VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 10:27:25 11/12/08 Wed
Author: EJetson
Subject: Re: redistribution of wealth
In reply to: Deep Diction 's message, "Re: redistribution of wealth" on 08:06:32 11/12/08 Wed


>>McCain wasn't the Presidential nominee in 2001. He
>>was one Senator among 100. Maybe he saw the error of
>>his ways between then and now.
>>
>>If Obama can get his tax cut through a Democrat
>>Congress, then I'll be flabbergasted.
>>
>>I'd still prefer the Steve Forbes flat tax approach.
>
>If he saw the error of his ways between then and now,
>then why doesn't he refer to himself as a former
>redistributionist? Instead, he flaunted his
>experience, which apparently was spent being a leftist
>commie in terms of economic policy. If you're calling
>Obama a redistributionist in 2008, you'd better have
>been calling McCain one in 2001.
>
>The Bush tax cuts were a way to give huge breaks to
>the wealthy, while placating the working class with a
>small check to distract them from the realization that
>it simply represented a shift in the tax burden from
>the rich toward the poor. McCain saw that in 2001, and
>chose to abandon his principles in 2008.



I didn't call John McCain anything in 2001 because he didn't affect me at all.

But, seriously, why would a guy trying to win the Presidency call himself a "former redistributionist" unless he wanted to sabotage his own campaign? Be reasonable, not extreme.

I didn't call Obama a redistributionist. Obama called himself one.

I don't think McCain would have been a good or bad President, but more of a middle of the road guy. I would have hoped that he just lived through it so that Sarah Palin wouldn't become President.

I don't think that Obama will be a good or bad President, although he will be (already is being) hailed as one of the greatest Presidents ever. As I said earlier, I think the one thing that he will accomplish in his term(s) is to get the rest of the world to think better of us, which is a good thing after the last 8 years.

But, the media won't criticize this guy even if he were to invite Bin Laden to the White House and offer him Texas in return for ending his terrorist attacks.


I'll never understand the universal hatred of liberals for anyone with wealth.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.