John McCain pays Denver a visit
The Rocky
Originally published 07:04 a.m., July 7, 2008
Updated 05:47 p.m., July 7, 2008
Photo by Darin McGregor
Cindy McCain wipes lipstick off the cheek of her husband Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain after a kiss before he spoke during a town hall meeting at the Denver Center for the Performing Arts in Denver July 7, 2008.
Photo by Lynn Bartels, The Rocky
The water stand.
Photo by Lynn Bartels, The Rocky
Barry Poulson
Photo by Matt McClain
169 Members of Progress Now Action, James Duncan, second from left, Blake Couch, center, and executive director, Michael Huttner, second from right, are asked to leave by Denver Police officer, Matt Canino, right, after being informed that the secret service thought the protesters were too close to a John McCain.
Photo by Lynn Bartels, The Rocky
Taylor Schettler, left, with dad Tim Schettler.
Photo by Lynn Bartels, The Rocky
Curt Schmidt
Photo by Carolyn Kaster, Associated Press
Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain and his wife, Cindy, are greeted by Larry Abrams as they walk into worship service at the North Phoenix Baptist Church in Phoenix on Sunday. McCain will hold a town meeting in Denver at noon today.
Republican presidential candidate John McCain is visiting Denver at noon today for town meeting on the economy. The Rocky is blogging live from the Denver Performing Arts Complex.
1:26 p.m.John McCain is wrapping it up right now, thanking all the young people for showing up with their cameras.
He said it helps the economy, but a man in the audience hollered, “It’s to keep you honest.”
McCain has handled some tough questions – an about-face from George W. Bushs’ 2004 staged campaign, where it appeared that only friendly faces were allowed in.
1:09 p.m.An older woman with a thick accent stole the show today when she griped about taxes, saying people are taxed when they are born, when they die, when they eat and so on.
Her voice got louder and louder and finally she demanded that government “GET OFF MY BACK!”
When the laughter stopped, McCain said, “ If you’re not busy I’d like to take you with me wherever I go.”
12:40 p.m.A Pueblo veteran and Democrat just told John McCain he planned to vote for him. The veteran invited McCain to Pueblo and said he believed such a visit would help the senator win votes from disabled veterans and Hispanics.
12:33 p.m. The first person John McCain tapped tapped for a question wore a Vietnam veteran hat, but McCain soon found himself under fire. The man was critical of McCain’s record of helping veterans.
McCain responded that he is proud of his record, and that he repeatedly is endorsed by veterans groups.
12:26 Wrapping up, McCain said, “We are Americans. We don’t hide from history. We make history.”
12:25 p.m. John McCain just got a big laugh with this line: “For a guy whose ‘official seal’ carried the motto, ‘Yes, we can,’ Sen. Obama’s agenda sure has a whole lot of ‘No, we can’t.’”
12:14 p.m. McCain just mentioned Crocs, the Colorado based company with the funky footwear.
12:13 p.m.By the way, the music that played when John McCain walked into the room was from the soundtrack “Rudy.”
12:12 p.m.“If you believe you should pay more taxes, I’m the wrong candidate for you. Sen. Obama is your man,” McCain said to laughter.
12:12 p.m. “These are tough times my friend,” McCain just told the crowd.
12:11 p.m.John McCain singled out his former Senate colleague, Hank Brown. They served together in the Senate from 1990 to 1996. Brown recently retired as president of the University of Colorado.
12:10 p.m.John McCain got a big laugh when he mentioned that his wife had just returned from a trip to Vietnam, “one of my old residences.” McCain was a prisoner of war in Vietnam.
12:06 p.m.Cindy McCain, wife of John McCain, got a laugh when she commented on the weather.
“In the McCain family, rain is good luck,” she said.
12:03 p.m.John McCain is now being introduced by Beth Isern, of Bethany Manufacturing.
“Government regulation and taxation are smothering small businesses,” she said.
12:01 John McCain is here and the crowd is cheering.
11:56 a.m.Look for Bob Schaffer, U.S. Senate candidate, to get lots of face time when John McCain starts speaking. That’s because the Fort Collins Republican was strategically placed behind the podium. Not bad considering that a year ago Schaffer indirectly dissed McCain.
11:40 a.m.Also sitting in the front row: Doug Dean, former speaker of the state House; state Rep. Jim Kerr, R-Littleton, and Bob Balink, clerk and recorder of El Paso County and a delegate to the Republican National Convention.
11:35 a.m.After standing in line, going through security and finally taking the escalator to where John McCain was going to be speaking, plenty of folks stopped for a glass of water.
Among them was Rick Newlander, 32, of Denver, who is an unaffiliated voter.
He said he came to the McCain event because he wants to see the presidential candidates in person.
11:31 a.m.John McCain will talk today about the economy so his campaign invited three local economists talk to reporters afterward.
Among them is Barry Poulson, a professor at the University of Colorado who also is senior fellow at the Independence Institute, and CU professor Jane Lillydahl.
"You've stumbled on the only two conservative economists at CU," Poulson said with a laugh.
11:04 a.m.
Who gets the good seats to see John McCain?
Well in one section, the front-row spots were reserved for former Gov. Bill Owens, his children Monica and Brett; Dick Wadhams, chairman of the Colorado Republican Party; Marti Allbright, who once worked for Sen. McCain and now is co-chair of his Colorado campaign; and Tom Kirk, who was a prisoner of war with McCain in Vietnam.
Both Kirk and Monica Owens are delegates to the Republican National Convention in the Twin Cities in September.
11 a.m.
Tim Schettler of Castle Rock has been bringing his daughter, Taylor, to Republican rallies since she was an infant. She saw George Bush in 1992, the year she was born. Then it was George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004. Today dad brought daughter to see John McCain. "She's my little Republican," Schettler said, with a laugh.
10:54 a.m.
Curt Schmidt said if he walked faster he might have been the first person in line to hear John McCain speak this morning. In fact, about four people arrived at the same time, at 7:38 a.m. Schmidt was among them.
The 72-year-old Littleton resident is an unaffiliated voter, who already has heard Barack Obama speak.
"I'm always looking for the best candidate," he said.
--Lynn Bartels
7 a.m.
Republican presidential candidate John McCain acknowledges the steep drop in U.S. jobs and says he would help the economy by cutting taxes, encouraging free trade, building nuclear power plants and launching other initiatives.
Economic problems under the Bush administration pose a major challenge to McCain and fellow Republicans running for House and Senate seats this fall.
In remarks prepared for a midday event in Denver today, McCain tried to confront the issue with a can-do spirit.
More than 400,000 jobs have been lost since December, he said, adding, "Americans are worried about the security of their current job, and they're worried that they, their kids and their neighbors may not find good jobs and new opportunities in the future."
He cited a list of previously announced proposals that he said are better-suited to helping the economy than are plans by Democrat Barack Obama.
"I will double the child deduction from $3,500 to $7,000 for every dependent," McCain said in the prepared remarks. He also cited his plans to cut the estate tax, although Democrats note that it applies to only a fraction of Americans.
McCain would provide refundable tax credits of $2,500 for individuals, and $5,000 for families, for all those who buy health insurance. Employer contributions toward health insurance would be treated as income, meaning workers would have to pay income taxes on it, but not payroll taxes.
Obama says the plan would seriously undermine the employer-based system that provides health insurance to about 158 million workers.
He would require most employers to provide health care for their workers or pay into a national health care plan.
McCain said Obama's plan would hurt small businesses and hamper job creation.
McCain restated his support of free trade, acknowledging it "is not a positive for everyone." He promised to retrain workers who lose their jobs to overseas plants.
McCain also repeated his call to build at least 45 new nuclear plants, which he said "will create over 700,000 good jobs to construct and operate them."
In an interview today on CBS' "The Early Show," McCain campaign adviser Carly Fiorina was asked what he would do immediately to boost the economy if he's elected president.
"Make it easier for small businesses to hire and grow and that's critical because small business is the one place in the economy that is still adding jobs," said Fiorina, a former Hewlett-Packard CEO. "Small business is the engine of growth in this economy."
Obama supporter Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri criticized McCain for saying he would continue President Bush's tax policy, which she said mainly benefits the wealthiest Americans.
Obama's "plan is all about middle-class families," she said.
"We're talking about changing the tax code to help out those who need it instead of those very few at the top."
McCain will appear at the Denver Performing Arts Complex. Doors opened to the public at 10 a.m. and the town meeting will start at noon.
--Associated Press
July 7, 2008
7:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
A vote for McCain is a vote for the same kind of economic stewardship we've been suffering under for the last seven years--for the rich, by the rich and without regard for the day to day struggles of the average person.
As Bush famously said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mn4daY...
McCain is no different--just older.
July 7, 2008
8:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
Michael writes:
The "rich", the "wealthy", the "affluent", the smart, the successful, the educated, the intelligent, and the ambitious. These are the people the liberal Democrats do not like, wish to tax into extinction, and think they can dump the entire cost of maintaining this country onto with no noticeable side effects. On second thought, they do like the educated and the intelligent as long as those types do not use their gifts to make money or create wealth. As long as they teach at a university or work for the government are they then praised.
The USA has the 2nd HIGHEST corporate tax rate in the industrialized world. Taxes are a business COST - like raw materials and energy. Business will go where the costs are lowest or where they can be offset in someway. That is why in the exact same economic climate that exists today, Ohio and Michigan are suffering and shedding jobs and Texas is thriving and prospering.
Our government cannot create private sector jobs - unless they are awarding a government contract that requires a private company to hire workers to fulfill that contract. All our government can do is keep taxes as low as possible, stay out of the way as much as possible (with some oversight and regulation being neceassary as we all know), and create to the best of their ability the economic and fiscal conditions that allow those evil, wealthy, rich, successfull, and ambitious business people and entrepreneurs to CREATE jobs and CREATE wealth and DRIVE economic growth. How selfish they all are!!!
July 7, 2008
8:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
leatherneck writes:
MAKE THE BUSH TAX CUTS PERMANENT
08 MORE YEARS
July 7, 2008
8:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
violinga1 writes:
"A vote for McCain is a vote for the same kind of economic stewardship we've been suffering under for the last seven years--for the rich, by the rich and without regard for the day to day struggles of the average person."
What's wrong with that? Sounds good to me.
July 7, 2008
8:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
How funny that every election the GOP run on the same old promise of tax cuts. VOODO economics. Look what Bushes tax cuts did. (DIDN'T GO TO THE PEOPLE THAT BUY THE PRODUCTS). And they run on the Democrats going to raise your taxes. Well under Clinton I got a rebate because of a surplus that Bush squandered. Now before you remind me of the latest refund it wasn't because of a surplus it was because our economy S--KS.
July 7, 2008
8:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
Buckwheat writes:
Welfare, or warfare, take your pick...The working man is going to foot the bill either way, there is no free lunch for us.. Just tell me what I owe. It's only July, and I'am already sick of hearing the same ole' promises.. Lets vote tomorrow and save get it over with. If you're expecting change (andf you're a blue collar worker, go ahead and drink the Kool Aid).
July 7, 2008
8:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
dakar writes:
the reason Bush became the Rep. nominee in 2000 was because the far right conservatives put him there and the rest followed. McCain was seen as to independent and not conservative enough.
The reason McCain has become the 2008 nominee was because more moderates wanted someone more middle ground while Huckabee and Romney more or less split the conservatives. McCain and Bush have quite a few differences. McCain's record speaks for itself - many of his bills he goes out and gets support from both sides and he can compromise. That is one of the reasons some conservatives don't like him, they don't want compromise. Just like many far left groups don't want Obama to compromise (see Huffington's - "Moving to the middle is for losers").
As a working guy who's not looking or expecting gov't handouts and doesn't want his taxes raised and who does want to keep their job - McCain is the best choice.
July 7, 2008
8:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
McCain has already created thousands of jobs - mainly as extra crowd control and security at overflow Obama rallies.
July 7, 2008
8:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
DenverDan writes:
That old man dont even know day it is.
July 7, 2008
9:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
Yeah Obama, let's just make all EMPLOYERS pay into a fund for national health insurance to cover everyone, whether they are EMPLOYED or NOT. Another disincentive to work - sounds like a real solution to me!
Just like the newly raised minimum wage: Make the EMPLOYERS pay higher wages than what people are willing to work for, and presto, we (the Democrats) have created better paying jobs! What's that you say? We have the highest summer unemployment rate for teens in 61 years?* Huh, I wonder why that is - must be Bush's fault.
* US News and World Report July 7-14 edition.
July 7, 2008
9:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
kc02 writes:
Jobs? Tax the Rich
Economy? We're gonna Tax the Rich
Energy? Let's ax the Rich
Social Security? Why, tax the Rich
These are bold new plans, people. We can....TAX THE RICH!!!!
"Everything for everybody, just by taxing the rich."
---- Obama
July 7, 2008
9:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
I know this is a real hard concept for some to follow, so I'll write slow. Poor people have no money. Rich people have money. If you want to collect money from taxes then you need to tax what has money. Got that?
I see that some of you still don't get it. So, I'll rephrase it for you.
If you tax people who don't have money then you won't get any money. They don't have money, so they cannot give you any money. If poor people had money then they would give it to you. That's one reason why some of them are poor. They don't know how to keep hold of their money. They're too busy giving it to someone else. The other reason is that when poor people get money, it all gets taken away by rent, food, gas, and corporate taxation such as insurance.
Some of you are really struggling with this idea. Let's take a moment to look at the rich.
Rich people have money. If you tax them then they can pay the taxes. Unlike the poor, the richer people are the more they complain about taxes. The rich feel that they're entitled to all the benefits that the great society lays at their feet but they should not be obligated by taxation to pay for any of their innumerable social benefits.
Rich people are clever but not usually generous. They hire consultants to come up with "talking points" that are designed to convince everyone who is not rich that taxing the rich is bad for them, too. This is a very funny joke. Are you laughing? Why aren't you laughing?
Oh, I see. You're too busy working your butt off to make ends meet and pay taxes, too. If you believe that giving tax breaks to the rich is a good idea then you should have no problem working yourself half to death just to cover their share of the taxes.
But then again, if you're smart enough to follow the discussion above then you'll be smart enough to vote for leaders who will TAX THE RICH.
July 7, 2008
9:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
Michael writes:
Let us all look at one idea that came from the left that is a micro-example of their view on economics, taxation, the "rich", and job creation. Some time back a luxury tax was levied on things that were primarily purchased by very wealthy people - in this example let us look at yachts and pleasure boats. The goal here was to raise more tax revenues from those evil rich people that just do not pay their fair share. The actual real world result was this: Those evil rich people stopped buying those big NEW yachts because they are smart consumers and did not wish to pay more than they had to, so they bought USED yachts instead. This caused a ripple effect through all those yacht builders along the coasts of America that employ 10s of 1000s (100s of 100s??) of skilled craftsman that actually build those yachts and all the equipment that goes into them - electronics, furniture, cabinets, HVAC, glass, engines, propellers, and on and on and on. There were layoffs, some builders went out of business, and many lives were impacted - NEGATIVELY. This example shows what is meant by supply side economics. When a rich person buys a yacht, they employ many people to build that yacht - both directly and indirectly. This is what the liberals never understand about wealth and job creation and taxes. BTW - that idiotic tax was repealed.
July 7, 2008
10:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
The_Punnisher writes:
" JUAN " McCain: Amnesty supporter
A vote for him is a vote for NEW SLAVES!!
The same thing applies to B. HUSSEIN Obama
July 7, 2008
10:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
DenverDan writes:
SAS
Dont drink the BONG water!
July 7, 2008
10:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
lucky for the american voters, we already know what kind of track record mccain's policies have produced.
his policies have created THE WORST RATE AND LEVEL OF JOB CREATION IN THE LAST 40 YEARS.
that's not so good.
2/61 - 12/69
Beginning number of jobs: 53,556,000
Ending number of jobs: 71,240,000
Total Jobs Created: 17,684,000
Compound rate of establishment job growth: 3.283%
11/70 - 11/73
Beginning number of jobs: 70,409,000
Ending number of jobs: 77,909,000
Total Jobs Created: 7,500,000
Compound rate of establishment job growth: 3.43%
3/75 - 1/80
Beginning number of jobs: 76,649,000
Ending number of jobs: 90,800,000
Total Jobs Created: 14,151,000
Compound rate of establishment job growth: 3.56%
11/82 - 7/90
Beginning number of jobs: 88,770,000
Ending number of jobs: 109,773,000
Total Jobs Created: 21,003,000
Compound rate of establishment job growth: 2.8%
3/91 - 3/01
Beginning number of jobs: 108,542,000
Ending number of jobs: 132,504,000
Total Jobs Created: 23,962,000
Compound rate of establishment job growth: 2.01%
11/01 - ?
Beginning number of jobs: 130,883,000
Ending number of jobs: 135,884,000
Total Jobs Created: 4,526,000
Compound rate of establishment job growth: .71%
July 7, 2008
10:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
bigfoot/hank...you're still having trouble wrapping your mind around the fact that the republican tax cuts are TEMPORARY.
we will have to raise taxes to pay for the last 8 years of republican irresponsibility.
give us some sign that you understand that fact.
July 7, 2008
10:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
Michael provides a fine example of the taxing-the-rich-is-bad-for-you-too argument.
Let's ignore for a moment his lie about putting boat makers out of work and pretend that his premise was hypothetically true. Suppose taxing the super-rich made them buy one or two fewer yachts. Is this any reason to shift hundreds of billions of dollars in tax burdens onto the poor and middle class? Even if we accept his false premise, his "yacht" argument doesn't float.
As for his premise, not one single American yacht builder restored a job after the yacht-tax was repealed. The yacht-tax provided a cover for offshoring their operations to southeast Asia where they could hire slave laborers and work them to death in appalling conditions.
The yacht-tax itself was nothing more than a ploy to avoid the real issue, which is the necessity of taxing the rich. Cowardly leaders who are afraid of loosing their bribe money will not represent the American public. They represent the interests of the rich and only the rich. You know they are accepting bribes because they refuse to face this issue head on. They make excuses like the one above.
The rich in America are not paying their fair share. That is why our government is sinking us into debt and foisting the entire tax burden onto the middle class by way of fees and increasing corporate taxation such as the exploding cost of private health insurance.
Why is it that conservatives invariably tank the economy? Why does America go into debt and loose jobs under conservative leadership like Ronald Reagan, the first Bush, and now his highness Bush the younger?
The main cause is their making excuses for not taxing the rich and subsequently shifting the tax burden down the economic food chain. Conservative politicians are only successful because they accept bribes to outspend those who might truly represent the people. In combination with those bribes, conservative media spreads propaganda to drug the stupid and ignorant citizens into believing that the screwing to which they are being subjected is good for them.
It's yet another reason why conservatives vehemently oppose free college education and improved schools. Ignorant people are easier to control with their relentless torrent of nonsense.
July 7, 2008
10:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
jay,
Don't skip meals waiting for some indication that conservatives understand how their policies are trashing the economy, putting us into debt, and ruining the middle class. Anorexia is not a pretty thing.
July 7, 2008
11:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
HolierTT: Your dissertation is simplistic, childish demagoguery. What are you, an idealistic young college freshman?
Yes yes, wave your (or Obama's?) magic wand, and no one will be poor any more, because you will make Rich People provide more support for them. This is your brilliant solution, am I right?
But let me guess: YOU are not part of the Rich People of which you speak. So you are full of compassion for poor people, as long as your own taxes are not raised, only the taxes of Rich People.
July 7, 2008
11:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
SASQUATCH:
Do you ever post anything germane or original?
I'll grant that you've mastered the art of the unsourced cut and paste. Don't you think it's time to move on to actual *thinking*?
July 7, 2008
11:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
No matter how simple I try to make the explanation. There are conservatives like davies who still don't get it. Yes, my discussion is "simplistic". Pedagogy is necessary to make the concepts accessible to persons such as davies. Unfortunately, in his case, the concepts are still not getting through. So, we'll try again with an example.
A poor man has an apple. A rich man owns an orchard.
Suppose you are a government and you collect taxes in the form of apples. Which one do you tax?
OK, now think real careful about this before you raise your hand. Give the slow students like davies a chance to answer. Look at your watch. If the number 1 is after the semi-colon add 10 to give them some time. You smart guys know how to add, so wait 10 minutes to give him time.
OK, time...
The answer is that you tax the rich man with the orchard to get some apples.
Oh! I see some hands raised.
Yes?
You ask, "Why do we not tax the poor man who has only one apple?"
It's simple. If you take his apple then what is he going to eat? He will have no apples. He won't even be able to trade his apple for something like an orange. That would hurt the economy.
But if you get some apples from the rich man with the orchard, he still has plenty of apples left. He can trade them for other things. The economy works better and the American public is happier because everyone get to participate in the circle of life.
July 7, 2008
11:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
smartasheck writes:
The poor man probably stole the apple from the rich man's orchard, because if he actually worked hard and used his brain he would have his own orchard.
vote McCain
July 7, 2008
11:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
Without talking points and statistics from bad sources SASQUATCH would have nothing to say at all.
July 7, 2008
11:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
i'm still waiting on someone from the mcsame camp to tell us which choice he's going to make...cut social security and medicare or drastically raise the payroll tax?
July 7, 2008
11:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
Why HolierTT, I GET IT now! Of course, it's all so simple! THANK YOU SO MUCH for the apple orchard example; now I know:
The economy is NOT complex; we need not look at the trade-offs between taxing the productive people versus the degree to which we assist the non-productive ones; we need not consider the societal and economic impact of rewarding unproductive lifestyles; and we need not consider what motivates people to be productive in the first place, so that those productive people will actually have some apples to share.
OF COURSE! The Rich People apple orchard owner should work hard to grow, harvest and deliver his/her apple crop to town, which the Poor People should then be free to eat as they wish.
It's too bad that obesity is becoming epidemic among the poor in the good old USA, but that's another lesson you can teach me some other day, HolierTT. My poor brain is exhausted from comprehending your first revelation.
Rich People = 100% BAD and selfish. Poor People = 100% good and without fault. It's so simple a caveman can do it!
July 7, 2008
12:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
""If you have a brain - you must vote McCain."
gene, since you appear to be saying that you have the "brains" necessary to vote for mccain...maybe you can answer a simple question for us.
which 5 bush accomplishments warrant a vote to continue his policies undder mcsame?
July 7, 2008
12:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
I wonder if paramedics have to be close to this guy with paddles.
July 7, 2008
12:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
DenverDan writes:
Gene
You voted for Bush "TWICE". Now tell me who is missing a brain?
July 7, 2008
12:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
Some people like me voted for Bush twice. Some people will vote for the most liberal, inexperienced and naive candidate we have seen since Jimmy "I sure wish they'd let those hostages go" Carter.
July 7, 2008
12:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
GoodNewsState writes:
Hi I was born in Colorado.
I now live in Texas because I could find a job here. Things are going real well for me since putting all my belongings in the back of my pick up and driving down to Texas without a job. I now enjoy the lowest tax burden in the country.
Here is something you need to understand to bring reality to the situation: Taxes retard economic growth regardless of income level. The Texas economy is booming and I will tell you it is nice.
Here is another important thing to understand: Not one poor person interviewed me when I was looking for a job.
July 7, 2008
12:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
dummas writes:
i forgot there was another candidate for president...thanks for keeping me well informed RMN
July 7, 2008
12:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
John McCain is so out of touch his plans don't even match what the Iraqi puppet minister says. He says he will keep the tax rates and I guess that means diminishing returns and the skyrocketing debt will keep our money worthless. A vote for McCain is a vote for continued devaluation of the dollar. I think the only immigration solution the GOP has is to make our money worth so little there will be no incentive for anyone to try and work here.
I guess since Bush already put our country in the ditch there is little handing over the reins to a 71 year old will make worse. McCain says his age isn’t an issue as long because his mom is 95, he omits the fact his dad died at 70.
He is the perfect candidate for anyone that would have voted three times for GWB. Heck he is even letting Cheney dictate his policy already. He has flip flopped so much John Kerry commented on it. McCain was against global warming before he was for it. All it took was a little of the green grease from Exxon and away he went. He seems like the best politician a company can buy, cheap.
July 7, 2008
12:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
RightDownTheMiddle writes:
I don't take economic advice from someone who admits he "doesn't really know much about economics"....and our country shouldn't either.
July 7, 2008
1:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
SAC ‘O’SQUAT,
1929 was caused by corporations and speculation just like the current market and a Democrat that was labeled a socialist by the affluent saved our country and got us out of that one. You shouldn’t use history, it has a liberal bias.
July 7, 2008
1:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
CheapEnergyNow writes:
"To each according to need: From each according to ability."
Ayn Rand "Altas Shrugged" 1946
Reward the needy and punish the producers.
How did that work out for the Soviet Union?
July 7, 2008
1:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
Nice picture RMN looks like John “nuttier than squirrel poo” McCain dropped one in his shorts.
July 7, 2008
1:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
MarcoPolo writes:
12:40 p.m.McCain just took a stately dump in the toilet stall. He wasn't tapping his foot, just whistling.
July 7, 2008
1:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
MarcoPolo writes:
12:45 p.m.McCain picked his nose. A gnarly booger, he wiped it under the podium. Not many people noticed.
July 7, 2008
1:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
The USSR had elite that was spoiled and ruined their economy by pushing the poor down while enriching their buddies. The system doesn’t work because one party was in power too long and became corrupt. This sounds kind of familiar with the crushing debt destroying the economy and only the buddies of the elite rulers getting rich.
July 7, 2008
1:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
Tried thinking but failed,
You shouldn’t use history, it has a liberal bias.
July 7, 2008
1:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
MarcoPolo writes:
1:23 p.m.McCain farted. Five individuals in the front row fainted but were quickly attended to by paramedics. No WMDs have been found but officials are suspecting an SBD, likely tied to Al Qaeda.
July 7, 2008
1:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
Exactly artstarzz,
They keep telling us to trust them and things will get better well seven years of sliding down is enough. The GOP needs to take a hike and find that fiscal conservatism they lost. Just giving tax cuts without caring about the deficit is stupid. The GOP has to buy votes with “tax cuts”; they don't win on their record. If the GOP stays the course our money will be worth nothing, it is already only worth about a quarter of what is was before Bush.
July 7, 2008
1:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
I would like a real conservative to win with deficit cuts not tax cuts. The GOP tax cuts are like paying the bills with a credit card. The deficit doesn’t go away this way it comes back bigger with more interest.
July 7, 2008
2:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
CheapEnergyNow writes:
Big_D,
You should stick to the childish comments Big_D. They require no thought.
"You shouldn’t use history, it has a liberal bias."
This will be good. Why did the Soviet Union fail again? What examples, in history, show that socialism works?
Communism works, it is just we've never had a really good example. The Soviet experiment was not pure enough communism.
July 7, 2008
2:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
that's what i thought, gene.
come back and see me when you can defend your positions with credible data.
until then, try not to throw a tantrum and fling too much poo.
bigD, you bring up a great point.
when can we get a break from all this conservative fiscal responsibility?
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
July 7, 2008
2:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
aRe writes:
If the middle class wants a tax cut - they need to vote for Obama.
If you make over 250,000 a year - McSame is your man.
Look it up.
July 7, 2008
2:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
HSTOWEL writes:
All of you yelling McSame must be insane if you think Oblabba's plan for the future sounds like something good for the economy. How is raising taxes, and these taxes will effect everybody with his raise in capital gains taxes, going to push the economy forward? Oblabba wants to move to socialized health care for everybody (including millions of illegal aliens)and anybody who's done any research on socialized medicine (Canada and the UK for two examples) knows that it's a terrible system. Oblabba wants to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and dash out of Iraq while also stating that it's possible we might have to go back in. Besides the fact that Oblabba is in no manner qualified to hold the Office of President his policies, and there are many more bad ones I could list, would be a disaster for this country. It's too bad that he won't debate McCain (and I'm not a huge fan of him either but I do respect the man) on the issues. It's obvious that Oblabba knows he would lose any debate because he wouldn't be able to simply yell change.
July 7, 2008
2:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
DenverDan writes:
It is almost past his bed time.
July 7, 2008
2:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
HSTOWEL writes:
RightDownTheMiddle, and you think Obama knows anything about anything?
July 7, 2008
2:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
Shaggy writes:
You should vote for Obama if:
You want a higher tax on Social Security,
You want your capital gains taxes to double,
You want an additional Tax to be put on Oil,
You want bigger Government controlling you,
You want an abortion clinics to out number Starbucks,
You want a phony who makes false promises for a vote,
You want all the illegals that can't even read a road sign to have drivers licenses,
You want to pay for health coverage for 25-30 million illegals,
You want to slowly say good bye to your second amendment right to bear arms,
You want to be Governed by a Socialist/Marxist,
You want someone running our Country that has gone to a Church for 20 years that has a non negotiable commitment to Africa,
You want someone running our Country that still would belong to that racist church if it weren't for the fact Rev>Wright through the plastic messiah under the bus.
You want a President who's wife is not proud of what her Country has provided for her...How many millions of taxpayers money did they make last year?
You want a President that has never held a job that wasn't paid for by Taxpayers,
You want a President whose only experience in Government is 143 days in the Senate before announcing his run at the Presidency, I might add has NO foreign experience except for what his Muslim back ground has given him,
You want a President that has stated in his book he would back the Muslim world if the political winds shifted,
This list could go on and on but I think everyone gets the point, Obama has no back bone, I question his loyalty to America and his wifes, he is very far left, border line radical, he is a liar and phony who has ZERO experience.
July 7, 2008
2:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
R8R_H8R writes:
John McCain does NOT KNOW HOW TO USE A HOME COMPUTER! Talk about out of touch with society, that says it all.
1958 - John McCain loses a Navy jet in Corpus Christi Bay while practicing landings.
1961 - John McCain loses a Navy jet "flying too low over the Iberian Peninsula, (Spain/Portugal)" when he hits power lines.
1961 - Barack Obama is born.
1962 - John MCain loses a Navy jet returning from flying a Navy trainer solo to Philadelphia for an Army-Navy football game.
1967 - John McCain loses a Navy jet in an accident that costs the lives of 134 sailors on the USS Forrestal when another plane accidentally fires a rocket into the plane next to his.
1967 - John McCain loses a Navy jet to enemy fire over North Vietnam. He is captured by enemy forces and subjected to privation, poor medical care, isolation and torture for five years.
2008 - John McCain, asked if he uses a PC or a Mac, says he doesn't know how to use a computer.
WOW!!
July 7, 2008
2:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
CoLoradoCitizen writes:
As Casey Stengel used to say, "You could look it up."
So, let's look it up.
Jobs
The heart of any economy is its ability to generate jobs. When President Clinton took office, nearly 10 million Americans were unemployed. And the private sector was sputtering to create jobs -- in fact, during the previous Bush presidency, what little job growth we did see was driven in large part by the government sector. (new gov't. jobs) Under President Clinton, by contrast, the American economy generated 22.88 million new jobs. More jobs than had ever before been created under a single administration. More jobs than Presidents Reagan and Bush Senior together created in twelve years. And 91 percent of the Clinton jobs were in the private sector.
Poverty
If generating jobs is the heart of an economy, reducing poverty is its soul. We've had periods of macroeconomic growth that had very little effect on poverty rates. That's because all the benefits of the growth went to a few people at the top of the economic pyramid. Such was the case during the Reagan years. During Reagan's entire presidency, only 77,000 Americans were lifted out of poverty. Not even enough to sell out Royal-Texas Memorial Stadium for a Texas Longhorn football game. A paltry 0.24 percent reduction in the poverty rate. Pathetic.
Under President Clinton's economic policies, 8.2 million Americans were lifted out of poverty. Enough to populate all of New York City. President Clinton's economic policies caused a 21 percent reduction in the poverty rate -- the greatest reduction since Lyndon Johnson's Great Society and the strong economy of the 1960s.
(By the way, under George ...Walker...Bush, the number of Americans suffering in poverty increased by 6.5 million.)
July 7, 2008
2:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
CoLoradoCitizen writes:
continued
Reducing the Size of the Federal Government
............Clinton did all this -- and more -- while reducing the federal workforce by 270,000 positions. So, the next time some right-wing government hater says Clinton was a big-government liberal, you tell him or her that Bill Clinton presided over the smallest federal workforce -- in absolute numbers, not even adjusted for population size or anything else -- since John F. Kennedy.
Clinton -- with enormous help from Al Gore -- reinvented the federal government, making it leaner and more effective than it had been in a generation. Government spending as a share of the economy, 21.2 percent under Bush Senior, was cut to just 18 percent -- the lowest level since 1966.
http://denver.yourhub.com/~BriansBLog
July 7, 2008
2:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
i see a lot of rush limbaugh fans have joined the discussion.
thanks for the look into the psychology on the far right, guys.
can anyone from the right half of the spectrum redeem your presence here?
July 7, 2008
2:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
glassguy writes:
mention the 20s-30s, that probably is true but lets not forget who paved that road the past 8 years. say what you want but the country is screwed up more now than when it handed over. i guess it could be worse, MCSTAIN might get a chance to show is inabilities like BUSHY has done to a tee.
July 7, 2008
2:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
CoLoradoCitizen writes:
Presidential Contributions to Debt
Just the facts, no perceptions, hard data taken from the White House itself:
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
July 7, 2008
2:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
CoLoradoCitizen writes:
In 1981 the gross national debt, compared to the nation's annual income, reached its lowest point since 1931. Despite his claim to HATE the debt, Reagan instituted unprecedented peacetime deficit spending. This is not partisan politics, this is straight off the White House web site.
As the graph shows, Bush II repeated Reagan's performance and turned the debt upward again. Bush II's own Office of Management and Budget provides all the data.
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/faq...
chart(click link above) shows how the United States debt skyrocketed during Reagan, spending under control with Clinton, and then through the roof with Dubbya. Increase Gov't. spending/ Lower taxes = DEBT! These numbers are taken directly from the White House website
The eye-popping $9 trillion gross national debtis owed by the "General Fund." That's the part funded by our income taxes.
July 7, 2008
2:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
temurlan writes:
Whenever the RMN puts a picture of obama on the front page it is always shown in a good light with a good background. Whenever they do that for Bush or McCain, it's always the worst picture they could find.
Do they know how transparent they are?
July 7, 2008
2:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
artstarzz: "The rich will start sharing . Yes sharing . That is the american way . the rich have to learn to share and not make it look like we are beggars . they have our money threw tax breaks."
Unbelievable. Tax breaks are a reduction in the amount of taxes paid. The tax break is granted to the taxpayer who pays the tax in question. What you are asking for is a handout; so YOU are the one making yourself look like a beggar.
July 7, 2008
2:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
CheapEnergyNow writes:
I finally understand. Since we apparently have 57 (or 58) states, BHO will tax the 7 (or 8) other states and leave the 50 states alone. What a brilliant plan. Those poor folks in states 51-58 are going to have a tough time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02...
July 7, 2008
3 p.m.
Suggest removal
marling writes:
bad photos are what happens when reporters are given cameras - this is especially tragic when the RMN has some of the best shooters in the country
i especially like the cutting edge journalism of taking photos of the water stand - that is really interesting subject matter - i almost feel like i was there!
July 7, 2008
3:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
YIOTA:
I understand that you've never had an original thought, but when you cut and paste other peoples writing you should at least give them credit.
Otherwise it's plagiarism.
July 7, 2008
3:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
temurlan writes:
LOL "The water stand."
What is the point of that? Good job Lynn Bartels. You can't even read the signs.
I know I'm being picky and lame but seriously...I don't get it.
July 7, 2008
3:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
Now I understand the McWorthless tax plan. He will continue spending like crazy and cutting taxes until he dies and then it will be somebody else’s problem. The problem is that the somebody else is the taxpayers that outlive him.
July 7, 2008
3:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
Trythinking,
Great Brittan is socialist. I think they are about 600 plus years old but it seems to work for them and most of the rest of Europe. Communism is single party and will always fail because the same party gets power than abuses it to make their friends rich. Something somebody said about "absolute power corrupts absolutely" comes to mind. It reminds me of what the GOP did once they had control in this country. They promised no abortions and low taxes and they delivered abortions with differed taxes.
July 7, 2008
3:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
ezekiel777 writes:
i'm not in love with conservatives... and i support john mccain as i have continually supported George Bush. mccain is just the thing needed to keep these conservatives at bay. the conservatives must go... but not at the cost of reasonableness. i won't engage in ptolemics wherein if you oppose one thing then you must automatically endorse another... (that approach is just plain stupid ...as are the folks who use it)
everybody's running around blaming George Bush for everything.. if there are sunspots then George Bush is to blame.
of course Obama.. (or BO as i like to call him) will fix the sunspots within the first week of his election. everything will be fixed because, well he's Obama and that's just the way it works.
i truely hope the are people who see through BO.... "nothing but air there"
July 7, 2008
3:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
So Gene,
What do you think caused the collapse of the USSR? Maybe an unfunded unending war may come to mind? Also, please enlighten me on how Europe isn't socialized and doesn't have better medical care than the US. You want to give the lesson? Making it up seems to be more your style.
July 7, 2008
3:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
denverone writes:
None of this works without cutting spending, no matter what people tell you.
Also, for you people that think raising taxes on corporations is the solution, you are idiots. Corporations of all sizes are the companies that employ you. If they are paying less in taxes, then they can expand and hire more people and raise wages. Not rocket science, but when you have never owned a company, and you have all these stupid politicians trying to get your vote, they will say anything contrary to what the other party is saying to set themselves apart. Most of these jerks, republican or democrat, haven't run so much as a lemonade stand, they don't really understand this simple fact of economics.
You think Obama, a former community organizer, could possibly understand how a corporation really operates. He has never run one!! Wake up people. It is ridiculous to think raising taxes on the corporations that employ you, is a good thing. Use some common sense and THINK people!
Lowering taxes on EMPLOYERS and CUTTING Government expenditures, is the only way to get us out of this mess.
July 7, 2008
3:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
aRe writes:
By the look of the above picture it looks like Cindy and John are going over their personal finances - "Oops - looks like we forgot to pay taxes again on our place in Malibu!"
July 7, 2008
3:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
So how does starting a war with Iran and not ending the war with Iraq play into this denverone? Also, if a corporation is multinational how does cutting taxes help people in the US if the company is from UAE?
July 7, 2008
3:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
freedomfighter1 writes:
one of the pics has a woman holding out her arms. are they having a religious revival?
July 7, 2008
4:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
DenverDan writes:
I know it is close to Mcains bed time. People at that age to to bed at 7:00PM
July 7, 2008
4:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
"davies writes:
What you are asking for is a handout; so YOU are the one making yourself look like a beggar."
So then artstarzz writes: "More like a give back . The Bush administration takes . The Obama administrations gives back ."
artstarzz dude, are you trying to make me go off? The term "give back" means you return something to the original owner, or in this case, the original taxpayer WHO PAID THE TAX IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I believe your desired policy should be stated thus: "The Obama administration will take, and give out to others."
See? To some of us, there's a difference.
July 7, 2008
4:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
denverone, you made a great point:
"None of this works without cutting spending, no matter what people tell you."
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
yep.
July 7, 2008
4:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
CoLoradoCitizen writes:
shaggydog. It's one thing to adhere to and believe in stated republican conservative values. But it's simply in-excusable to nod like a bobble-head doll in agreement when the politician and his forked-tongue speak, and not bother to actually stop and learn and read what they are actually doing. Which is in stark contrast to what they tell you simple-minded-bobble-heads that they say they're doing.
The facts are there, you just keep burying your head in the sand and pretending not to notice WHO is running up the debt, WHO is responsible for sept. 11th attacks, WHO is better for the economy of this country.
Republican VALUES are fine. Republican Politicians are playing you like a puppet.
http://denver.yourhub.com/~BriansBLog
............Clinton reduced the federal workforce by 270,000 positions. So, the next time some right-wing government hater says Clinton was a big-government liberal, you tell him or her that Bill Clinton presided over the smallest federal workforce -- in absolute numbers, not even adjusted for population size or anything else -- since John F. Kennedy.
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
July 7, 2008
4:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
CoLoradoCitizen writes:
These messages are typed slowly, in simple english, so even one who calls themselves a conservative can understand it.
http://denver.yourhub.com/~BriansBLog
Jobs
The heart of any economy is its ability to generate jobs. When President Clinton took office, nearly 10 million Americans were unemployed. And the private sector was sputtering to create jobs -- in fact, during the previous Bush presidency, what little job growth we did see was driven in large part by the government sector. (new gov't. jobs) Under President Clinton, by contrast, the American economy generated 22.88 million new jobs. More jobs than had ever before been created under a single administration. More jobs than Presidents Reagan and Bush Senior together created in twelve years. And 91 percent of the Clinton jobs were in the private sector.
Poverty
If generating jobs is the heart of an economy, reducing poverty is its soul. We've had periods of macroeconomic growth that had very little effect on poverty rates. That's because all the benefits of the growth went to a few people at the top of the economic pyramid. Such was the case during the Reagan years. During Reagan's entire presidency, only 77,000 Americans were lifted out of poverty. Not even enough to sell out Royal-Texas Memorial Stadium for a Texas Longhorn football game. A paltry 0.24 percent reduction in the poverty rate. Pathetic.
Under President Clinton's economic policies, 8.2 million Americans were lifted out of poverty. Enough to populate all of New York City. President Clinton's economic policies caused a 21 percent reduction in the poverty rate -- the greatest reduction since Lyndon Johnson's Great Society and the strong economy of the 1960s.
(By the way, under George ...Walker...Bush, the number of Americans suffering in poverty increased by 6.5 million.)
July 7, 2008
4:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
DenverDan writes:
denverone
I understand your point. The problem is people on top keep rich and pay the workers crap. CEO's get paid more, we dont. I dont understand why people get a tax break who dont need them!
July 7, 2008
5:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
So you talk about the ladies behind Obama but you don’t seem to notice that every face in the McCain crowd is white as far as I can see.
July 7, 2008
5:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
MarcoPolo writes:
7:04 p.m.The GOP re-lubes McCain for the next round of hand-puppeteering tomorrow.
July 7, 2008
5:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
CoLoradoCitizen writes:
Today, July 7th, 2008, during a Denver 'Town-hall' meeting, Senator John McCain said,
"The 60% GROWTH of the Federal Government under George W. Bush is in-excusable."
Bill Clinton reduced the federal workforce by 270,000 positions. So, the next time some right-wing government hater says Clinton was a big-government liberal, you tell him or her that Bill Clinton presided over the smallest federal workforce -- in absolute numbers, not even adjusted for population size or anything else -- since John F. Kennedy.
Clinton -- with enormous help from Al Gore -- reinvented the federal government, making it leaner and more effective than it had been in a generation. Government spending as a share of the economy, 21.2 percent under Bush Senior, was cut to just 18 percent -- the lowest level since 1966.
Now, WHO's "BIG GOVERNMENT" ?
Republican Politicians keep saying what their people want to here, and doing the exact opposite. For more than a decade, for example, John McCain said it is NOT ok to allow drilling off-shore and drilling in Alaska. Less than 2 months ago, he flip-flopped like a fish in a pan and began saying whatever it takes to get elected.
July 7, 2008
5:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
CoLoradoCitizen writes:
SIXTY PERCENT! GROWTH IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT during Dubbya and his 6 yrs. of republican controlled congress!!
Republican = Big Gov't.
Republican = Lower Taxes but INCREASED spending on pork-barrel projects
Republican = Astronomical Debt
Republican = Rich get richer. All the while Master of Puppets to many who believe they're actually helping them too! Even though the evidence is right in front of them.
July 7, 2008
5:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
If you vote for McCain and he wins. This day will come:
McCain is sitting at his desk staring blankly at some papers. He starts to lean towards the left. A warning beeper on his chair makes a sound that alerts a staffer who rushes into the room with a pillow. The staffer wedges the pillow between the president and the left arm rest returning John McCain to an upright position.
A few minutes later, President McCain starts listing to the right. The beeper sounds again, the staffer rushes into the Oval Office, and inserts another pillow between the right arm rest and McCain restoring him to an upright position. The staffer leaves.
Not long after this, President McCain starts to lean forward until his nose is nearly touching the papers on his desk. The warning beeper beeps again. This time the staffer comes in with a rope and ties McCain upright in his chair.
Five minutes later, all the leaders of the G8 arrive for consultations with the president only to find him weeping openly. Their concern is evident as the president of France asks, "Mr. President, what could be the problem here?"
President McCain answers, "They won't let me fart."
July 7, 2008
6:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
commoncents writes:
The one thing everyone misses in the talk about taxes is that staying in Iraq costs money. Bringing troops out of Iraq saves money. Even if spending were to increase for social programs under Obama it would be spent here in the US. We are always going to pay taxes, but I would rather spend mine here on US citizens that somewhere that the government elected by its population really doesn't even want us there.
McCain isn't the son of Satan that Bush is, but he has got to be a cousin. He is too hung up on his days as an inferior pilot to let go of this winning a war mantra. His war was trumped up and fought with faulty plans just like this one. If 5 years getting tortured didn't teach him, what would.
July 7, 2008
6:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
navymom writes:
Big_D should check his history. 1929 was not caused by corporations and the stock market. It was caused by fear and the cessation of spending and investing as even liberal FDR recognized. When people made runs on the banks without understanding the concept of banking, (guess what the bank doesn't necessarily have your money on hand if you walk in and say I want to withdraw $100,000) the banks had to close the doors and many never recovered. You could say that the "poor" people forced the banks out of business. Recovery from 1929 was brought about by federal spending and the confiscation by the US government of all privately held gold bullion. By the end of FDR'S presidency the income tax rates ranged from 23% to 94% and every American worker was paying taxes on wages as low as $600 year. 23% of $600 is $138. This from the great savior of the US. I admit that the US was in trouble after 1929, but taxing the rich today is not the answer to today's problem just as socialist programs which have never gone away were the right answer to 1929. If Barack Obama is elected, mark my word, tax rates will soar and the economy will weaken more.
July 7, 2008
6:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
navymom writes:
In my last comment, I meant that socialist programs which have never gone away were not the right answer to 1929.
July 7, 2008
6:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
commoncents writes:
The world economy is much more developed than 1929. To not factor it into the equation of our economy is short sighted. America is not the top dog anymore, and needs to use this information to formulate policies that make us competitive on a global scale. We are not even going to be good consumers if this downturn continues, then we wont have the items to buy if the money was flowing. Money goes where the money flows, and right now it is in Asia. The salad days are gone.
July 7, 2008
8:11 p.m.
Suggest removal
jax writes:
To artstarzz:
You are mental and out of touch with reality. To assert that those of us who work our butts off to have our own business should be penalized is illogical. That is nothing but insanity. If that were true, you might as well forget your hand out because companies of every size and shape will close their doors and then where will you be? No job for you, which will really have you protesting in your wheaties. As it is we pay more taxes, professionally and personally, than those who are employees for others, so your comments are nothing but nonsensical BS. Perhaps you should endeavor to start your own business and then give all of your hard earned dollars to the rest of us? We work extremely hard for the money we earn and I am certainly not going to give it away just because others want a hand out, don’t want to work or are too lazy to work. If they want to be rich, by all means, this is why we live in America...they are afforded the same opportunities as I am. Instead of whining about it and looking for others to pay your way, go out and do it yourself. I won’t be fined because I have built a good business for myself and I make more money than some in this country. That is ridiculous. What would be the point in striving to better yourself and make money if you are just going to have to give it all back at the end of the day? I can work a lot less and have a lot less headache working for someone else. Why should I have to pay markedly more just because I have something you don’t? I worked my butt off for it, so why does that make me more responsible than you? Or perhaps that makes you just that much more irresponsible then, correct? Can we make you pay more taxes because you aren’t contributing to society at your full potential? Consequently, if I want to give my money away, I’ll give it to whom I choose but it certainly won’t be to any sniveling democrats looking for a free ride and welfare check. (No offense to any democrats out there with half a brain).
July 7, 2008
9:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
Navymom,
Sorry to burst your bubble but the 1929 stock market crash is accepted as one of the five major events causing the great depression and the bubble definitely burst. Maybe you should go read about it.
http://mutualfunds.about.com/cs/1929m...
July 8, 2008
7:47 a.m.
Suggest removal