billion dollar stimulus package that won't really work....sounds like spending is under control to me. Holy crow people! Nothing like adding that to our huge deficit now and how many days as he been in office? Is that like a new record of making the deficit shoot up so fast within the first month of a presidency. Impressive....NOT.
Control of Congress???
If you don't know what you are talking about - maybe you should venture to a safer topic, like, I don't know, knitting? Bush vetoed and obstructed the Dems at every turn (do you read?). Just like right now - the pubs are obstructing and delaying at every turn. Same old games just a different President. Obama is getting a crash course in "Politics as Usual." He may have been woefully mistaken in believing the 2 parties could work together. Won't happen. The pubs will trumpet their BS and obstruct everything they can all in the name of trying to exert their power. They don't give a rats about what happens to the American people. They really don't. They want to keep big corporations and banks in power - not We The People. Do you really think they care if people stay in their houses or not? NO. The problem is all these banks with empty houses they can't sell. Gotta save the mortgage companies and Banks - screw the people. There will be some kind of bendover in the new mortgage contracts with lower interest - watch and see. WHAM! It'll hit those people right between the eyes just when they thought things were going good, that is, if the economy turns around - which I doubt. Not enough cooperation.
BTW, there are much better birth control
options than birth control pills. One of them IUDs, when those are in, there is nothing to 'forget' about them.
Gun Control Article
My, read nothing about it in our newspapers around here. Please pay attention to the paragraphs following these:
His feelings about House Bill 375 are the same, according to his Philadelphia office manager, Joe Evangelista.
Similar to House Bill 375, U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush of Illinois in January introduced Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009.
http://articles.lancasteronline.com/local/4/234644
No. I just wish we could get some union control
nm
Did someone mention anger control....
Corporations control the media.sm
Wonder who controls the corporations? I do not watch mainstream television news because it is censored and compromised, so I could not tell if you if they are left-leaning or not. Republican/Democrat same thing to me - divide and conquer.
He looks a few questions away from losing control...nm
Nothing silly about population control.
BTW....we ARE animals.
Not everyone has the same access to birth control. sm
I guess you didn't watch 20/20 this past Friday night? You can view it on their website. Go to http://abcnews.go.com/2020 and click on Watch: Babies in Memphis
I think everyone who is interested in this current thread would find it interesting, whatever your opinion on abortion is. It was called "Babyland" because that's what the locals call the cemetary where all the premature babies who die are buried if their mother can't afford to bury them.
It was about how the poverty-striken areas in Memphis, TN have much greater rates of premature births and deaths of babies than the more affleunt areas. Why? Lots of reasons, but probably the main one is lack of money, which means lack of prenatal care. No insurance and no easy access to a free or low-cost clinic. Lack of education. The girl they profiled was 18 and pregnant, and they showed another girl who had gotten pregnant at 12 yrs old, now a mother at 13. I mean, yeah, a 12 y/o shouldn't be having sex - she's still a child, but how in the world would she have access to birth control? She wouldn't.
It showed how the closest clinic is only open during the day (and only 1/2 day on Sat., to cut costs). No evening or weekend hours, so what are you supposed to do, take time off work, which you can't afford, to go get birth control (or prenatal care, etc.) which you also can't afford? I mean to you or me it may seem like a no-brainer - if nothing else go to the drugstore and get a box of condoms for $10.00, or the Today sponge thingie, but maybe they don't even have an extra $10.00 (or the time and $ to take 2 buses to get to the drugstore?).
All I'm saying is, the situation is different for everyone. I've personally never had an easy time with any method of birth control I've tried, and it's a bit of a wonder to me that I've never had an unplanned pregnancy because of that. Maybe because of that, I try to be less judgmental of others. Oops, more to say but I've got to go...
Sam busy w/damage control this a,m.
nm
I disagree. Since the dems got control, nothing
x
Birth control would have been nice.
.
I knew about birth control.
However, was I willing to go to my mom and ask her to put me on the pill. I knew my mother would have suspected my sexual activity and I didn't want her to know. Most teens also have the belief that "it won't happen to me." Now that I'm older, I see how some of the decisions I made back when I was 17 were poor ones, but at that time I thought they were great ideas. Do I blame my mom and dad for the bad decisions I made back then....no. Those were my decisions, my choices, and I had to deal with the consequences.
She supports birth control and ..
supports abstinence-only education in schools, but she has also said she does not support tax payer dollars to distribute birth control in schools. She is a member of Feminists for Life, which is an pro-life group.
Feminist for Life is a pro-life group that has had its positions distorted to show that they are against birth control. Palin critics (including many in the media) have cherry picked in order to smear Gov. Palin.
Dems are in control in Congress
If you're looking for someone to blame, you're going to have a short walk to the nearest mirror for voting those boys into power.
Out of control being the operative words....
said control denied JOhn McCain and republicans by democrats.
but Democrats control congress.
Did you miss that?
William Shatner on gun control sm
Short clip from the show Boston Legal on gun control. LMAO.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AYG4y5et5g
so now abortion as population control...
lovely thought! As far as my daughter getting pregnant--there are options other than abortion. Plenty of people who want babies can't have them--or there is always the good old fashioned taking responsibility for your actions. I have one child that was a surprise and don't know what I would do without him. With my second "surprise" on the way, I am certain that I will never feel that keeping my baby was a mistake, but I am certain that I would have thought killing him was! The timing is bad, I was a little irresponsible, but babies have an uncanny way of making people happy. It seems to me that our world could use a little more of that.
No, not population control, Einstein. But in
an already overcrowded world, what sense does it make to bring an UNWANTED child into the world? Babies dont automatically make people happy when their birth is a mistake and it ruins their lives.
whose insurance does not pay for birth control?
Mine sure as heck does. It is much cheaper to prevent births than pay for them. It makes fiscal sense.
Yeah, and look at the democrats in control for
nm
I think McCain lost control....(sm)
or better yet, never had control. I actually like McCain to a certain extent. I don't like his policies, but I do like his ability to get some things done. I think McCain's real pick for VP would have been Leiberman. I think he knew he would have to run a *middle of the road* campaign after Bush, but I think he was overruled by the pub party. This is evidenced by the fact that Palin seemed to be running a completely different campaign than McCain. McCain also voiced disagreement with other activities such as robo-calls. McCain has been on the ugly side of a campaign before, and I really didn't get the impression that he was happy with the way things were going. This makes me think he had no control.
Who the master mind behind the Palin pick was, I don't know yet, but I'm sure it'll come out sooner or later. Another possibility is that the pub party knew they couldn't win this election so they pretty much used McCain, and in the meantime tried to show some versatility by choosing Palin -- that didn't work out as planned I'm sure.
Either way, I don't think McCain is at fault for the Palin pick. A major concern during the election was that he had exhibited bad judgment by picking her. I tend to believe that the real problem was that he didn't have any control of the situation and wouldn't have had control as pres.
Dems never had control of congress.....
With Cheney's vote and the veto pen - but that's convenient to ignore, isn't it? All about family values? right? No child left behind? Sure, uh-huh. Talk about swallowing the Kool-Aid - all that Rovian campaigning propaganda brought Kool-Aid to new heights.
too bad i'm not the pres - i'm control freakish enough 4 it
:)
|
