Article

2008-10-17 Home Front: Culture Wars

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2008-10-17 09:38|| || Front Page|| [11136 views ] Top

#1 ladies and gentlemen... the next president of the United States.

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Republican-presidential-nominee-shaking-hands-Senator-Barack-Obama-presidential-debate/photo/081016/ids_photos_ts/r1772410910.jpg/;_ylt=AujAY6EXHmMQy5Zsha09SbsDW7oF

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 10:27|| 2008-10-17 10:27|| Front Page Top

#2 Reagan's youth and Bush's brain all in one candidate

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 10:28|| 2008-10-17 10:28|| Front Page Top

#3 Have you decided yet, Todd?

Posted by Mike N. 2008-10-17 10:59|| 2008-10-17 10:59|| Front Page Top

#4 He probably hasn't been told yet.

Posted by tu3031 2008-10-17 11:10|| 2008-10-17 11:10|| Front Page Top

#5 He's been told. Pro'ly been working for ACORN. How many times did you register Mickey Mouse to vote, Todd?

Posted by Steve White 2008-10-17 11:31|| 2008-10-17 11:31|| Front Page Top

#6 Todd's did you pre-order one too?

Posted by Procopius2k 2008-10-17 11:39|| 2008-10-17 11:39|| Front Page Top

#7 That one hurt, P2K...

Posted by tu3031 2008-10-17 12:11|| 2008-10-17 12:11|| Front Page Top

#8 You'll never persuade by being rude, Todd dear. And please embed your links so your readers can just click through. It's very easy. The site owner, Mr. Pruitt, very thoughtfully provided a cheat sheet just below the box where one types in one's comments. Really -- even I can do it, so there's no excuse for someone with your superior trained intelligence.

Posted by trailing wife ">trailing wife 2008-10-17 12:11|| 2008-10-17 12:11|| Front Page Top

#9 trailing wife,

It didn't work for me. Then again, I used the link button, didn't copy and paste the stuff below the button

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 13:02|| 2008-10-17 13:02|| Front Page Top

#10 And I apologize for the link. I was still half-asleep this morning and just thought it was funny.

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 13:03|| 2008-10-17 13:03|| Front Page Top

#11 Mike N. Just because you make fun of a candidate doesn't necessarily mean you vote against him. I voted for Bush (the first time)but I've made fun of him plenty of times, cause he's unintentionally funny a lot. So too is McCain--what can I say?

But yes, I HAVE decided to go with Obama this time. I make less than 250K a year, and I don't mind giving him a shot. I don't think he'll ruin the nation quite as the scare tactics would have you believe. Plus--and this is subjective--but some of my values have changed in terms of abortion (I see it now as nobody's business but a woman's in consultation with her doctor), and imposing of Christian values on our government. I lean toward Republicans in terms of gun control, but I can't have it all my way, so I have to pick a side.

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 13:17|| 2008-10-17 13:17|| Front Page Top

#12 There's more from a fiscal point of view (in addition to the social conservative stuff above), but I bet no one here gives a damn why I am voting the way I'm voting, so we'll leave it at that.

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 13:19|| 2008-10-17 13:19|| Front Page Top

#13 Great. Somebody wanna notify the media?

Posted by tu3031 2008-10-17 14:03|| 2008-10-17 14:03|| Front Page Top

#14 but I bet no one here gives a damn why I am voting the way I'm voting,

I'll take that bet mate. I care how you vote and I hope you don't vote for a communist.

Posted by Besoeker 2008-10-17 14:10|| 2008-10-17 14:10|| Front Page Top

#15 More astroturfing?

I voted for Bush Ah, trying to make that connection. If you surfed here long enough you'd find there's not a whole lot of love for George here. No BDS, but certainly no love and some serious opinions on some of his major actions [re: immigration, bailout, Justice Department carryovers, etc]. So, no mutual identification there.

I make less than 250K a year Oops, that old class warfare meme. I doubt most of the regulars here make something in or around a quarter of that. I for one make less. If you didn't get the message, its the Democrats who are now the Party of the Rich(c), just check the donation records at sources like Opensecrets.org.

...some of my values have changed in terms of abortion (I see it now as nobody's business but a woman's in consultation with her doctor)

My problem with Roe vs Wade is that the Judiciary overstepped its authority and the restraints of the 10th Amendment. Through a house of cards of rationalization they pull 'privacy' through a series of various precedents to arrive at their desired outcome. The state of New York already has law on the books to kick in place if Roe is overturned. I have no problem with that because that is where the authority properly resides. Compare the Civil Rights Act passed in the legislative branch with the decree issued by the court. No one questions the former, but the latter has created an ever greater untenable situation of SCOTUS nominations and reduced the entire judicial nomination process to a destructive element within the government process.

..and imposing of Christian values on our government. Again the evil Christianists meme. For the last hundred years the Christians that have put civil in to civilization. The Socialist morality has given us in the same time frame a 100 million dead in the 20th Century and they're still not satisfied.

We know how you're going to vote. You have an expectation on how most of us are going to. So, why did you bother in the first place other than astroturfing? [rhetorical question].

Posted by Procopius2k 2008-10-17 14:13|| 2008-10-17 14:13|| Front Page Top

#16 Todd, despite the fact that you make less than $250K, if you don't think the amount, in aggregate, that you pay in taxes is not going to go up under an Obama + dem congress administration, then you are kidding yourself. That said, I understand the desire to give the other team a shot, since, on the domestic front, the current team has failed so miserably. But again, I don't think you are going to get what you hope you are going to get.

Posted by remoteman 2008-10-17 14:20|| 2008-10-17 14:20|| Front Page Top

#17 OK Besoeker, just cause you asked, and I'll keep this short.

In terms of fiscal stuff, I do think Obama's plan will cut more taxes for more Americans (including me). McCain is not directly disputing this--all he's saying is that EVERYBODY's taxes should be lower. I don't believe a standard tax rate for all incomes is "fair". I don't think there should be tax breaks for companies pulling down record profits (like oil companies)--simply doesn't make sense to me. I don't think increasing taxes on the wealthier and reducing taxes on the less wealthy makes you COMMUNIST--that's a term used to just strike fear into voters. It's more reasonable to call it socialism, but even that is a huge stretch. Wealthy people would not stop being wealthy because of slightly higher taxes, or lose the incentive to make more money--they'll still make more money, so the basics of our capitalist society will still be intact.

Why tax ANYONE more? Sadly, someone gotta pay for the goverment (starting with that horrible $700 billion bailout). There also needs to be better oversight in general--so we don't face the same lame greed-induced economic meltdowns. This costs money. McCain says he'll cut everyone's taxes. It sounds great; I just don't think it is feasible. Obama has a more workable plan (even if it doesn't fit Republican ideals).

I like Obama's healthcare plan better--and no it's not "evil" after reading the details-I find it more pragmatic, and possibly the only one of the two plans that will maintain employer-provided healthcare.

Basically I think what makes our country great is that we take what's best in different systems (be it capitalism, socialism or whatever else)and apply them (sure, we won't call it socialism cause we'll throw up) in order to create the best overall system to keep us prosperous and the global leader we are. We have the ability to continually morph our government to best fit our nation's needs as a whole. That's what separates us from places like China--and not the fact that they are "Commy Evil" and we're not. We shouldn't turn captitalism or any other system into a religion--that's when we get inflexible and hurt ourselves in the long run.

Is that good enough, Besoeker?

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 14:40|| 2008-10-17 14:40|| Front Page Top

#18 Procopius2k

One can always try to convert some over to the "dark side".

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 14:44|| 2008-10-17 14:44|| Front Page Top

#19 Also Procopius2k

OK I'll bite that the Democrats are "new" the party of the rich (even if I don't REALLY buy it). Even if so, if they are the party of the rich who don't mind paying more taxes to support the less wealthy, I've got no problem with that.

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 14:49|| 2008-10-17 14:49|| Front Page Top

#20 No one should support the less wealthy. Each should support himself. When a nation operates in a "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" mode, only the apparatchiks and the nomenklatura benefit. We end up in a situation where everyone pretends to work, and the government pretends to pay us. The whole politics of envy is based on the expectation of equivalence of outcome as opposed to equivalence of opportunity. It becomes increasingly evident that outcomes will not be equivalent on a level playing field because people are not all equivalently capable.

Posted by SR-71">SR-71 2008-10-17 15:10|| 2008-10-17 15:10|| Front Page Top

#21 I am not condoning "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need", or pure socialism. It is not black and white in my opinion(no pun intended). There is a grey area. The incentive for the more capable to make more needs to be maintained. A bit more taxes doesn't ruin the system or put everyone on a level playing field. My concern is just for maintaining a minimum playing field that ensures, for example, that equivalence of opportunity for those who may not have the opportunity. I don't think we're at a point where everyone has an opportunity--be it due to lack of health care or a proper education, that affects entire communities. This requires funding, which requires increased taxes on some.

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 15:40|| 2008-10-17 15:40|| Front Page Top

#22 A bit more tax is a bit more disincentive to produce.

Posted by Mike N. 2008-10-17 15:53|| 2008-10-17 15:53|| Front Page Top

#23 yes, and no tax at all is complete incentive. What's your point? Is THAT your presidential plan?

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 15:58|| 2008-10-17 15:58|| Front Page Top

#24 #23 yes, and no tax at all is complete incentive. What's your point? Is THAT your presidential plan? Posted by Todd

Yes, and that is pretty much what we had it prior to the beloved FDR (who would still be president were he alive today). Only the wealthy paid income taxes. The difference then was, those that didn't pay taxes didn't get gummit cheese free money via the socialist IRS "Earned Income Tax Credit." The give-away programs started with FDR. Vote for the Messiah and you'll be headed 'back to the future.' Just my 2 cents worth, while I've still got it and it hasn't been..... spread around.

Posted by Besoeker 2008-10-17 16:07|| 2008-10-17 16:07|| Front Page Top

#25 "Only the wealthy paid income taxes"

There goes your entire argument. You like the fact that the wealthy paid and the non-wealthy didn't? Thanks for being way more extreme than I would have ever suggested that I am.

I am more fair than you are. Almost everyone needs to bear the burden of supporting the government, not just rich people--my only change would be to what degree.

I

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 16:12|| 2008-10-17 16:12|| Front Page Top

#26 I am more fair than you are.

More smug, too. No wonder you like Obama.

Posted by Grenter, Protector of the Geats 2008-10-17 16:21|| 2008-10-17 16:21|| Front Page Top

#27 Yes Todd, yes Todd... all hale, you are indeed the "fairest" of them all.

When you get a bit of time, go check the data on tax payers prior to FDR mate.

Posted by Besoeker 2008-10-17 16:25|| 2008-10-17 16:25|| Front Page Top

#28 Grenter, It was a conclusion based on what was said. Just because I say I'm right, it makes me smug?

And really, why do you have to have the mild insult, Besoeker? Sure I can look up tax payers before FDR, but what is the point? I already accepted that perhaps only the wealthy paid taxes. I was including that in my argument.

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 16:39|| 2008-10-17 16:39|| Front Page Top

#29 Just because I say I'm right, it makes me smug?

Just dense.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2008-10-17 16:54|| 2008-10-17 16:54|| Front Page Top

#30 Nimble-- Do you have anything of actual value to add? Or would you prefer just the meaningless namecalling that reflects more on you than on me?

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 17:10|| 2008-10-17 17:10|| Front Page Top

#31 And why are you guys picking on specific minor phrases and throwing it back at me like it's intelligent?

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 17:12|| 2008-10-17 17:12|| Front Page Top

#32 I plan to do a write in for Scalia. I would very much like to see McCain win just to see the reaction of astroturfers posing as registered Republicans who have reluctantly decided to vote for the Marxist.

Posted by Mike N. 2008-10-17 17:33|| 2008-10-17 17:33|| Front Page Top

#33 At $250,000 gross at a 30% profit margin gives me $75,000 net. That gives me 3 employees at $25,000 (minus tat income for mandated health insurance and taxes) which is shipping, books, and phone. Now, each percentage point of tax = $2,500 of money I do not have to put into the business for replacables, maintenence, and growth. That eliminates one employee - so I would have myself and one other having to work 8 hour days in order to take, fill, and ship those orders and make little money for the effort.

Giving me $3000 to hire another employee still sets me back $22,000 EOY.

Its insulting. It is a governor switch on business growth.

Posted by swksvolFF 2008-10-17 17:52|| 2008-10-17 17:52|| Front Page Top

#34 And if the rich, however that is defined, make more money then fine - people have to build their cars and planes, cook for them at fancy restaurants, clean their houses, sail their yachts, etc. People make a living off of the rich. People with money like to make the money work by buying stock, starting new businesses which hire people. People with money take trips and buy food and gas which the government makes a cut with various taxes.

Cut the middleman - Congress - because when they get going they spend that money on stupid shit like prison museums, woodstock museums, bailing out their lobbyists, pander to constituants. Congress has already proven itself unable to resist the blank check, pelosi wants more money already after the wildly unpopular bailout (arguable necessary).

Posted by swksvolFF 2008-10-17 18:04|| 2008-10-17 18:04|| Front Page Top

#35 Do you find it impossible to believe that people can change their mind? Not everyone is stuck to one view their entire lives. And there you go again with the scare-tactics--"Marxist". The problem is that people hear the same thing over and over again and convince themselves it's true.

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 18:10|| 2008-10-17 18:10|| Front Page Top

#36 my post #35 was in reference to #32

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 18:12|| 2008-10-17 18:12|| Front Page Top

#37 OK I'm done for the day. I agree with most of your second post swksvolF. In regards to your first post, I'm confused--it seems you are talking less about taxes and more about that it would be impossible to make any profit regardless.

Posted by Todd 2008-10-17 18:18|| 2008-10-17 18:18|| Front Page Top

#38 Rant/on

Obama talks about cutting taxes for 95% of Americans? Since when did 95% of Americans pay fed taxes in the first place? More like 60%. If he meant 95% of taxpayers - that's different - but that's not whate he said - nuance. You can raise a few taxes on those who already pay more than 50% of the tax burden - it's retarded but he can certainly do it. Next, he has not mentioned cutting spending - in fact the inverse is true if he's going to let Pelosi run her games plus the health care crap -- no, I don't believe in universal health care - I'm in the U.S. mil active duty - I can tell you how socialist health care works -- it would be okay if everyone was between the ages of 17-47, few smoked and all were basically within their height and weight standards - HOWEVER - I can't imagine providing it for smokers, alcoholics and all the obese pigs I see in the country. Plus, all the malpractice insurance for every sue happy p.o.s. lawyer and client looking to make a buck - no tort reform means unaffordable health care. I.E. - why the fuck does my chiropractor have to have almost 100K of malpractice insurance to work?? Horse shit. That's partly why his patients are paying $30.00 a pop.

If Obama's going to cut & run on Iraq and Afghanistan both he will still not be able to pay for all this crap -- Hawaii state health care just tanked this week too, btw.

Taxing corporations does not work - that tax gets thrown on to the consumer - CORPORATIONS ARE GENERALY MADE UP OF HUNDREDS OR THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE - not the old bald white guy from the simpsons steepling his fingers together and saying excellent smithers - you libz understand that? You over tax corps and they will start laying labor off in order to maintain the profit margin for share holders - business 101. Or, they will go overseas. The oil companies make a lot of cash - and rightfully so -- supply meet demand. India & china are both ramping up their economies - of course oil is going to cost more. We haven't built a new refinery in over 30 yrs, we haven't really tried nuke and we should've started drilling when Reagan was in office. 50% of our elected leaders are fucking brain dead. If you tax a small business owner like swks was saying they will end up laying an employee off to maintain the profit margin and viability of the company. It is about the profit.

I don't make 250K but I don't want another man's money because one of my fellow American schleps was too stupid to live within their means. Yes, that's right, I said it - doesn't take a fucking genius to figure out a budget or man w/the willpower of Jack Lalane to not buy shit you cannot afford. This also the fault of some Americans buying homes they don't rate, the congressmen pressuring banks to give out loans to otherwise un-suitable candidates and the idiots that took the loans - a pox on all their houses, yes, I'm mean & no, I don't fucking care who has a problem w/that. The gov't needs to adhere to the constitution and then basically stay the fuck out of the way.

Lastly, I love it when people who don't pay any income taxes get to vote on the rights and property of those of us who do. We fought a war over No taxation without representation I feel that the converse is also true. You don't pay federal tax, you don't rate a vote on the prospect of raising my taxes to pay for your ass.

Rant/off

Posted by Flitch the Imposter aka Broadhead6 2008-10-17 19:30|| 2008-10-17 19:30|| Front Page Top

#39 Todd: "OK I'm done for the day."

Gott sei dank!

Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut 2008-10-17 19:33|| http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/]">[http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/] 2008-10-17 19:33|| Front Page Top

#40 Well said, BH6. This Todd individual is dreaming if he thinks he can make the "wealthy" pay more in tax. Given the convoluted tax code we have there will always be loopholes for the wealthy who can afford the expensive legal advice about how and where to place one's money.

Obama knows this extremely well; one of his top advisers, Penny Pritzker, is the primary heiress of a huge family fortune that expanded tremendously in exactly that way. IIRC, they had some 4-500 interlocking business and family trusts incorporated in various Caribbean tax havens that were so tightly tied that even the IRS couldn't untangle the skein. When they sued the Pritzkers they ended up settling for pennies on the dollar because the Pritzkers brought more and better legal talent to bear than the USG did.

Obama has no intention of doing anything to help anyone but Obama and his coterie of cronies. That said, whoever gets elected is going to inherit a sullen, very angry country that is probably closer to civil war than at any time since 1865. It will be almost impossible for the next president to succeed. I suspect the Secret Service may have a tough job just keeping him alive.

Posted by Jolutch Mussolini7800 2008-10-17 22:25|| 2008-10-17 22:25|| Front Page Top

#41 Apology accepted, Todd. One leaerns by getting caught at mistakes.

You're wrong about rich people, though. They have more than enough money, so generally they work hard because they enjoy it. But if their taxes go up significantly, many of them decide it's not worth the risk of another heart attack to put in the extra work... or retire. There are an awful lot of baby boomers approaching retirement age, and the senior vice president types are are just deciding on the timing. Granted, that would open up opportunities for advancement for managers all the way down the food chain, but eg. Mr. Wife is already working 70-hour weeks -- as are all his peers -- due to chronic understaffing at his Fortune 500 company, so I don't know that he would accept a promotion which would require even longer hours. Net effect over all: fewer rich people dollars available for taxation, even at higher rates, equal fewer tax dollars collected.

Posted by trailing wife ">trailing wife 2008-10-17 23:39|| 2008-10-17 23:39|| Front Page Top

23:44 Red Dawg
23:39 trailing wife
23:31 JosephMendiola
23:29 ed
23:27 JosephMendiola
23:25 SteveS
22:53 trailing wife
22:45 trailing wife
22:36 trailing wife
22:31 trailing wife
22:25 Jolutch Mussolini7800
22:22 trailing wife
22:15 DanNY
22:07 trailing wife
22:05 newc
22:02 Scott R
21:58 KBK
21:56 KBK
21:54 Jolutch Mussolini7800
21:50 KBK
21:43 Jolutch Mussolini7800
21:00 gromky
20:54 OldSpook
20:51 tipover