elkston on 27/6/2008 at 18:35
Lately I've been very high on having Joseph Biden or Wesley Clark as Obama's running mate.
But after seeing Hillary and Barack's joint appearance today in New Hampshire (on TV) I am just overwhelmed by how awesome a team they would be. Not only do they look good together, but the synergy of ideas and the sheer power of both of them out there pushing agendas forward would be an unstoppable force!!!
I'd just hate to see it end after this election season. I want to see them embracing, joking, laughing, touching --- being the two strong leaders they are.
Obama/Clinton - 08'
Stitch on 27/6/2008 at 19:10
She brings nothing to the ticket and would completely compromise Obama's appeal.
I'm sure she'll be part of his cabinet, but she won't be the VP.
Kolya on 27/6/2008 at 19:15
Quote Posted by elkston
I want to see them embracing, joking, laughing, touching --- being the two strong leaders they are.
I want to see them have supercute uber-powerful mulatto babies. With laser hands and claw eyes! Wouldn't that be just awesome? They would secretly have to feed them on royal flesh and human jelly. And by the time they turned twelve they would ...
WTF? Who are you? How did you get in here? Now that badge looks shooped! I can tell because I've seen quite a feRenault on 27/6/2008 at 20:57
Yeah, these guys are great...if you want your taxes jacked up through the ceiling. :nono:
Stitch on 27/6/2008 at 21:14
lol it's so true :laff:
Pyrian on 27/6/2008 at 21:18
Quote Posted by Brethren
Yeah, these guys are great...if you want your taxes jacked up through the ceiling. :nono:
Better a tax than a deficit, I always say. It's all that fiscally irresponsible Republican policy that's got us in financial straights in the first place. If it weren't for the massive Reagan/Bush national debt (and yes, it consists almost entirely of the results of their policies), we wouldn't
need higher taxes.
elkston on 27/6/2008 at 21:37
Quote Posted by Brethren
Yeah, these guys are great...if you want your taxes jacked up through the ceiling. :nono:
That's fine. Stay on the sideline as the
CHANGE EXPRESS passes you by. :cheeky:
Obama has my vote. Hillary has my heart.
heretic on 27/6/2008 at 21:46
Quote Posted by Pyrian
Better a tax than a deficit, I always say. It's all that fiscally irresponsible Republican policy that's got us in financial straights in the first place. If it weren't for the massive Reagan/Bush national debt (and yes, it consists almost entirely of the results of their policies), we wouldn't
need higher taxes.
You say that like the government only spends the amounts we are taxed, that's funny.
Also, you can't simply blame the Republicans and then gloss over the fact that during Clinton's 8 years he kept the (
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.png) upwards spending trend going strong. Obviously the second Bush admin blew them all out of the water, but only time will tell what the next one will do.
Government spending is out of control, and no single party is to blame, just career politicians and their corporate masters doing their thing throughout, party affiliation be damned.
Pyrian on 27/6/2008 at 23:01
Quote Posted by heretic
You say that like the government only spends the amounts we are taxed...
No, I didn't. At all. Wtf? How do you even GET that from a complaint about deficit spending? I think the government SHOULD only spend the amount we're taxed, or at least a reasonable approximation.
While I agree that there's enough blame to go around, I can't help noticing that your graph rather dramatically demonstrates a leveling off in the Clinton years abruptly thrown away when another Bush took office.
...The graph would be a lot better (albeit less dramatic) if it were logarithmic. Ah, well.
Quote Posted by heretic
Government spending is out of control, and no single party is to blame...
No single party is to blame, but the Republicans (who so proudly proclaim their fiscal responsibility) certainly grabbed a vastly disproportionate share. It's
literally their
stated policy to cut taxes and increase spending (though they like to lie about the latter, the
major recent spending increases - the war and the prescription drug entitlement - are Bush initiatives).
heretic on 27/6/2008 at 23:25
Quote Posted by Pyrian
No, I didn't. At all. Wtf? How do you even GET that from a complaint about deficit spending? I think the government SHOULD only spend the amount we're taxed, or at least a reasonable approximation.
I agree that they
should. The point is that they
don't. My point was this, no matter how high we are taxed there will always be a deficit given the current state of the government.
You stated "better a tax then a deficit" like the two are mutually exclusive.
Quote Posted by Pyrian
While I agree that there's enough blame to go around, I can't help noticing that your graph rather dramatically demonstrates a leveling off in the Clinton years abruptly thrown away when another Bush took office.
Notice also that it rose ever upward, the overall effect was the same. To be sure, the events in the graph have more to do with a veritable cornucopia of given factors than any single admin.
Quote Posted by Pyrian
No single party is to blame, but the Republicans (who so proudly proclaim their fiscal responsibility) certainly grabbed a vastly disproportionate share. It's
literally their
stated policy to cut taxes and increase spending (though they like to lie about the latter, the
major recent spending increases - the war and the prescription drug entitlement - are Bush initiatives).
No argument there, the Republican party has been behaving an awful lot like the Democrats (esp. in terms of spending) for quite some time.
