Bringing up from below about taxes/unions
Posted By: gourdpainter on 2008-10-29
In Reply to:
At first we were told the outsourcing was to cut labor costs. Only after this campaign rhetoric took hold did the issue of taxes come up. Now I ask you, if the reason for outsourcing is taxes, what the heck? Didn't Bush CUT taxes.
It seems that American people have lost the reasoning side of their collective brains. When I quit working a few months ago I was making LESS than I made in the 80s. How is that possible? The cost of medical care has not gone down. The cost of medical insurance has not gone down. I posted some time ago about a local hospital that laid off their most experienced nurses, not a few of them, ALL of them, and hired new graduate nurses to replace them at lesser wages. What was that about? They got away with it though. Anything to increase the bottom line profit.
This is true in every industry. They like to blame labor for everything. Well, how the heck can you buy a $2+ loaf of bread and $5 gallon of milk on minimum wage, ya know? Take gasoline for example. Sure it has gone down the last days but is it back where it was when oil was what? $86 a barrel or whatever? No and it never will be.
So that car you drive.........how much do you think of the price tag is labor?
These things are what really aggravates me. People just can't seem to use reasoning power any more. I'll give you an example: After my husband lost his job in the CF fiasco, he drove for awhile for a friend who owns a trucking company. I went with him on a trip. He picked up a load of beef in Boonesville, AR, hauled it to Chicago, no problem. Then they sent him somewhere in Ohio to pick up a load of vinegar to take to Florida. Got to Ohio and I forget the reason but he couldn't pick up the vinegar. Then he was sent (empty) to Logan (?), Kentucky where he picked up 40,000 pounds of chocolate covered doughnuts which he delivered to Phoenix. In Phoenix they told him that most of that load would be routed back to Atlanta. Now what kind of sense does that make? Taxes the problem? I would say poor management is a bigger problem than taxes OR labor.
I'm sorry about your dad's experience. People used to do things like that. I recall my late father-in-law, worked for the fire department in Fort Worth and he said during the depression they did the same thing, worked less so the ones with less seniority could keep a job. They all suffered but they suffered together and somehow they all made it as did your parents.
I am just horrified at the apparent digress of intelligence in this country. It seems people believe anything the news media or anyone else tells them. Seems they have totally lost the ability to reason and God forbid that anyone should think of anyone other than themself.
All that said, feel free to go ahead and believe that companies are outsourcing jobs because of labor costs or taxes. The unionized workers, under Reagan, started taking wage concessions, that is taking a DECREASE in pay to keep jobs. How did that work? Don't believe I've heard of any of the victims of outsourcing even being offered a pay cut to keep the jobs in this country. Certainly not the Rheem plant in Fort Smith that the other day laid off the last 600 workers. They sent most of their production to Mexico a few years ago. Fort Smith they say is dying because of outsourcing. Their reason? They say, it's "labor costs." Well, then, how is it that people can't afford to pay their bills with all the excessive wages they're supposedly receiving. Obviously the next in vogue EXCUSE will be that taxes are lower in other countries. B.S.!!!!!!!
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
Unions
I am in total agreement with your synopsis of unions. Case in point: I work for one of the largest HMO's in the country as a MT, and our jobs are on the line. We belong to a 'union' (won't say which one), and without notice, the facility decided to use VR and guess what? The majority of our MT's are either jobless or working for dang near nothing. The union stood with management and let them take our jobs and then turned around and told us that 'there was nothing they could do about it'. Our country has gone to h#ll in a handbasket since deregulation (Reagan years). They deregulated every single job such as Gourdpainter pointed out, trucking. Look at the airlines and any other large company you can think of. The American worker is an and has been an endangered species and it saddens me that on the Repub and Dem sides that we are stuck in the middle and ultimatrly pay the price for their greed and neglect when it comes to their constituents. WE suffer - not them. They don't have to worry about what to do when they decide to retire, they don't have to worry about how to give their children a good education and certainly don't have to worry about how their families are fed. There was a time when unions did their best to protect the American worker but looking at what I personally deal with at this point in time - they are weak, useless and take your money and you can believe you get little or no representation when or if its needed. JMO.
those bad ol' unions
I love how the unions are always the secret cause of the problems. If demanding good pay and fair treatment can utterly destroy the economy, then maybe our economy is too unbalanced to be worth saving.
You're right, though. It's a lot easier to create a cheap job where workers are unprotected and uninsured, than it is to create a good job. And so the foreign car companies came flocking to the southern US to build their factories, and the US taxpayer, as always, picked up the cost of the uninsured. And now the business is bottoming out, and there's no safety net for the workers, because everybody was too busy trying to cut costs and complaining about those evil union workers up north.
What the unions have done lately
is negotiate bloated hourly pay rates and pension plans. The car manufacturers, of course, agreed. Couple that with executive pay and bonuses, the effect has been to kill the goose that laid the golden egg.
I believe it was a triad, the unions, executives, and government meddling that has killed the auto industry.
Let's not leave out the government's part in this - long before the bailouts, government mandates and standards for manufacturing cars other than what people wish to buy. And since the government could not ban SUVs and trucks (apparently what many consumer wanted and still want) it attacks them in a different way.
We've all read claims that SUVs are 'responsible for highway deaths.' Why? Because the SUV driver walked away and the family of four driving a roller skate did not? Look for gas prices to go back up to four bucks and stay there. That will be to force us to drive tiny death trap cars. People were actually buying them when gas prices were high, but sales dropped when the per-gallon price got back down to two dollars.
Maybe there will also be some kind of tax based on vehicle size or weight, either on purchase, or to scoop more of us into the governmentm maw, a federal surtax when we reregister our current cars.
Unions, etc.
1. I agree that I kind of mixed up two points here. I was sort of confused about you saying I needed to educate myself on percentages, though. And I was being kind enough not to mention that we might not need such a large part of our budget going to the DOD had Mr. Bush not gotten us into at least one, if not two unwinnable wars with the loss of over 4,000 young American lives, on the basis of, shall we say, fibbing, or making up "facts on the ground" that were totally false. But hey, Mission Accomplished!
2. I don't think a transcription union would work - especially right now. Too many people are worried about keeping their jobs to complain about how our pay rate has actually decreased over the years rather than increased. 30 years ago I was earning 5 cents per line for a 50-character line, straight typing, correcting mistakes with white-out (so happy when correcting selectrics arrived) and managing 100 dollars a day. That amount actually meant something back then. Nowadays people are under so much stress, not knowing when the "other shoe is going to fall" that they are happy to have scraps, as long as it means they have a job.
3. I'm not exactly sure what happened with the UAW, other than being put under incredible pressure to make concession after concession, all while being made to look like the bad guys who were the cause of all the trouble. For myself, I can't imagine how difficult it would be to work on the line day after day, as was the case for some of my relatives. My husband's union is a very strong union. Every year he has gotten a raise in pay, he has vacation pay, health insurance, and a pension plan. I don't really think I provided you with a "cache of union slogans", but I am very thankful for the Ironworkers Union.
I think probably the end of unions is not far away. Union-busting seems to be a favorite activity of certain people. All I can tell you is that for my family, my husband was able to earn a living wage in his very dangerous occupation.
As I alluded to previously, in our great country we are entitled to our opinions. I thank God for that.
I swear this is all because of the unions. They will
nm
want to talk about unions?
the places i've seen around our area who have unions are pathetic. i've seen unions protect employees who come to work intoxicated, who don't come to work at all, who PLAY CARDS on work time, do what they want because their "union will protect" them. so if you are suggesting the union is American... that's pretty pathetic. if they were actually protect HARD WORKING AMERICANS, then i'd be fine with it.
you wanna talk about "jabs" at obama? i guess "a bunch of losers" would not be a jab?
i believe the unions were meant to
maybe part of the downfall is because of the lazy ones who rode on the backs of the hard workers.
that is the only part of a union that i could say i'm against. if you are not pulling your weight, enough... ya know?
regarding these MTs who cherry pick, i wish these companies would call them on it, give them notice and get rid of them... there are plenty of good MTs who would gladly take their place.
actually i have seen norma rae.. lol... it has been YEARS go though...
I have seen unions do good and bad
Did anyone take note of what happened with the last grocery strikes in California. The employees certainly did not end up better off after months of striking for a corrupt union. I have also seen them do very good things. They do keep wages high--sometimes, perhaps too high. Checkers at your grocery stores used to have to memorize codes and prices and everything else. Now, it is so simple that you and I can do it with no training whatsoever, thus, the self checkout, so maybe, just maybe, $20/hour with really good benefits is more than that job is worth at this point. I think that unions are good and bad, but the sanctity of the secret ballot needs to be preserved. Of course, this is just my opinion and some of you out there might disagree 200%.
Deregulation of unions in US
Gourdie: I definitely agree, and I find it such a shame that the workers and consumers in this country cannot see what has happened. All this talk about OSHA, etc. has no meaning anymore because the backbone of these government offices have no backbone and don't give a gnat's tweeter how the American workers have and continue to suffer.
Profitable? Doing well? No unions?
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/oct2008/germ-o25.shtml
European Auto Industry in Crisis
http://www.emf-fem.org/Press/Press-release-archive/2007/EU-Automotive-Restructuring-Forum
EU Automotive Restructuring Forum - talks about working with trade unions
http://blog.lib.umn.edu/ashuster/nonviolence/2008/09/romanian_autoworkers_strike_against_rockbottom_wages.html
Romanian Autoworkers Strike Against Rock-Bottom Wages
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/german-autoworkers-threaten-strike/
German Autoworkers Threaten Strike
http://uk.oneworld.net/contact/company/view/18
Canadian Autoworkers Union Directory
http://www.just-auto.com/article.aspx?id=89621
UK: Car workers' Union Frustrated by Low Manufacturers Output
http://www.autonews24h.com/Auto-Industry/Peugeot-Citroen/741.html
UK Peugeot Workers Vote Against Strike to Protest Lay-Offs
http://climateandcapitalism.com/?p=573
Swedish Auto Workers Campaign
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2002/10/feature/it0210303f.htm
Crisis at Fiat Worsens - name countless unions
Yet another reason we need unions...nm
x
This, along with the millions to the unions
help pay for Mr. O's presidency being bought. These 2 for sure, reckon how much more?
unions redux
The question that always comes to mind, when I hear how lazy and shiftless all those UAW workers are, is--who made all those millions and millions of cars on the road, all these years? It certainly couldn't be the union workers, right? They wouldn't lift a finger to make a car, they were too busy fanning themselves with hundred dollar bills. So who made the cars?
The austrian-school piece you quote is a good example of the thing that is most wrong with our country: Turning worker against worker, while the CEOs profit. Boiled down to its essentials, the article says: ''Workers shouldn't have any power to organize to defend their rights. Their pay should be determined by the free market--a market that is not so much free, as it is controlled by the corporate interests.''
That is the ideological foundation: Enrich the rich, at the expense of the worker. The pratical method: Keep workers from organizing so that their interests don't have to be considered. And the antiunion rhetoric that we've all heard, all our lives, is the propaganda technique that makes it seem reasonable.
I don't doubt that the foreign car companies who have based operations here in the non-unionized southern US have good production numbers. They have received massive government intervention in their own countries, enabling them to create better production methods (rather than simply enriching the CEOs and stockholders, as our domestic companies seem intent on). The fact that, in their own countries, they don't have to pay for insurance for their workers, because these benefits are provided by the government, helps them stay lean. Our own method, throwing workers to the wolves, also helps socialize costs, but with a more chilling, terrifying effect.
Anyway. My point: If you are against workers organizing to defend their rights, then you are on the side of the wealthy who have organized to defend their wealth. There is not a middle ground.
Well....civil unions would have
to be something we would do on a country wide basis. I mean...what is the point if you can't leave your state because other states don't accept them. I meant this as a country wide thing. If the whole country recognized civil unions with the same benefits as marriage kind of thing. I guess I wasn't specific enough.
As it goes, same sex marriage is only accepted in the states that allow it. I mean...you have to live in those states to have the rights of marriage...right? Please correct me if I'm wrong on that one because I really don't know.
Unions don't work anymore.
Some union members are afraid to vote for better benefits or strike because management threatens to move, like the other posters stated.
Case in point: A small manufacturing shop. Union wanted higher wages or strike, and health care benefits to stay the same, both in cost and care. The union wanted a $.25 an hour raise. Owner said No. Union asked for $.15. Owner said no. Union said strike. Workers said no. They were afraid the owner would shut down and they had their jobs for 30 years.
The union steward fought for better benefits but when the workers voted against the better benefits, the company won. Two weeks later, the steward was laid off, along with a member of my family just because he was friends with the union steward. That was 3 years ago. The workers are still working for the same hourly rate this year. How's that for being fair?
I was a member of the Teamster's. When we went on strike for better wages back in the ྂs, he company threatened to move out.. We also wanted (women) equal pay for equal work because we did the same work the men did, but got paid $.25 an hour less. They moved and 100 jobs were lost. So, you see, companies still have the upper hand, not unions. They only want your money anymore. They really don't care about the workers.
No, unions DO put them in a financial hole.
nm
The unions are killing companies, though. That is
nm
Have a question for the labor unions....
especially the UAW....how do you like him now that he has thrown you under the "let the automakers go bankrupt" bus. Be careful what you vote for.....
I think they should go bankrupt. Unions didn't cause it -
well, i guess the word has not gotten to the unions then...
at end of article they quoted one union leader as saying his members "would not tolerate" this. It was an article dated yesterday. But, it would not surprise me that he would exempt unions, which makes absolutely NO sense, because they are the best and most costly benefits to be had. So, probably so, it will be on the backs of folks like us. My question is...what are they going to do after they break our backs? Who is going to pay for all their cr*p then?? Why, whatever am I thinking? Soon it will be only the "poor" which will include all of us, and the government and those who kiss*d the government as* who prosper...hmmm. Kinda like Venezuela...kinda like Nazi Germany...hmmm.
you keep bringing it up
I haven't seen anything that Obama has done that has disrespected this country or our flag. Refusal to wear jewelry is not going to sway my vote. I have seen him put his hand on his heart to say the pledge, both on TV clips and while visiting the senate.
Thank you for bringing it to the top
There are so many posts (especially because its only days away and a lot of emotions are flying), but I read this and thought it a very critical article. I remember one story in particular of a woman who said she was a McCain supporter but she moved to the Obama side, etc, etc., and when the news people followed up on her to find out why she she went over, she admitted she didn't really move over, they paid her to be in a commercial.
Politics - it's all dirty campaign tactics to fool everyone. I guess that's his campaign though - "Yes we can" (i.e., yes we can fool and trick the people. Yes we an demonize and attack the other side. Yes we can make everything look like what it isn't).
Bringing Mrs. M to the top
Actually no I dont like Palin. I can barely tolerate McCain. I am a democrat. I just didnt feel that I could vote for O for a few reasons that were very important to me. So I voted for McCain and Palin just so that I could have a voice. I was very torn about my decision and I actually like some of the things that Obama is for. But at the same time, I am strongly agaist others. I do feel that there are many unanswered questions about some of his relationships and that worries me. Some of his ideas also worry me. I know that he is our president and I respect that but that doesnt mean that I have to agree with him. I am just really tired of a debate about the two parties that seems to be very one sided. The dems say the race is over, let it go but then they continue to trash McCain/Palin. If someone trashes O, the dems get nasty. It has brought out the worst in me today, that is for sure. For that I apologize. I am quite certain that I have not acted like God would want me to today! But it just seems to me that O supporters cant even for one minute entertain the thought that something might not be on the up and up on SOME of his issues or things that he supports.
This is why we have to keep bringing it up....(sm)
because you STILL don't get it. I don't care that Bristol is an unwed mother. I don't care if the guy lived in Palin's house. And no, I don't rule my kids with an iron fist -- unlike the religious right. You have simply missed the point...AGAIN.
The whole point isn't that this stuff is happening. Dems (of all people) know these things happen. However, we are not the ones out there preaching abstinence (that doesn't work), spouting out about how terrible unwed mothers supposedly are, how homosexuals are just going straight to he11, and how you MUST be a murderer if you have an abortion. YOU guys --- REPUBLICANS -- are the ones preaching that day and night, 24/7. I can guarantee that if that had been a democrat who had done that the first thing out of your mouths would have been--- where was her father? As in, insinuating that the mother (in this case Palin) would somehow be at fault because she didn't provide the proper guidance for her child.
And now after all those years of preaching that crap, who do you put up as a potential leader of this country? The mother of an unwed pregnant teenager -- who Palin decided to flaunt all over the country, and who also obviously encouraged this boy to move in with her daughter -- as in, living in sin.
There is only one word for this: Hypocrisy. You do know that Palin cut funding in Alaska for benefits for unwed mothers? Hmmm....
Yeah, I'll talk about unions s/m
Two husbands who were union workers. One IBEW, one Teamster. BOTH said there were workers who didn't carry their share of the work load...not much different than MTs who cherry pick for instance.
#1 IBEW husband said at the time or Reganomics, when Ronald Reagan, himself a card-carrying member of the actor's union, said he would break the unions, it would be the downfall of the American workers.. Regan succeeded in breaking the backs of the unions. When union workers lost the ability to bargain, they had to start taking wage concessions......and guess what? Union wages went down, so did non-union wages follow suit. When union workers got better working conditions, better wages and better benefits, so did non-union workers.
#2 Teamster husband is a radical retired Teamster. While he also complained that there were lazy workers who rode on the backs of the hard-workers, he also said that the union does not support such and more times than not the union would uphold the firing of such a person. He has a Teamster retirement that is the envy of most people and he has retiree health care benefits even though we pay about $700 a month for that. While he was working, his union dues were around $35 a month and that covered our insurance. Teamster retirees today will not enjoy those benefits.
Do some research on the history of unions. Might not hurt to watch the movie Norma Rae as well.
You already posted this question. Civil unions are
*
Thanks for bringing this to the front...nm
Sorry to keep bringing it up - SCHIP
I found this website while trying to look up some more info and thought I'd share it.
http://www.ncsl.org/print/health/CRSSbyS0807.pdf
I'm now thoroughly confused on the arguments against expanding it. It does require proof of citizenship (states responsibility to document), so I'm not quite sure how that means it will allow illegal immigrants access - at least any more access than they already have to medicaid - however they get it. It also seems to state that the limit on income will be determined by the states - which would somewhat answer the question I posted below. I've heard interviews on television with those against the expansion quoting the $88,000 limit. (which I did not see mentioned, but I certainly have no idea what's discussed in Congress). As I said below, for a family whose living expenses are relatively low, $88,000 is a lot of money, but for a family who lives where the living expenses are insanely high, $88,000 does not go as far.
Observer, or any others, have you found a site that explains why some are against it?
bringing my answer up from below
i wanted to bring this up from below because i want people to read it that are for abortion. i want them to watch the video mentioned here.
into poverty, but you don't want the money it takes to care for these children to come out of your pocket???? Am I on the mark?
Answer: First of all, I wouldnt be forcing anyone to have a baby born into poverty. That would be THEIR choice. Yes, it is a CHOICE to get pregnant or not. If you dont want to get pregnant you should use BIRTH CONTROL, given out FREE to anyone who cannot afford it. Of course, you cannot actually shove it down someone's throat and make them swallow it, I guess. Second, I already DO pay for these unwanted children. It is called WELFARE.
I guess this is another so-called way to sling mud at Obama. The rich republicans can't have it both ways. You either care for the unborn (welfare for their mothers) or you allow the mother the choice... Which is it?
Answer: First, I am not slinging mud at Obama. I would be against abortion no matter who was running for office. Second, I am not a rich republican but a poor democrat. Sorry to dissappoint! Third, I believe that education about birth control and sex should be funded more, there should be more support out there for teens on how to NOT GET PREGNANT in the first place. Second, there are NO unwanted children in the world. If the natural mother did not want the child, there should be, and I am sure there are, government funded programs to allow these girls to adopt out their babies to the MILLIONS of people who want to adopt. Also, our government should help fund would be parents to be able to adopt w/o having to spend thousands of dollars to do it. So that way people in the good ole' USA could adopt w/o having to go to third world countries to do it. Another thing, the government should reevaluate their priorities in that it costs almost nothing to have an abortion and commit murder versus spending thousands on adoption. Go figure that one!
Not all abortions are a form of birth control, ya' know. I knew a very religious lady that aborted her child due to hydrocephalus. The child would been born deformed/a vegetable. This would have put this lady at high risk. She prayed about it and soon after aborted the child. She had to live with that.
That is the child that God gave her. I dont have all the answers about why that would be, but murder is still murder. So does that mean because the baby was deformed that he was less of a baby, a human life? Not our call to make. As far as her having to live with that, this is true. However, as a Christian, we also have to live with whoever we put into office. They represent us, our beliefs. We have to answer for who we give the power to. We are all responsible.
Not all situations are the same. Furthermore, you can't force your child to have a baby or to have an abortion. Either way, it's her body.
In the OT of the Bible God speaks about the children of Israel. They were worshipping an idol and offering their children to it. He spoke about innocent blood be shed and he was angered by it. He speaks quite clearly that it is murder. Also, if anyone supports abortion, I think they should go to the faith board and click on the post not for everyone and find the link in there to a video, copy and paste and watch what happens to an aborted fetus. At 19 weeks what a baby looks like and see what happens to them when the are killed. I mean, after all, if you can condone it, then you should be able to watch it.
So I'm bringing my questions right along behind you.
Never said you were lying. Simply asked for what you have provided and I was able to finally find on my own. So here is the post you would like to leave buried below while you celebrate your victory. Still need these answers.
So, it seems that McCain also has a refundable tax credit in his plan too...larger, in fact than Obama's. $2500 for individuals and $5000 for couples for health insurance. This begs my original question, which yet have to answer.
Whe Obama adjusts taxs rates within our historical progressive tax structure, it's socialism. When anybody else does it, it's not. So, I am wondering...if Obama has a smaller refundable tax credit in his plan than McCain, why is it welfare under Obama and not under McCain?
Bringing this to the top before it gets buried...sm
This is just absolutely amazing. I wonder how many of Obama's bots are here on this very forum?
http://www.rense.com/general83/nrw.htm
Oh, he's bringing change all right.....LOL.
nm
Supporting them would be bringing them home, and then there would...sm
not be such a wish list.
We had a friend stationed in Iraq (she is back now, thank God) and we sent her some lotions and things she asked for, but I'll admit I didn't know there were wish lists like this on the web. From the contacts I have over there with my uncle and brother in law (back now thank God) being males they told us not to send anything because they have/had everything they needed. I have searched the web just now and found many on the web, and I will do whatever my heart and pocketbook leads me to do as far as sending care packages.
You can't judge a book by it's cover. Just because you have 8 boxes in your office ready to go doesn't make you anymore patriotic than the next man.
Bringing up from below about my "Judas Goat"
I doubt we'll ever know what kind of leadership the "Judas Goat" would offer as I would be willing to bet McCain/Palin will be in the White House by hook or CROOK. So if I'm correct, then we'll know whether McCain is as great as you pubs think. I hope he is. IF he is, I will come back here and share my pot of crow. I actually LOVE eating crow when I'm actually proven wrong.......which is seldom.
Bringing the refundable tax credits to the top,,,
Took some looking, but found it.
o A $1,000 “Making Work Pay” Tax Credit. For 95 percent of workers and their families—150 million
workers overall—the “Making Work Pay” credit will provide a refundable tax cut of $500 for workers or
$1,000 for working couples. This credit will benefit over 15 million self employed workers and for 10
million low-income Americans, will completely eliminate their federal income taxes.
o A Refundable $4,000 American Opportunity Tax Credit. Barack Obama will provide a $4,000 fully refundable
tax credit to ensure that college is affordable for all American families. This credit will cover
100% of the first $4,000 of qualified tuition expenses, making community college essentially free and
covering about 2/3 of the cost of public 4-year college.iv
o A Universal 10% Mortgage Interest Tax Credit. Barack Obama will provide a 10% refundable credit to
offset mortgage interest payments and make homeownership more affordable for lower- and middle-income
families. This universal credit will provide an average tax cut of $500 to 10 million homeowners who do not itemize.
I see refundable in there a few times. And there you have the low income folks who will, with the help of this "credit," ELIMINATE their federal taxes. Who is going to take up that slack?
Obama bringing terrorists to the US?
The president-elect's advisers QUIETLY craft a proposal to ship dozens, if not hundreds, of imprisoned terrorism suspects to the United States to face criminal trials.
Under plans being put together in Obama's camp, some detainees would be released and many others would be prosecuted in U.S. criminal courts.
Sorry, but I want my tax dollars and priority to focus more on our economy, jobs, war, health care, then bringing terrorists to our country for court. Not a priority on my list. What is he up to, bringing terrorists to the US? Afraid to find out.
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/11/10/obama-planning-trials-guantanamo-detainees/
If you're over it...stop bringing it up!
Oh I get it...if you stop bringing it up, you will have no one to blame but yourself for the problems in your life.
I find it unbelievable that they keep bringing this up.
It only makes things worse, not better. The anger it causes with "outsiders" coming to that small town does not do any good. Let the people of that town alone. They're doing okay without outsiders stirring up trouble.
I'm not just talking about that town. It happens all over the USA. These groups get together and go to a town just to stir up trouble. I've seen it happen again and again. They have no right sticking their noses in where it doesn't belong. Let them protest in their own towns.
The KKK does this all the time, too. They don't get the press, though, and they shouldn't be sticking their noses in where it doesn't belong, either.
Bringing our troops home would also.....
save our country a sh&tload of money.....
I'm bringing up post I did this morning as it really irks me.
I'm proud to be a gun-toting, religious, redneck from PA, but we are not any more racist than any other state or person.
The O thinks we are all of the above, so why does he keep coming into the state to campaign? You would think he would fear us. His buddy Murtha really blundered on his comment and now thinks an apology will smooth things over. If the O gets in, he will take our guns away and we will have no protection at all from criminals. It's our constitutional right to own guns.
He's a glib talker but what is he really saying? He definitely can't smile or debate his way through the terrorists.
Rendel-D, our precious governor, ran our state into the ground with giving money away to Philadelphia and Pittsburgh mostly for convention centers and sports centers and now for casinos. Why? He loves sports and gambling. When Rendel was mayor of Philadelphia, he almost bankrupt that city with his shenanigans. I'm so glad his term will be over soon. Maybe then Pennsylvanians will be able to get back to work. Our roads are back to being #1 on the Worst Roads in the U.S. He made sure there would be no money for road construction.
He promised all kinds of tax cuts, property taxes mostly, if the bill passed for the casinos. That was a few years ago. Where's the cut? Our property taxes went up, not down! No rebates as he promised, but we have 20,000 (exaggeration) different ways to play the lotteries between instant tickets and 3 digit, 4 digit, 5 digit, 6 digits, power ball, etc.
Casey-D didn't do a good job for us, either. He made everyone who owned a service business (that was me back then) pay 6% sales tax on our earnings EXCEPT lawyers and doctors. I'm confused. Don't they provide a service? Sure they do. He also upped our taxes. His son, sad to say, is now a Senator. First he ran for another post and won, and before that term was up, he ran for Senator and won. How can the people of of PA fall for this again? Just hearing him talk makes me sick.
Sorry, I don't buy the dems making a better life for us. They make it worse.
I will get off my soapbox now.
Well...first he said he was bringing the troops home immediately...
if he was elected. Now he is talking about a "phased" withdrawal. Was he lying then, or is he lying now? He said: "I never heard that kind of sermon." Then he said: "Yes, I did hear some of that." That is on tape on You Tube. Which place was he lying? He said he barely knew William Ayers. We know now that is a lie. There are several more.
The key word about the troops is he will START bringing....sm
then home and I believe he will START in 60-90 days after he is sworn in. As for all the other promises you say he has already broken, he is not even president yet and I am very encouraged by plans being set forth to deal with the most pressing problems we all face. Get over it. Your guy didn't win. Give our guy a chance.
Gitmo -- bringing this up top cause I'm just lazy and don't want to scroll.
Obama told George Stephanopoulos at ABC News:
"We are going to close Guantanamo and we are going to make sure that the procedures we set up are ones that abide by our Constitution."
I'm sorry, but those being held at Gitmo are not citizens of the United States; therefore, are not entitled to any protection under the Constitution. Why not say 'abide by the Geneva Convention'? Even then, how many of our POWs were treated as outlined in the Geneva Convention? Let's not forget, this is a war and these terrorists are POWs. President Bush sought to protect the citizens of this country whatever the cost. After the awful events of 9/11, it was his priority. The world needs to know if you target the U.S. there are consequences.
And I want to know where they are going to put these 250 or so terrorists? I live 50 miles from Fort Leavenworth and that's a little too close for comfort for me. I assume some will be released to return to their country where, of course, they will plot their next terrorist attack. While others will be housed in federal facilities like Leavenworth and then what? We sit them down for tea and crumpets and ask them nicely if they plan on blowing anything else up here in America?
How quickly Americans have forgotten the victims and families of 9/11!
Stop bringing back memories.
Spam, powdered milk (hated it), that awful yellow cheese (yuk), oatmeal for breakfast every day for a year, but we ate it. No choice. Took me 30 years to be able to eat oatmeal.
DH's parents used to get canned beef. Don't know how they got that. We never did. He liked it.
He's bringing dignity back to the White House!
Yes, I read something similar from a different source. Not that hard to believe when you see him giving unwanted massages and acting like a 9-year-old boy. Perhaps alcohol and cocaine ate more of his brain cells than anyone imagined. He can hardly get a sentence out without stumbling.
As usual, bringing up the past...how 'bout something original...
your inexperienced leader is already in over his head. It's okay sweetie, you'll get used to hearing your leader bashed and getting no respect. We had to endure that for 8 years now you will for the next 4.
If the government doesn't start bringing our jobs back,
Sure ain't gonna be any MTs. Even if the auto industry retools and builds super-duper fuel-free cars that run only on AIR, what're they gonna COST? Most likely only the rich will be able to afford them.
oh yea - good point - bringing our medical records back from overseas
Never thought of that one.
Stop bringing up Bush - this post was not about Bush
I even said we have had some good presidents and some bad ones, but this post was not about Bush. It was about Obama. Yes Bush was one of the worst presidents I'm not arguing with you on that one, but everytime anyone brings up something about our current president they are shot back with Bush this or Bush that and on things that have nothing to do with what the current topic is about. Again, this was not about Bush. It was about Obama.
You won't pay more taxes
The fact of the matter is McCain's tax proposals are the same as Bushes - he wants to make the tax cuts for the rich PERMANENT. Therefore, the burden of taxes falls on the backs of the middle class. Yes, I worked for Children Services - by taking in foster children and adopting hard to place children the parents receive quite a few entitlements - that is true. (I'd rather work - I saw how hard it was to raise "damaged" children). I had a weekend foster child, as a single mother, with my own 2 children and custody of my neice and never applied for food stamps, medical care, etc. My husband took off and dodged state-to-state to avoid paying childsupport. How we managed, I guess it was just easier then. Obama's tax plan does not include YOU at your tax bracket - you will benefit from his plan - are you benefitting from Bush's? I know we aren't. I'm not asking for pity. 1 out of 3 people will get cancer. I paid for my disabiity insurance and I am still fighting for my benefits (they play games and lie to delay payments), so I will scrap aluminum and do whatever I have to in order to keep food on the table. I'm not lazy. I worked hard raising my children by myself, bought my own home and did not remarry until my kids were adults. I had to write to state representatives in order to get my insurance disability to MOVE. I have written my state representatives before when my ex-husband was dodging child support. I learned to lean Democrat while working at Children Services and also by all the things I learned in college. Those dem state reps helped me and even called me at work to ensure the Bureau of Support was doing their jobs. How can I argue with that? Please read the issues on both candidates and don't believe everything you hear on the news and read on this board. McCain's attack ads are lies and that's sad as we considered him when he ran against Bush. Now he is just another Bushie.
Taxes
mCcain gives back rich. Obama to give back to middle class. Simple as that. I have never attended any institute of higher lurnin so that makes me sure I am right. Too much knowledge a dangeris thingie.
|
