http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/10/dozens_of_call_center_workers.php
-Brian
C’mon Steve. I expect better from you. You really gonna blame the two years of Democrats running the house for the mess in DC and NYC? What does that have to do with what I posted? I feel for you that your guy is likely going to lose but learn how to do it gracefully.
-Brian
That all may be true, but, unless the buck (as in $) no longer stops with the President, it is the President that must take the repsonsibility for all the problems facing the USA and the American people will make sure he does on Nov 4th.
If y’all hadn’t been so blind as to the failings of Dubya and his neocon cronies y’all wouldn’t be in this position.
I love that story, but I’m a little skeptical–those people who probably don’t make much money, gave up a day’s pay to avoid repeating McCain’s nonsensical slime. I’d like to believe it, and the evidence looks very good though
TonyWalsham said:We're not all blind.
If y'all hadn't been so blind as to the failings of Dubya and his neocon cronies y'all wouldn't be in this position.
My apologies.
I guess y’all was the wrong way of me saying a majority of the American voters got conned in 2000 and again in 2004.
It must have been that liberal media that did the conning to get GWB elected.
Brian Donovan said:
C'mon Steve. I expect better from you. You really gonna blame the two years of Democrats running the house for the mess in DC and NYC? What does that have to do with what I posted? I feel for you that your guy is likely going to lose but learn how to do it gracefully.-Brian
Why? You won’t.
TonyWalsham said:
My apologies.I guess y’all was the wrong way of me saying a majority of the American voters got conned in 2000 and again in 2004.
It must have been that liberal media that did the conning to get GWB elected.
I can honestly say I never voted for the man.
And the two years of control was pretty useless. Not enough votes to stop a filibuster or override a veto. Pretty much W got his way.
Ralph
And “Stretch” Pelosi and “Dingy” Harry gave us the most ethical, transparent and bi-partisan congress and Senate ever. Be still, my heart.
'Twas the weekight before elections
And all through the town
Tempers were flaring
Emotions all up and down!
I, in my bathrobe
With a cat in my lap
Had cut off the TV
Tired of political crap.
When all of a sudden
There arose such a noise
I peered out of my window
Saw Obama and his boys
They had come for my wallet
They wanted my pay
To give to the others
Who had not worked a day!
He snatched up my money
And quick as a wink
Jumped back on his bandwagon
As I gagged from the stink
He then rallied his henchmen
Who were pulling his cart
I could tell they were out
To tear my country apart!
" On Fannie, on Freddie,
On Biden and Ayers!
On Acorn, On Pelosi"
He screamed at the pairs!
They took off for his cause
And as he flew out of sight
I heard him laugh at the nation
Who wouldn’t stand up and fight!
So I leave you to think
On this one final note-
IF YOU DONT WANT SOCIALISM
GET OUT AND VOTE!!!
Ric, I can understand not liking Obama. I never liked Bush, just really disliked and distrusted the guy, he rubbed me the wrong way. Ok, fine. But when you post this:
"They had come for my wallet
They wanted my pay
To give to the others
Who had not worked a day! "
It’s just odd. There’s nothing in Obama’s tax plan that really fits this. He’s not proposing expanding welfare, or giving handouts to the chronically unemployed, he’s proposing to return tax rates for the top 2% to what they were in 1998. And then he proposes to use the increased revenue to fund middle class entitlements like college aid. So in effect he’s proposing to take money from one set of working people and give it to another.
There’s plenty of grounds for criticizing his tax plan. But why not at least be accurate? It’s like you’re imagining Obama is Lyndon Johnson and it’s 1967.
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?series_id=LNS14000000&data_tool=XGtable
Let’s see about people “who have not worked a day.”
Last three years of Clinton’s administration, unemployment trended down from 4.7 to 3.9.
Bush takes office in January 2001, numbers start rising to a high of 6.3 in July 2003. The numbers begin to improve, but never below 4.4, and for the vast majority of the time higher than Clinton’s last three years in office. Then beginning late 2006, numbers start trending upwards again to where we are today at 6.1.
Seems to me that an awful lot of people who “had not worked a day” were put in that position during Bush’s time in office. We had a rather nasty round of layoffs at my shop back in April. Ain’t no one was walking out that door yelling “Yipee!!! I can live off the Government.” The vast majority of unemployed aren’t unemployed by choice. And when the welfare laws are such that it penalizes people for going out and actually getting jobs, what can you expect from the rest?
Now, I’m not prone to blame the economy solely on any one factor such as an administration, but when an administration presides over such a trend, I do think they have a social obligation to help those affected. And–yes–that does mean giving money to those who are not working through unemployment benefits or–dare I suggest–public works projects. You know, something like that government-sponsored program in the 30s that gave work to thousands of unemployed people and gave us such silly things as new roads, buildings, parks, cultural history displays… projects that we still enjoy nearly 80 years later, and that still provide a boost for their respective local economies? Nah, that’d never work.
Later,
K
Nicely put Kevin
mike omalley said:
Ric, I can understand not liking Obama. I never liked Bush, just really disliked and distrusted the guy, he rubbed me the wrong way. Ok, fine. But when you post this:"They had come for my wallet
They wanted my pay
To give to the others
Who had not worked a day! "It’s just odd. There’s nothing in Obama’s tax plan that really fits this. He’s not proposing expanding welfare, or giving handouts to the chronically unemployed, he’s proposing to return tax rates for the top 2% to what they were in 1998. And then he proposes to use the increased revenue to fund middle class entitlements like college aid. So in effect he’s proposing to take money from one set of working people and give it to another.
There’s plenty of grounds for criticizing his tax plan. But why not at least be accurate? It’s like you’re imagining Obama is Lyndon Johnson and it’s 1967.
Mike,
All I did was copy and paste that poem. I don’t write that crap. For God sake’s lighten up. Your the one that hangs around with hippies and the poets on college campi, not me. I didn’t like those places when I was forced to be there and I sure wouldn’t go back to one now. Holly cow, you’d wear out a dead Iraqy.
Remember now, mikie says that he really doesn’t like Obama, either, but I have yet to hear a word of criticism come out of his fingers, either.
How could anyone criticise “perfection”?
Ric Golding said:"Hippies?"
Your the one that hangs around with hippies and the poets on college campi, not me.
Yes, and we use those new-fangled touch-tone phones, and we have punch card computers out there with the hippies.
!!
It’s like those stories about finding Japanese soldiers deep in the jungle 30 years later, they don’t know the war’s over.
Two separate points. One, If the script WAS sleazy, and the telemarketers refused to do it, Good On Them! …I wish the “guy on the street” who did the “Obama is pro second amendment” (when he isn’t) radio spots here would have done the same thing.
Second, the university here had a bunch of local pollies and prominent business people do this all day workshop last year where they pretended to be poor, and had to go through all the financial juggling, hoops and red tape that the poor deal with all the time… Seems 2/3 of them were either evicted, had at least had one of the utilities shut off, or ran afoul of the system and were cut off of assistance by the end of the afternoon… Yep, public assistance is such a hammock for lazy people.
Here’s the thing. Obama wants to re-cut the pie…a BIGGER pie. McCain wants a smaller pie. I doubt we can really spend our way to prosperity…
TonyWalsham said:Again, Tony doesn't read what is written.
How could anyone criticise "perfection"?