yep - what really matters is the
Posted By: Shera on 2008-09-23
In Reply to: If your going to go by polls then use more than just the ones that favors - your opponent
electoral college -- Obama WAY ahead there. Yippie-oh-coyote.
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
Not that it matters
http://www.factcheck.org/archive.html
Excerpt from Bush - Kerry debate and analysis by Factcheck.org
George W. Bush: FactCheck: Most of Bush tax cut went to top 10%
BUSH: Most of the tax cuts went to low- and middle-income Americans. And now the tax code is more fair.
FACT CHECK: Bush could hardly have been farther off base when he said most of his tax cuts went to low- and middle-income Americans. That's just not true. In fact, the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center recently calculated that most of the tax cuts-53% to be exact-went to the highest-earning 10% of US individuals and families. Those most affluent Americans got an average tax cut of $7,661. And as for the low- and middle-income Americans Bush mentioned-the bottom 60% of individuals and families got only 13.7% of the tax cuts, a far cry from most of the cuts as claimed by Bush.
Source: Analysis of Third Bush-Kerry debate(FactCheck.org Ad-Watch)
George W. Bush: FactCheck: Wealthy pay 63% of taxes, not 80%
BUSH: 20% of the upper-income people pay about 80% of the taxes in America today because of how we structured the tax cuts.
FACT CHECK: The President came closer to the mark, but still got it wrong, when he said that the top 20% of earners pay about 80% of the taxes in America today. That's incorrect. In fact, as we reported only that morning, the Congressional Budget Office calculates that the top 20% now pay 63.5% of the total federal tax burden, which includes income taxes, payroll taxes and other federal levies. It's true that the top 20% pays nearly 81% of all federal income taxes, but the president spoke more expansively of taxes in America, not just income taxes.
Source: Analysis of Third Bush-Kerry debate(FactCheck.org Ad-Watch)
What really matters
Instead of giving so much credence to Palin's mean spirited attempt to cast aspersions on Obama's character, maybe you should be a bit concerned about McCain's documented palling around with folks who are bringing this nation to financial disaster. I dare you to watch this!
http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/keatingvideo
Well it matters to me
Someone show me one iota of REAL proof that Obama is or associates with terrorists and I will immediately change how I vote. I don't want a terrorist in office and I don't want a liar either but in either case that is exactly what we're gonna get. As near as I can tell Obama happens to live in the same neighborhood as Ayers. Is he the only one who knows people in his neighborhood, attends parties with the, etc. Don't YOU know people in your neighborhood that you aren't necessarily close friends with?
What really matters now is not
who got us into it, but who can help us get out of it. The next thing is an honest (nonpartisan) look into how we got into this mess so that we can avoid it in the future.
well it matters to me
if there was an all white group ANY where in this country that wouldnt allow ANYONE in based on their skin color, it would be a huge deal and people would be held accountable. DUH. The reason that it matters is because our new president is probably not going to do anything about this and had a nice little smile on his face when the rev. was giving his speech on inauguration day and said his little comment about its time for white to embrace what is right. That is the problem. Many white people in this country have ALWAYS embraced what is right and feel that EVERYONE should be treated equally and I am one of them. For there to be a group out there doing this is WRONG. By the way, I am so talented that I can talk about this issue AND the ecomony all at the same time!
It matters very much.......... sm
what the Bible says, and the Bible is what shapes, or should shape, a Christian's whole way of thinking. One can hold current day newspaper headlines up against Daniel and Ezekiel and see the events unfolding just as they were foretold over 2000 years ago. That people today have grown so politically correct as to disregard, or worse yet ridicule, the Bible's teaching is a very sad commentary on the condition of our hearts.
Do you think it matters WHO you wish to rot in hell???!!!!! Oh my! NM
Course it matters. He lied.
VA's have a policy. No demonstrating or protesting on their grounds. It's what laws are for. He said he wasn't protesting but he was lying. Now, in those VA beds are soldiers who were probably wounded in battle. This kind of this does not belong in the VA. Period. Rules are rules.
try Media Matters
They go after both sides for inaccuracies. They back up their points with facts.
about Media Matters....
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7150
Think your vote matters? Think again. sm
October 11th, 2008 7:08 AM Eastern
Think Your Vote Matters? Think Again
Editor’s Note: The non-partisan Web site “Opposing Views” offers readers a look at all sides of the debate on a variety of issues. This is the part of ongoing series of posts from the Web site that will appear in the FOX Forum.
By Dr. John R. Koza
Chairman, National Popular Vote
You’ve become enthralled with John McCain and Barack Obama’s struggle to win the presidency. Along with record numbers of Americans, you tuned into the debates, attended rallies and registered to vote, many of you for the first time. Yet in all likelihood your vote won’t matter because this historic election will be decided by voters in only six or so closely divided “battleground states.”
The reason the vast majority of states don’t matter in presidential elections stems from a winner-take-all rule (Nebraska and Maine being the notable exceptions). This rule awards all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes. Consequently, presidential candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, or even pay attention to the concerns of states where they are comfortably ahead or hopelessly behind. This harsh effect of the winner-take-all rule became clear in the first week of October when McCain’s Michigan state director AL Ribeiro explained McCain’s abrupt cessation of campaigning in Michigan: “The campaign must decide where it can best utilize its limited resources with the goal of winning nationally.”
Of course, voters in 36 of the 50 states never mattered, even before the 2008 presidential election began. Michigan just discovered the harsh political reality a little later. As early as spring 2008, The New York Times reported that both major political parties were in agreement that there would be at most 14 battleground states in 2008. In 2004, candidates concentrated over two-thirds of their money and campaign visits in just five states; over 80% in nine states; and over 99% of their money in 16 states.
The best and most direct way to fix our broken system is to elect the president by a national popular vote. Under a national popular vote, every person’s vote, in every state, would be equally important, regardless of political party.
Every vote would be equal, and politicians would be forced to address the concerns of every voter. There would be no red states, no blue states, and no battleground states.
It’s crucial to remember that the winner-take-all rule is not in the U.S. Constitution, but simply state law. That’s why we support the National Popular Vote bill, which would guarantee the presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and the District of Columbia). The National Popular Vote bill would take effect only when enacted by states possessing enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). It is currently being debated in all 50 states and has been enacted by four states- Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland.
It’s time to reform the current system and do what more than 70 percent of the public has long supported – elect the president by a national popular vote.
http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/11/think-your-vote-matters-think-again/
On which other matters of US politics would you have us
These other "must read" story headlines read like the Intruder tabloid and show us just what a reputable source you have cited. Waste of time and white matter. Ignored. No sale.
I don't think it matters anymore
We are on the brink of a major depression. I don't know that anything they do will prevent it. The best they can do is maybe lessen the severity and length. The automakers, credit card companies, and banks are going to end up like the airlines (at best) in having to be propped up for an indefinite period of time by the government.
I can't believe it matters. 2000 or 6000, what's... sm
The difference? It's still an ancient piece of fiction written by primitive, superstitious people from a corner of a long-dead empire. Why anyone in the present day would chose to believe any of it, let alone feel compelled to organize their life around it (or believe that it predicts the future, of all things!) is beyond me.
Here - let me try to educate you on a couple of matters
Obama's mother was in Kenya. Could not fly back to the US due to her late stage in pregnancy. After the birth she flew to HI to register the birth that happened in Kenya.
The law at the time of his birth was that a US Citizen may only pass to a child born overseas to a US citizen parent and non-citizen parent if the former was at least 19 years of age. Obama's mother was 18 years old. Therefore, because US citizenship could not legally be passed to him, Obama could not be registered as a "natural born".
Also, if for some reason he could somehow have been deemed "natural born" that citizenship was lost in or around 1967 when he and his mother took up residency in Indonesia where his mother married his stepfather .
But since he was never an American citizen to begin with there was nothing to take away.
Just because you have a mother who is a citizen does not automatically qualify you as a citizen. Just the way the laws were then.
Whether you like it or not those are the laws.
Besides...why is everyone in such an uproar. If everyone is so certain that Obama was born in Hawaii, then why is everyone defending so hard for an independent party to be able to view Obama's original birth certificate - the one he has yet failed to provide.
So, if he is american born, the judges will examine it, and if he's natural born life will move on. If not, you will still have a democratic president. No big deal.
Matters not one whit....he is now in charge of
.
These were matters that were ajudicated and people were
Get a clue, willya?
Also, you're conflating these with the "torture" (dry cough) issue - and THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING AT ALL.
And incidentally, waterboarding isn't torture. If it was so torturous, why did they have to use it 83 times on one individual to get the information? Must be REEEEEEEL bad!
That's right Character matters, meanwhile MQ puffs on W's cigar
Yep, W is his goooood buddy. They be bestest of friends. Gives him big ole bear hugs. Nice to see McSame in the saddle.
Media Matters...William Bennett Audio...sm
You'd have to hear it yourself to get the correct context. The caller was not even talking about reducing the crime rate, Bennett brought this up out of the blue, and he says I do know... before he made the comment, NOT making a reference to Freakonomics but his own opinion.
From the September 28 broadcast of Salem Radio Network's Bill Bennett's Morning in America:
CALLER: I noticed the national media, you know, they talk a lot about the loss of revenue, or the inability of the government to fund Social Security, and I was curious, and I've read articles in recent months here, that the abortions that have happened since Roe v. Wade, the lost revenue from the people who have been aborted in the last 30-something years, could fund Social Security as we know it today. And the media just doesn't -- never touches this at all.
BENNETT: Assuming they're all productive citizens?
CALLER: Assuming that they are. Even if only a portion of them were, it would be an enormous amount of revenue.
BENNETT: Maybe, maybe, but we don't know what the costs would be, too. I think as -- abortion disproportionately occur among single women? No.
CALLER: I don't know the exact statistics, but quite a bit are, yeah.
BENNETT: All right, well, I mean, I just don't know. I would not argue for the pro-life position based on this, because you don't know. I mean, it cuts both -- you know, one of the arguments in this book Freakonomics that they make is that the declining crime rate, you know, they deal with this hypothesis, that one of the reasons crime is down is that abortion is up. Well --
CALLER: Well, I don't think that statistic is accurate.
BENNETT: Well, I don't think it is either, I don't think it is either, because first of all, there is just too much that you don't know. But I do know that it's true that if you wanted to reduce crime, you could -- if that were your sole purpose, you could abort every black baby in this country, and your crime rate would go down. That would be an impossible, ridiculous, and morally reprehensible thing to do, but your crime rate would go down. So these far-out, these far-reaching, extensive extrapolations are, I think, tricky.
It doesn't matter how it started; it matters that it stops.
x
SNORT! Media Matters! Crappers complaining
X
Lol. Media Matters liberal misinformation vs conservative misinformation.. pot ... kettle...nm
nm
|
