Open Thread #70

Brendon,

Disappointed because a liberal (and very possibly envious) female said that Sarah Palin was the butt of jokes among the other envious, liberal “females” in her small town school? Does that really worry you?

Sarah Palin is an electrifying speaker who has much more common sense, conviction, and executive experience than Barack Obama. If John McCain and Sarah Palin loss, it will not be because of Sarah Palin. It will be because of the unfair, liberal media coverage, the economic crisis, and all the anti-Bush goofballs out there who seem willing to cut off their noses to spite their faces.

Barach Obama is one of the shadiest, most self-aggrandizing politicians I have ever seen. He has done almost nothing in the short time he has been in public office, except run for the presidency. He seems to have no backbone or convictions and survives by just telling people what they want to hear, whether it is true or not. He will probably end up giving Iraq, and maybe Afghanistan, back to the terrorists. He is a slick talker who is more qualified to train door-to-door salespeople than to be President of the United States.

People still have time to come to their senses and realize that Barack Obama is too naive, too inexperienced, too self-serving, too liberal, and too untruthful to be President. He also has way too many shady aquaintances for it to be just a coincidence.

Many Americans are so blinded by their anti-Bush feelings that they seem willing to put America at risk just to get back at the Republicans. If Barack Obama is elected President, anti-Bush Americans will be making a mistake just as stupid as the anti-American Koreans made when they elected slick-talking Roh Mu-hyun president of Korea. Koreans came to regret it, and Americans will also come to regret it if Barack Obama is elected.

SomeguyinKorea,

Experience almost always trumps graduate school, and Sarah Palin has a hell of a lot more experience than Barach Obama. Palin is a doer while Obama is a talker.

SomeguyinKorea wrote:

So, tell me, how does Palin’s experience make her more qualified to oversee the creation of laws than Obama who spent years as a constitutional law professor and legislator?

The President of the United States is an executive office, not a legislative office, and Barack Obama has no executive experience. In fact, Sarah Palin even has more executive experience than John McCain. In other words, you are comparing apples and oranges.

If you want to compare apples and apples, then go HERE and search for bills “sponsored” by Barach Obama and John McCain in the “109th” and “110th” Congresses. Notice the kinds of bills that John McCain has sponsored compared to those that Barach Obama has sponsored. It is kind of interesting.

Also, if you think Sarah Palin’s record can be summed up by her decision on a bridge, then that shows either your ignorance of the facts or your insincerity. Read what Wikipedia has to say about Sarah Palin.

User-81,

What makes you think Barack Obama understands “international relations”? Look at the bills that he has sponsored.

SomeguyinKorea,

Barack Obama was a “state” senator for almost six years, which means he was one of fifty-nine other senators in his state. Sarah Palin is the chief executive of her state. Obama has been a US senator for less than four years, which means that even if you combine his state senate career and his US Senate career, your claim that he has been a senator for “more than a decade” is wrong.

Michael,

How do you know I am enamored with Palin if you skip over my posts?

Hamel,

If I am obtuse, then it must be because I really am because I do not do it deliberately.

Please explain to me how my posting of the Obama blopper video is different from how others on this blog and the liberal media in the US have been unfairly painting Sarah Palin. If Sarah Palin had said that the US had sixty states, you do not think the US media would have made a story out of it or that Saturday Night Live would have done a skit on it?

What did I say about the Korean Coast Guard and the Chinese fishermen? I do not remember. And what is your problem with my postings on Liancourt Rocks?

Could you please post a couple of my “disingenuous” questions because I do not usually post such questions. It is not my style.

I am very happy at where I am living right now. By the way, I do not want to be disingenuous by thanking you for your “disingenuous” concern, so I will not.

One of the things I dislike most about Barack Obama is his double talk and his seeming lack of principles. Here are some more videos that demostrate what I mean. I especially recommend the “Obama Double Talk” video.

Obama flip-flops on Iran

Obama flip-flops on Iraq

An Obama lie?

Obama Double Talk

Kerplunk,

I do not see how acting like an asshole, making insults, and doing racist rants can “prompt greater thought among people.” I do not know if you have really been doing that since I have not been paying much attention to your posts, but I still do not understand why people come online and pretend to be someone they are not.

By the way, the reason I have not been paying much attention to your posts is because the few posts of yours that I have read did not make much sense to me.

Now that you have been exposed, in a way, I hope you start posting things that really do prompt greater thought.

Linkd,

When you tax corporations, it puts more burden on the poor and middle class than it does on the rich because the corporation simply adds that tax expense to cost of the product or service. If you do not tax corporations, then the cost of those products and services should come down.

For example, by eliminating the corporate income tax, the price of a car might come down from $25,000 to $20,000. That $5,000 savings would not mean much to a person making a million dollars a year, but it would mean a hell of a lot to a person making $30,000 a year.

It would be more fair to the poor and middle class to just tax personal income because then the rich would be paying their fair share of the taxes rather than putting the corporate tax burden on those who are least able to pay it.

The rich probably love the corporate income tax because it means the middle class are essentially subsidizing their rich life styles by paying most of the taxes that keep our government operating.

CMM (#219),

Robert does not ban people just because they support McCain, though I think some Obama supporters wish he would. The truth hurts sometimes.

Linkd,

There are many mistakes in your Economics lesson, but I am not going to waste my time pointing them out. Instead, I am going to focus on two big differences between McCain and Obama in regard to taxes.

First, Obama wants to keep the corporate tax rate at 35 percent. McCain wants to lower it to 25 percent.

Second, Obama wants to raise the dividend and capital gains tax to between 20 and 25 percent. McCain wants to keep it at 15 percent.

If you just look at the differences between the Obama and McCain tax plans, Obama’s plan means there will be 10% more in corporate taxes and between 5% and 10% percent more in capital gains taxes.

As I explained above, that 10 percent in corporate income tax will be passed on to consumers by way of higher prices, which means the poor and middle class will be paying a higher percent of that tax. For example, if that 10 percent difference added $2,000 to the price of a car, that would be about 6.6 percent of the annual salary of a person making $30,000 a year. However, it would be only 1 percent of the annual salary of a person making $200,000 a year. Therefore, the $30,000-salary consumer would essentially be paying a 6.6% tax while the $200,000 consumer would be paying only a 1% tax.

Not only rich people invest in stocks. Many middle-income people invest in stocks and mutual funds. Also, 401(k)’s are mainly stock investments. The 5% to 10% tax difference of Obama’s capital gains tax means that both the rich and middle-income investors will be taxed at the same percentages. The difference is that a 5% to 10% higher tax would most likely be a greater burden on someone making $30,000 a year than on someone making $200,000 a year since the $30,000-salary investor may depend on that money to buy food and clothing while the $200,000 investor may depend on it to take annual vacations to Europe.

A sales tax is another example of the poor and middle class subsidizing the lifestyles of the rich. An 8% sales tax on a $1,000 computer ($80) is more of a burden on a person making only $30,000 a year than on a person making $200,000 a year.

The middle class is getting screwed by sales taxes and the corporate income tax, and most of them do not even realize it. The rich, however, including Barack Obama, most likely do realize it, but would rather just keep it a secret because that corporate income tax is helping to keep their taxes low.

Correction: McCain just finished saying he would cut the capital gains tax to 7.5%.