Jump to content

Why McCain would be a mediocre president


Len_A

Recommended Posts

You asked for me to cite my sources. I did. Two of my sources are reputable news agencies and the other is form there very own web site. What more do you want. I do n ot totally agree with McCain. But I have not foound a single thing that I agree with Obama on. Wait, ther is one thing. He says he is for change. I will agree with that since that is all I will have left in my pocket when he gets through taxing me to death to fund all of the LIBERAL give away programs he believes. Like I said, I don't always agree with McCain, but at least I will still be able to earn a decent living for my family without share with the whole commune.
And two of your sources claims have been debunked and the third is of questionable relevance. I don't use blogs as credible sources. Blogs are a form of editorial commentary, not a credible hard news sources. And Hamas ripped into Obama the day he made the comments that Hamas is a terrorist organization, but I guess your blogger missed that.

 

As far as taxes, must be nice to be earning more than $200,000 a year. Because I heard Obama say that he would extend the Bush tax cuts for people making less, and the Tax Policy Center backs that up (download the PDF document on McCain and Obama's tax policies here - Link Here - right click and select "Save As" )

Senator Obama would permanently extend certain provisions of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts primarily affecting taxpayers with incomes under $250,000

 

McCain's tax proposals benefit corporations and the uppermost income brackets:

 

The impact of the tax code on economic activity under each candidate’s policies would differ in several important ways. Under Senator McCain’s proposed policies, the top marginal rates (35 percent on individual income and 25 percent on corporate income) would be significantly lower than under Senator Obama’s plan (39.6 and 35 percent, respectively).

 

In case you didn't read my other posts, I'd love to be able to earn a living for my family. Under eight years of GOP leadership in the White Hose, I now am three weeks away from being a year out of work, with no prospects for a job. That's with a Bachelor's degree in marketing, one third of the credits for an MBA done. Twenty-five years experience in outside sales. A quarter of a century of relevant work experience and I can't find a decent job in my field. And you want me to beleive that another Republican that endorses Bush's fiscal policies is the best idea? A GOP that fought extending unemployment benefits since January of this year, only giving in when they were attached to a military appropriatios bill? You want me to support the Republicans? You can support a Republican Party, whose lead senator on attacking the extention of unemployment benefits said that unemployment benefits tend to make people lazy?

 

Be grateful you have a job, and that you're not looking at being push to society's margins. You think it might not happen to you, and that your hard work and efforts will pull you out of the kind of hole I find myself in. But it's happening, and it's happening a lot. White middle class male. Bachelor's degree in marketing, one third of the credits for an MBA done. Twenty-five years experience in outside sales. Out of work three weeks shy of a year. Can't even sell the house to even try and relocate. If it could sell, might only walk away with a decade old down payment, if it sold after eighteen months on the market.

 

All under the watch of GOP leadership in the White House.

 

While we're talking about qualifications, let us reflect for a moment on where a man of George Walker Bush's alcoholic, cocaine-snorting, draft-dodging past (sorry for the lese majeste - but it's all true) and intellectual "abilities" would have gotten to had he not been the son of a President and grandson of a Senator. I have always maintained - and still do - that he would be lucky to have risen so high as shift manager at the local tire outlet. Of course, we'll never know for sure, because fate dealt Dubbya the hand it did. He has proved himself with Harken Energy, Arbusto, leaving the state of Texass in a budget deficit, and now with the tremendous economic "turnaround" he has produced in the 2 terms since Clinton. Whatever you may say about Obama, like Clinton, he raised himself up to where he is. It takes more than affirmative action and the sympathy of liberals to find yourself where Obama is now, don't fool yourself. On the other hand, if you like hereditary monarchies, I guess Bush is the poop.

 

Exactly. Bush get ahead on the strength of his father and grandfather's accomplishments, and McCain gets ahead on the strength of his father and grandfather's, two Navy four star admirals, accomplishments. And Obama is to be criticized for turning down Wall Street to work on social causes? And how does Wall Street react? They contribute more to Obama than to McCain, even though Obama does want to raise capital gains taxes. See link here. Go figure.

Edited by Len_A
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 601
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Go tell it to the moderators - they moved the thread, not locked it or deleted it. If the rest of us feel like having a political debate, it's our business. No one is making you read it, are they?

 

Yes. I am working on trying to get another area created for completely off-topic posts. Until that is done, this is the place for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You said:

 

Having a marketing background, however, I have to give kudos to the right wing of American politics for being more effective in manipulating the situation with emotionally charged issues , especially those that don't affect the pocketbooks of the middle class. No one else does as good a job as getting people worked up over social issues that once decided one way or the other, don't help the middle class put food on the table, save for their kids education, or save for retirement.

 

You also said:

 

The crap on Obama is just mudslinging. It's bigotry rooted in the fact that he has an unconventional name, that he's African American, and the fact that there isn't a lot of skeletons to find, so they start grasping at straws.

 

Consider the entire theme of your posts. You did not say, "Republican Leaders said that Obama is not qualified to be President because of his race" in those exact terms. Instead you use terms like, "you conservatives" and the "right wing of American politics", then inject the language in your second statement.

 

Therefore, yes. You did, by lumping all conservatives together and failing to clarify, include ALL Republicans (including the leaders and me) in your mudslinging comment.

And I've already addressed the bigoted comments made by local Republican voters. If being lumped in with that crowded offended you, I half-heartedly apologize, but those are the people who vocally support much of the same views you espouse.

 

 

You said: Obama's background isn't as deep as I'd like, but it's an easy decision to make over McCain.

 

I agreed that Obama's resume is lacking. I then went on to ask "what would you propose we base any/all judgements on?". I then clarified my position by saying, "(as for myself, I need more than a good speech)"

 

As far as being disenchanted with the GOP, that is your choice. Did they leave you or you leave them? Going the polar opposite doesn't make much sense to me, unless you share the left-wing's values. I will vote Republican this election, but would vote for a Democrat, if he were the right Democrat. The likes of Obama/Pelosi/Reid/et al absolutely repel me. I would have strongly considered voting for Leiberman in 2000, had he been the top of the ticket. The choices haven't been very good for the last few cycles, although I admit I voted FOR Bush in 2004.

I call dropping our income tax bracket by a few percentage points, while dropping the income tax bracket of the wealthy by double digits the GOP leaving me. I'm a moderate. Under Nixon and Ford's policies I was able to go to college, get government backed student loans like the National Direct Student Loan Program and the Guaranteed Student Loan Program, both of which I received in addition to academic scholarships, and both of which I paid back early with interest.

 

I admit that McCain wasn't my first choice, but holding him accountable for 'making nice' isn't reason for me to oppose him. If you have a problem with the "religious right", then it's yours to bear.

 

I prefer no income tax at all. None. Nada. Penalizing someone for their success does nothing to promote acheivement.

 

I prefer pure consumption taxes. Those rich enough to buy more, will pay more. Pass the FairTax, and with the implementation of the pre-bate, the lower income brackets will pay no Federal taxes at all, including payroll taxes.

 

People are only paid what those willing to pay them believe they are worth. Confiscating more of their income is equivalent to taking the portion of their lives they committed to earning it.

A consumption tax has the potential to disproportionately hit the lowest end of the economic strata, unless safeguards are built in to exempt things like food and medicine (exempt from sales tax here in Michigan). A consumption tax amounts to a valued added tax, adn that thrills me less than an income tax. Sorry, but that's how I feel about it.

 

And while the whole concept of rewarding rather than penalizing success is something I endorse, I don't call giving a a big tax break to those the small percentage of society that that makes in the seven and eight figures a year in favor of a consumption tax something favorable or equitable to the middle and lower class, I don't give a tinkers damn how someone frames it. Can a Derek Jeter, or a Alex Rodriguez, or a Ben Affleck, or a Madonna, or a Harrison Ford, or an Alan Mullaly possibly consume enough, to pay enough consumption tax to make up for paying no income tax? Verses how much larger a percentage of our middle class incomes the essentials take to buy? Consumption tax? "FairTax"? No thanks, that's more welfare for the rich.

 

 

You've lived in an area with severe economic hard times with no interviews for six weeks, and you (apparently) blame someone else for your troubles? In those eleven months, you couldn't find anything in the entire U.S.? I have an employee working for me who moved here (Raleigh, NC) from Toledo, OH on the basis of economic viability. Have you applied for, or been willing to take, something "beneath" you?

 

Now we are to the crux of the problem. You've lost your job, and for the last eleven months haven't found anything. What have you done to better yourself in the last 11 months? My father, faced with a similar situation in 1991, went back to school to get a nursing degree because it is/was the easiest way for a man in his mid-50s to get a job. He did something about it. Have you done more than submit resumes? If not, why not? And why do you want everyone else in the country (with the Democrats' help) to provide you with the basic necessities of life?

 

No one is accusing you of being a cheat, but you are waiting for something that isn't going to happen. That being, someone knocking on your door (in "greater Detroit" :shades: ) to offer you a job.

 

You know of your age and geographical disadvantages. Is anyone going to change that? Obama or McCain? Noone is going to change your life, but you. Start by asking yourself every morning, "What do I have to be happy about?"

 

I sympathize and wish you the best of luck, but also hope that you realize that the theme of Obama's "Hope and Change" is no better than the religious right's faith. Except that the Left's "faith" is in a fallible human being, not the Almighty.

I'll start of by telling how offended I am by what sounds like condescending and sanctimonious comments directed at me. If you were in front of physically, I'd probably have to walk away, lest we come to blows over what you just wrote. I'd love to go back to school and learn a new skill set, I truly would. How do I pay for it? How freaking lazy or stupid are you assuming I am, anyway? G*d damn, am I angry now. How do I pay for it, that is new training or college? My wife barely makes enough to keep us from going over the edge, but too much for any of the meager financial aid that's supposedly available today. So how the hell do I pay for it? In today's credit market, not just the Detroit area, but the whole country, a home equity loan is next to impossible to get. Our homes value has dropped below what we paid for it ten years ago. People living in more economically stable areas of the country, like Texas, are having existing lines of home equity credit, established before the current mortgage foreclosure situation, being reduced or even frozen. So I how the hell do I borrow to even pay for college? Existing lines of "education loans" aren't like the National Direct Student Loan program from the days of Nixon and Ford - back then payments and interest were deferred until one year after you stopped going to class, graduation or not, but that was too socialist for the conservatives of the Reagan revolution, so they scuttled that program. So again, how do I pay for it? There's no family that has the means for me to even borrow from them. Everyone is strapped that tight. Nixon and Ford were Republicans and we had more safety net programs for situations like this under them, so did I leave the GOP or did the GOP leave me? You can't figure that one out?

 

I have the skills to set up web sites, and do even high end desktop publishing. I've even tried self employment, but no one wants to spend the money to market their own businesses, their budgets are so tight. And you have the unmitigated gall to ask if I'm just waiting for a knock on the door? Who the hell do you think you are to condescend to me, anyway?

 

Yes, I blame the GOP and their supporters like you for not giving a damn enough about people to see to it that there is some kind of safety net. A hand up, not a freaking hand out.

 

I spend three hours a day, on average, sending out resumes and job hunting. We would love to move the hell away from Michigan - houses in my subdivision, and within a five mile radius of my neighborhood, are taking eighteen months to sell. Where is the money to relocate going to come from? We're tapped out and I'm not finding jobs that pay for relocation. My brother in Texas is networking my resume, and my wife's family is doing the same in Las Vegas. No takers. No paid relocation, and we don't have the funds to leave. Everything we have is tied up in a house whose value has dropped, understand?

 

Have I considered a job beneath me? Does retail with Lowe's, Home Depot, and Best Buy count? The store manager at my local Lowe's said they are getting 500 to 600 applicants for every 1 opening. I made a comment about the computer kiosk in the store that's being used to perform the task of filling out applications, and I am told, to my face, that one purpose to to take away the human element in the application process, because laid off white collar professionals like myself "might sell one of our managers on the idea of interviewing them and hiring them for a position that they are truly over qualified for".

 

You know what, I don't regret for a second lumping you with the conservatives I don't like. Your attitude is a part of the problem. "I got mine, you go get yours". You make a reference to the far left's faith being in fallible human beings, rather than the Almighty. Reference these passages:

"Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys." Luke 12:33

 

"But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind." Luke 14:13

 

"Compassionate conservatism" and "A thousand points of light" aren't working. The average middle class income has fallen under eight years of

"Compassionate conservatism" . The number of uninsured Americans has risen under the "thousand points of light" mentality, that started with Bush 41. Obama's resume may not be as deep, but his past work does show just who he wants to help. It's not about a "commune", as another conservative poster wrote. It's about a helping hand up when it's needed. The GOP of Eisenhower (remember the warning about "the military-industrial complex" bankrupting the country came from a Republican), Nixon, and Ford left me, and replaced it with the GOP of Reagan and both Bushes, the GOP of taking selfishness beyond "an intelligent concern about one's own affairs" to the selfishness of "I've got mine, you got get yours", help for Exxon-Mobil, Halliburton, and Blackwater, and no help for middle class blue and white collar workers displaced from their careers and livelihoods through absolutely no fault of their own.

 

As politely as I can say this, please don't condescend to me. What you wrote and the attitude you displayed was truly insulting.

Edited by Len_A
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I've already addressed the bigoted comments made by local Republican voters. If being lumped in with that crowded offended you, I half-heartedly apologize, but those are the people who vocally support much of the same views you espouse.

 

I half-heartedly accept

 

I call dropping our income tax bracket .......

 

There are no exemptions in the FairTax. There is only reimbursement of the "basic necessities". The FairTax is intended to be revenue-neutral. Those paying taxes pay about the same after, as before. The difference being that the only way to pay more is consume more.

 

The FairTax is a tax on wealth, not income.

 

And while the whole concept of rewarding rather than penalizing success is something I endorse, I don't call giving a a big tax break to those the small percentage of society that that makes in the seven and eight figures a year........

 

With the expected expansion of the production shifts coming to several Ford factories (heard on Wall Street Journal this morning), would it be worth paying Alan Mullaly several million dollars per year, if you got your job back? How about if many got their jobs back?

 

How many people are gainfully employed as a result of Harrison Ford/Madonna/Derek Jeter's ability to draw a crowd? What is it worth?

 

Perhaps nothing to you, nor is it to me, but to the person working with Universal Studios or whatever team Jeter plays for, it means a lot.

 

I'll start of by telling how offended I am by what sounds like condescending and sanctimonious comments directed at me.......

 

I'm the guy looking at someone who is bitter over being the last to leave the party (Detroit), and now being stuck with the check (with depressed housing values and few job opportunities). I'm also the 39 year old Chemical Engineering graduate who took a job in 1992 making less than what the market average was (for my degree), because I thought I had a better opportunity at a small company. I don't regret what I've accomplished because I've worked my ass off for it, feel no obligation to "give back" (or whatever bullshit term the left uses) and don't appreciate those that say I am where I am, because I've been one of the lucky ones. (Not that you did, but there are those that do)

 

As far as how you pay for it, you do what my dad did. You take a shit job, while you are in school. If there are no jobs, you go where there are, even if it means you default.

 

I am not, nor have ever intended to be condescending, but if you wish me to retract my expression of sympathy, I will do so and we'll both go on with our respective lives.

 

Yes, I blame the GOP and their supporters like you for not giving a damn enough about people to see to it that there is some kind of safety net.........You know what, I don't regret for a second lumping you with the conservatives I don't like. Your attitude is a part of the problem. "I got mine, you go get yours".

 

Feel free to do so. If calling me names, and focusing on whether or not others are successful, makes you feel superior go ahead. Your problem won't be solved in either case. Nor will it be solved for you by me, Obama or anyone else.

 

I too call myself a moderate, because I have no problem with a basic safety net, but what most Democrats advocate goes WAY beyond that.

 

Don't expect the government to confiscate that which others have worked for, without them attempting to avoid it. If opposing confiscatory income taxes (for any/all income brackets) makes me un-American or "stingy", then I am guilty as charged.

 

I don't bemoan rich people. I want to be one, and I'm working to get there.

 

Again, best of luck to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One would think the federal government, especially with two wars going on at this time, would be doing everything it can to support our nation's veterans who have served us so courageously. Why would the Bush administration be placing any barrier that might impede the ability of veterans to participate in democracy's most fundamental act, the vote?

 

Read more:

On May 5, the department led by James B. Peake (the secretary of Veterans Affairs) issued a directive that bans nonpartisan voter registration drives at federally financed nursing homes, rehabilitation centers and shelters for homeless veterans. As a result, too many of our most patriotic American citizens — our injured and ill military veterans — may not be able to vote this November.

So let me get this straight: We ask these brave young men and women to risk their lives in order to protect our rights and freedoms — most important of which is the right to vote — and then we make it harder for them to exercise that right when they return? Why is Bush so afraid to have our veterans register and vote?

 

One would think that McCain (has anyone else noticed that he seems to be wearing his NAVY cap a lot lately at campaign appearances) would have the support of the armed forces, right? Afterall, he has claimed numerous times that "he is the expert on Iraq" - you know the surge and all.

 

Maybe they saw these numbers:

 

Troops Deployed Abroad Give 6:1 Financial Support to Obama

According to an analysis of campaign contributions by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Democrat Barack Obama has received nearly six times as much money from troops deployed overseas at the time of their contributions than has Republican John McCain, and the fiercely anti-war Ron Paul, though he suspended his campaign for the Republican nomination months ago, has received more than four times McCain's haul.

LINK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I half-heartedly accept

 

 

 

There are no exemptions in the FairTax. There is only reimbursement of the "basic necessities". The FairTax is intended to be revenue-neutral. Those paying taxes pay about the same after, as before. The difference being that the only way to pay more is consume more.

 

The FairTax is a tax on wealth, not income.

 

 

 

With the expected expansion of the production shifts coming to several Ford factories (heard on Wall Street Journal this morning), would it be worth paying Alan Mullaly several million dollars per year, if you got your job back? How about if many got their jobs back?

 

How many people are gainfully employed as a result of Harrison Ford/Madonna/Derek Jeter's ability to draw a crowd? What is it worth?

 

Perhaps nothing to you, nor is it to me, but to the person working with Universal Studios or whatever team Jeter plays for, it means a lot.

 

 

 

I'm the guy looking at someone who is bitter over being the last to leave the party (Detroit), and now being stuck with the check (with depressed housing values and few job opportunities). I'm also the 39 year old Chemical Engineering graduate who took a job in 1992 making less than what the market average was (for my degree), because I thought I had a better opportunity at a small company. I don't regret what I've accomplished because I've worked my ass off for it, feel no obligation to "give back" (or whatever bullshit term the left uses) and don't appreciate those that say I am where I am, because I've been one of the lucky ones. (Not that you did, but there are those that do)

 

As far as how you pay for it, you do what my dad did. You take a shit job, while you are in school. If there are no jobs, you go where there are, even if it means you default.

 

I am not, nor have ever intended to be condescending, but if you wish me to retract my expression of sympathy, I will do so and we'll both go on with our respective lives.

 

 

 

Feel free to do so. If calling me names, and focusing on whether or not others are successful, makes you feel superior go ahead. Your problem won't be solved in either case. Nor will it be solved for you by me, Obama or anyone else.

 

I too call myself a moderate, because I have no problem with a basic safety net, but what most Democrats advocate goes WAY beyond that.

 

Don't expect the government to confiscate that which others have worked for, without them attempting to avoid it. If opposing confiscatory income taxes (for any/all income brackets) makes me un-American or "stingy", then I am guilty as charged.

 

I don't bemoan rich people. I want to be one, and I'm working to get there.

 

Again, best of luck to you.

Rangerm. Don,t bother explaining to libs and dems. They are angry people that thinks the government needs to be involved in every aspect of people's lives. The government has a hard enough time running itself. I can't imagine the government running healthcare. And people think going to the unemployment office is bad.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I half-heartedly accept

 

 

 

There are no exemptions in the FairTax. There is only reimbursement of the "basic necessities". The FairTax is intended to be revenue-neutral. Those paying taxes pay about the same after, as before. The difference being that the only way to pay more is consume more.

 

The FairTax is a tax on wealth, not income.

 

 

 

With the expected expansion of the production shifts coming to several Ford factories (heard on Wall Street Journal this morning), would it be worth paying Alan Mullaly several million dollars per year, if you got your job back? How about if many got their jobs back?

 

How many people are gainfully employed as a result of Harrison Ford/Madonna/Derek Jeter's ability to draw a crowd? What is it worth?

 

Perhaps nothing to you, nor is it to me, but to the person working with Universal Studios or whatever team Jeter plays for, it means a lot.

 

 

 

I'm the guy looking at someone who is bitter over being the last to leave the party (Detroit), and now being stuck with the check (with depressed housing values and few job opportunities). I'm also the 39 year old Chemical Engineering graduate who took a job in 1992 making less than what the market average was (for my degree), because I thought I had a better opportunity at a small company. I don't regret what I've accomplished because I've worked my ass off for it, feel no obligation to "give back" (or whatever bullshit term the left uses) and don't appreciate those that say I am where I am, because I've been one of the lucky ones. (Not that you did, but there are those that do)

 

As far as how you pay for it, you do what my dad did. You take a shit job, while you are in school. If there are no jobs, you go where there are, even if it means you default.

 

I am not, nor have ever intended to be condescending, but if you wish me to retract my expression of sympathy, I will do so and we'll both go on with our respective lives.

 

 

 

Feel free to do so. If calling me names, and focusing on whether or not others are successful, makes you feel superior go ahead. Your problem won't be solved in either case. Nor will it be solved for you by me, Obama or anyone else.

 

I too call myself a moderate, because I have no problem with a basic safety net, but what most Democrats advocate goes WAY beyond that.

 

Don't expect the government to confiscate that which others have worked for, without them attempting to avoid it. If opposing confiscatory income taxes (for any/all income brackets) makes me un-American or "stingy", then I am guilty as charged.

 

I don't bemoan rich people. I want to be one, and I'm working to get there.

 

Again, best of luck to you.

I'm not calling you names, but I find your opinions far too right-of-center to be a moderate. Sorry, that's just my perception.

 

"I'm the guy looking at someone who is bitter over being the last to leave the party (Detroit), and now being stuck with the check (with depressed housing values and few job opportunities)." - that's just mean spirited. We stayed in Detroit first to look after my wife's ailing mother, who died last January, and now we have my aging parents to contend with. My siblings don't live here anymore. If we book, and we're very, very close to making the decision to do that, it means my Mom & Dad have no one left to help them out as they age, or they're forced to contend with their retirement savings and their retirement income taking a hell of a hit in moving. If we stay, they'd like to move out of their declining neighborhood, adn move five miles closer to us, and that's out of their means.

 

I'm glad your Dad was able to retrain and get into something else. My Dad is retired and, and he and my Mom on a fixed income. Moving to follow us around is going to be hard on them, the distance with the two of them not having any help is going to be hard on them, and they don't have the means for, nor the need right now, to be in some kind of assisted living. Don't go making assumptions on what's appropriate for other peoples families. What they need is help with documents and other things that start to confuse the elderly, and what they want is see their kids once in a while, more than the holidays, and more than just a voice on the phone. What's appropriate for your family is your business alone, as mine is to me.

 

So, in keeping with this philosophy, I'm supposed to abandon my parents. It's hard to stomach. It's getting close to coming to that, but it's hard to stomach. I don't know what you define as a basic safety net, but I don't even see that actually existing.

 

As far as the racist comments coming the Michigan Republicans I know, my wife reminded me to comment about my wonderful western Michigan based employer from fifteen years ago, who was hand a successful and very profitable Detroit office when my national company was split up. They said they didn't really want to come east of U.S. 23 (small highway between Ann Arbor and the rest of the south east Michigan area, because, and I still remember this vividly, "there are too many blacks, too many Democrats, and too many unions in Detroit", meaning the whole metropolitan Detroit area. Never mind that the people actually writing the requisitions that were approved into purchase orders were all UAW skilled trades. Never mind that, at the time, I still considered myself to be a Republican. And what the hell does the areas racial make up have to do with anything?

 

When they took over, my manager was asked what we expected to be paid. He replied that he hoped we would be paid in the neighborhood of what our peers, including the office in Greensboro, NC (and if you're background is in chemical engineering, private message me and I'll tell you who my old parent company was, and the product line, and you can verify some of the local distributors down there) were getting paid, which was, on straight commission, roughly one-third of the gross profit. He was called greedy to his face. I stayed on, because shifting to a competing distributor meant giving up profitable accounts I worked on for years (giving them up to their existing sales people whom I had been kicking their butts for years), and my reward was a forty percent pay cut. When I left three years later, on what I thought was good terms (I even sent a good bye letter to my customers asking them to give my replacement a chance), I find out that they, my now former employer, were bad mouthing me behind my back, to the point of getting me blacklisted with all of the vendors I used to represent.

 

That's further examples of my experience, in Michigan, with the Reagan era GOP. No thanks. I haven't seen anything that comes close to a safety net. What I do see is Republican Senators like Judd Gregg of New Hampshire fighting the extension of unemployment benefits. What I see are Republicans Senators refusing to answer questions justifying that position and other positions that are anti-middle class.

 

I'm very curious to see your definition of a basic safety net, because I don't know if we have any common opinions on the subject. If your idea of a basic safety net is, in order to retrain, as if I need to be retrained, how did you put it -

 

You take a shit job, while you are in school. If there are no jobs, you go where there are, even if it means you default.

 

Default means lose my house. Ok, that's a basic safety net? Are you sure you're a moderate? I don't mean that sarcastically either. I find it hard to call that the politics or beliefs of a middle class moderate. I don't care if you define it as name calling, to me that's the politics of the vindictive. Like I said, "I got mine, you go get yours". That's not name calling. I'm really trying to be fair minded, and find signs of humanity in your beliefs, and I don't see any. I don't call being told to go default on my house if needed a sign of sympathy, not that I'm soliciting any. I call it a lack of humanity.

 

Rangerm. Don,t bother explaining to libs and dems. They are angry people that thinks the government needs to be involved in every aspect of people's lives. The government has a hard enough time running itself. I can't imagine the government running healthcare. And people think going to the unemployment office is bad.
99ktpbirdman, it's about liberal or Democrat, conservative or Republican. It's how do we help people who need the help. I'll you what I told Rangerm - I hope you don't find yourself pushed to the sides, out of your own resources, and no help in sight.

 

You know what really sucks? Getting the attitude that your fellow Americans don't really give a damn. We've come a damn long ways from the days of the frontier. Back then, people helped each other out. Family values wasn't a buzzword, it was taking care of each other in your family, and helping your neighbor do the same. Not true today. In the name of being successful, it's turning your back on your fellow man. I said it before, I'm not asking for anything to be handed to me. I'll find a way to tough this out, but I can promise you one thing. I'll never stop raising hell on behalf of people who need a break, even if it happens to happen to either of you. Sorry, but I can't be that self-centered. And I see nothing in what the GOP offers today other than encouragement to be self-center. We were better off under Nixon and Ford when it comes to safety nets.

 

What's forum member Fatso like to say, in some of his posts, Americans just seem to hate each other? Sure seems like that's true these days.

 

Oh, and 99ktpbirdman, I'm ex-Local 600, Dearborn Stamping, and my Dad retired from there after 37 years as an hourly employee. Thanks for the kind thoughts of "Don,t bother explaining to libs and dems. " from someone I normally would consider "family".

Edited by Len_A
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rangerm. Don,t bother explaining to libs and dems. They are angry people that thinks the government needs to be involved in every aspect of people's lives. The government has a hard enough time running itself. I can't imagine the government running healthcare. And people think going to the unemployment office is bad.

 

I am sympathetic to and will not simply disregard those in need, no matter what is said about me on this board. BUT, I will not unconditionally throw money at a problem when it will only perpetuate the same miserable circumstance.

 

No government official has the power to implement "Change" in peoples lives. They do it for themselves, or they do not.

 

Using government force to implement certain, overreaching, social programs is neither the proper, nor the desirable role of government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sympathetic to and will not simply disregard those in need, no matter what is said about me on this board. BUT, I will not unconditionally throw money at a problem when it will only perpetuate the same miserable circumstance.

 

No government official has the power to implement "Change" in peoples lives. They do it for themselves, or they do not.

 

Using government force to implement certain, overreaching, social programs is neither the proper, nor the desirable role of government.

I never advocated throwing money at the problem with no over sight and no sunset provisions either. But I am saying that the problems now are so bad, that what level of safety net we have is insufficent. I made reference to the National Direct Student Loan program - you didn't start paying it back until you were a year out of school. Did some people abuse the shit out of it? Hell, yes. It it the fault of all the people who used the program? No. It's the fault of the authorities who let them slide. Do the actions of a few render the whole concept of such a program invalid today? Would bringing back that kind of a program amount to throwing money at a problem?

 

You also didn't comment at all about the fact that I'm trying to be of help to my parents as they get older. Curious how that didn't rate even a comment. And defaulting on a loan goes against my values. I'm trying to avoid that. It will be a last resort, and I don't think it should come to that...yet.

 

BTW, a month ago I found a job posting on line for an outside industrial sales position in the Dallas to Northern Texas area. Matches my experience to almost to a "T". Very, very good base pay and commission structure, as well. Far better than anything I can earn in the Detroit marketplace. I'm reading it, and got pretty excited at the prospect of just even talking with this recruiter. Figure if I can make the move down to Dallas, my brother & I can figure out how to relocate the parents, and then we share the responsibility for looking after them as they get even older.

 

Then I get to the last lines of the job posting. Local Residents Only Will Be Interviewed, No Relocation.

 

Floyd Lawson, I'm glad the few people I've been lucky enough to interview with don't think like you do, or I may not have had even those chances. I guess you're not familiar with how bad it's become in Detroit. Nor are you familiar with how sales people are recruited around here, either. Outside of that, I'm not going to take a slam at anyone. I hope you never find yourself in the position I'm in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hadn't seen your post until just now. More later.

I truly look forward to it. Read my comment about the Dallas job posting, too, if you want a bit of a nervous laugh.

 

And with that, I'm going to go workout. After yet another telephone interview, I've had the opportunity to fill out yet another on-line job application and submit the resume yet again. Oh yippee!! You have no idea how many of these employers are using phone interviews to pre-screen candidates. Professional to professional - how good does a persons telemarketing skills have to become to go past a 45 minute telephone screening interview? Good God, am I sick of telephone interviews. I'm an experienced outside sales person. That means face-to-face contact. You have no clue how stressful this has become.

 

Enough venting. Elliptical trainer and Bowflex, here I come. I look forward to sparring some more with you later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One would think the federal government, especially with two wars going on at this time, would be doing everything it can to support our nation's veterans who have served us so courageously. Why would the Bush administration be placing any barrier that might impede the ability of veterans to participate in democracy's most fundamental act, the vote?

 

Read more:

So let me get this straight: We ask these brave young men and women to risk their lives in order to protect our rights and freedoms — most important of which is the right to vote — and then we make it harder for them to exercise that right when they return? Why is Bush so afraid to have our veterans register and vote?

 

One would think that McCain (has anyone else noticed that he seems to be wearing his NAVY cap a lot lately at campaign appearances) would have the support of the armed forces, right? Afterall, he has claimed numerous times that "he is the expert on Iraq" - you know the surge and all.

 

Maybe they saw these numbers:

 

Troops Deployed Abroad Give 6:1 Financial Support to Obama

LINK

Maybe a lot of the enlisted and reserves want a change from the status quo. I'm surprised by the numbers quoted. I have to wonder, knowing as many active duty and retired military as I do, how many actually feel that way. If it's accurate, then I'm pleasantly surprised.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I attempted to respond earlier, but I got that FUCKING CPU QUOTA thing again and lost everything I'd written. I probably won't write it as well the second time.

 

I'm not calling you names, but I find your opinions far too right-of-center to be a moderate. Sorry, that's just my perception.

 

"I'm the guy looking at someone who is bitter over being the last to leave the party (Detroit), and now being stuck with the check (with depressed housing values and few job opportunities)." - that's just mean spirited. We stayed in Detroit first to look after my wife's ailing mother, who died last January, and now we have my aging parents to contend with. My siblings don't live here anymore. If we book, and we're very, very close to making the decision to do that, it means my Mom & Dad have no one left to help them out as they age, or they're forced to contend with their retirement savings and their retirement income taking a hell of a hit in moving. If we stay, they'd like to move out of their declining neighborhood, adn move five miles closer to us, and that's out of their means.

 

I'm glad your Dad was able to retrain and get into something else. My Dad is retired and, and he and my Mom on a fixed income. Moving to follow us around is going to be hard on them, the distance with the two of them not having any help is going to be hard on them, and they don't have the means for, nor the need right now, to be in some kind of assisted living. Don't go making assumptions on what's appropriate for other peoples families. What they need is help with documents and other things that start to confuse the elderly, and what they want is see their kids once in a while, more than the holidays, and more than just a voice on the phone. What's appropriate for your family is your business alone, as mine is to me.

 

So, in keeping with this philosophy, I'm supposed to abandon my parents. It's hard to stomach. It's getting close to coming to that, but it's hard to stomach. I don't know what you define as a basic safety net, but I don't even see that actually existing.

 

Re-reading my statement, you are correct, and I was too harsh. I apologize.

 

Noone should presume to suggest how you conduct your internal family business, but I would ask how would you best serve your parents? Do you best serve them by staying, likely remaining unemployed (given the local economy), and being in no position to serve yourself? OR, if you were gainfully employed elsewhere, and in a more comfortable economic circumstance, would you be able to better serve yourself, and (by extension) them?

 

Just so you know my perspective. I was brought up to believe that my allegiance is with my children (the next generation). My obligation is to them. I best honor my parents by providing the best I can for my children. My parents are aware that I have no intention of moving back to Charleston, WV, nor do they expect me to.

 

BUT, since I am an only child, I have taken steps to provide for them, but on my terms, since I have no siblings to help. I built a life, a family, and a house where I can allow them and my in-laws a place to live, should the need arise.

 

In sum, I respect your willingness to look after your folks, but how can you serve your parents, if you are in no position to serve yourself?

 

As far as the racist comments coming the Michigan Republicans I know, my wife reminded me to comment about my wonderful western Michigan based employer from fifteen years ago, who was hand a successful and very profitable Detroit office when my national company was split up. They said they didn't really want to come east of U.S. 23 (small highway between Ann Arbor and the rest of the south east Michigan area, because, and I still remember this vividly, "there are too many blacks, too many Democrats, and too many unions in Detroit", meaning the whole metropolitan Detroit area. Never mind that the people actually writing the requisitions that were approved into purchase orders were all UAW skilled trades. Never mind that, at the time, I still considered myself to be a Republican. And what the hell does the areas racial make up have to do with anything?

 

When they took over, my manager was asked what we expected to be paid. He replied that he hoped we would be paid in the neighborhood of what our peers, including the office in Greensboro, NC (and if you're background is in chemical engineering, private message me and I'll tell you who my old parent company was, and the product line, and you can verify some of the local distributors down there) were getting paid, which was, on straight commission, roughly one-third of the gross profit. He was called greedy to his face. I stayed on, because shifting to a competing distributor meant giving up profitable accounts I worked on for years (giving them up to their existing sales people whom I had been kicking their butts for years), and my reward was a forty percent pay cut. When I left three years later, on what I thought was good terms (I even sent a good bye letter to my customers asking them to give my replacement a chance), I find out that they, my now former employer, were bad mouthing me behind my back, to the point of getting me blacklisted with all of the vendors I used to represent.

 

That's further examples of my experience, in Michigan, with the Reagan era GOP. No thanks. I haven't seen anything that comes close to a safety net. What I do see is Republican Senators like Judd Gregg of New Hampshire fighting the extension of unemployment benefits. What I see are Republicans Senators refusing to answer questions justifying that position and other positions that are anti-middle class.

 

Being from the South, many have the impression that I am an ignorant redneck racist. A stereotype that many are happy to perpetuate.

 

It's a shame that in 2008, we are still focusing on such things, but until those whose livelihoods depend on brewing conflict between groups (based on race, income, religion, etc) fall by the wayside, we will likely continue to do so.

 

I understand your reluctance to go elsewhere, but sometimes we must take a step backward to take two forward. Cliche, yes. But often true.

 

I'm very curious to see your definition of a basic safety net, because I don't know if we have any common opinions on the subject. If your idea of a basic safety net is, in order to retrain, as if I need to be retrained, how did you put it -

 

Default means lose my house. Ok, that's a basic safety net? Are you sure you're a moderate? I don't mean that sarcastically either. I find it hard to call that the politics or beliefs of a middle class moderate. I don't care if you define it as name calling, to me that's the politics of the vindictive. Like I said, "I got mine, you go get yours". That's not name calling. I'm really trying to be fair minded, and find signs of humanity in your beliefs, and I don't see any. I don't call being told to go default on my house if needed a sign of sympathy, not that I'm soliciting any. I call it a lack of humanity.

 

I had a good response to this, but after being aggravated by that damn CPU thing, I'm too tired to remember what I wrote.

 

Suffice to say, a basic safety net is only enough to feed you, and perhaps a little more, and for a limited time. Unemployment insurance typically lasts 6 months, although I'd bet you were considered an independent contractor as a commission-only salesperson, and were possibly ineligible. I would have looked at that as a red flag immediately.

 

I am not suggesting you default to avoid paying for you house. Either way you'll pay.

 

You'll pay if you default, and you'll pay if you don't. The question is, where do your priorities lie?

 

Houses are things, ultimately. The bank has no love for you. I'd bet that in your loan agreement, if your credit score goes below a certain threshold, the bank can call your loan even if you've made your payments on time. This is standard in many mortgages, unless State law prevents it. At some point, a decision wil have to be made one way or the other.

 

Obviously, if you find a suitable job in your current location, this conversation is moot. Therefore that is exactly what I hope happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never advocated throwing money at the problem with no over sight and no sunset provisions either. But I am saying that the problems now are so bad, that what level of safety net we have is insufficent. I made reference to the National Direct Student Loan program - you didn't start paying it back until you were a year out of school. Did some people abuse the shit out of it? Hell, yes. It it the fault of all the people who used the program? No. It's the fault of the authorities who let them slide. Do the actions of a few render the whole concept of such a program invalid today? Would bringing back that kind of a program amount to throwing money at a problem?

 

It is throwing money at the problem if it doesn't solve the problem. For instance, what good is providing financial aid for someone getting a degree in a field where the jobs essentially don't exist? Would it make sense to provide financial aid for someone getting a degree in History? Getting an education is nice, but getting a job is better. If there is no guidance on this, what good is it?

 

I haven't had much time to look at this, but perhaps this website will help: http://www.back2college.com/index.shtml

 

BTW, a month ago I found a job posting on line for an outside industrial sales position in the Dallas to Northern Texas area. Matches my experience to almost to a "T". Very, very good base pay and commission structure, as well. Far better than anything I can earn in the Detroit marketplace. I'm reading it, and got pretty excited at the prospect of just even talking with this recruiter. Figure if I can make the move down to Dallas, my brother & I can figure out how to relocate the parents, and then we share the responsibility for looking after them as they get even older.

 

Then I get to the last lines of the job posting. Local Residents Only Will Be Interviewed, No Relocation.

 

Didn't you say your brother is in Texas? I'd say you're local, if you use his address. No you may not get relocation allowances, but assuming you got the job, you'd likely save enough (living with your brother assuming he is reasonably close by), after a couple of months to move yourself. My brother-in-law stayed with us for awhile when he needed a place. We were happy to help.

 

Would you consider looking at Charlotte or Raleigh, NC? I grew up in Charlotte and live in Raleigh. Both areas still have very low unemployment.

 

It's not the optimum solution, but it is an option.

Edited by RangerM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I attempted to respond earlier, but I got that FUCKING CPU QUOTA thing again and lost everything I'd written. I probably won't write it as well the second time.

 

 

 

Re-reading my statement, you are correct, and I was too harsh. I apologize.

 

Noone should presume to suggest how you conduct your internal family business, but I would ask how would you best serve your parents? Do you best serve them by staying, likely remaining unemployed (given the local economy), and being in no position to serve yourself? OR, if you were gainfully employed elsewhere, and in a more comfortable economic circumstance, would you be able to better serve yourself, and (by extension) them?

 

Just so you know my perspective. I was brought up to believe that my allegiance is with my children (the next generation). My obligation is to them. I best honor my parents by providing the best I can for my children. My parents are aware that I have no intention of moving back to Charleston, WV, nor do they expect me to.

 

BUT, since I am an only child, I have taken steps to provide for them, but on my terms, since I have no siblings to help. I built a life, a family, and a house where I can allow them and my in-laws a place to live, should the need arise.

 

In sum, I respect your willingness to look after your folks, but how can you serve your parents, if you are in no position to serve yourself?

 

 

 

Being from the South, many have the impression that I am an ignorant redneck racist. A stereotype that many are happy to perpetuate.

 

It's a shame that in 2008, we are still focusing on such things, but until those whose livelihoods depend on brewing conflict between groups (based on race, income, religion, etc) fall by the wayside, we will likely continue to do so.

 

I understand your reluctance to go elsewhere, but sometimes we must take a step backward to take two forward. Cliche, yes. But often true.

 

 

 

I had a good response to this, but after being aggravated by that damn CPU thing, I'm too tired to remember what I wrote.

 

Suffice to say, a basic safety net is only enough to feed you, and perhaps a little more, and for a limited time. Unemployment insurance typically lasts 6 months, although I'd bet you were considered an independent contractor as a commission-only salesperson, and were possibly ineligible. I would have looked at that as a red flag immediately.

 

I am not suggesting you default to avoid paying for you house. Either way you'll pay.

 

You'll pay if you default, and you'll pay if you don't. The question is, where do your priorities lie?

 

Houses are things, ultimately. The bank has no love for you. I'd bet that in your loan agreement, if your credit score goes below a certain threshold, the bank can call your loan even if you've made your payments on time. This is standard in many mortgages, unless State law prevents it. At some point, a decision wil have to be made one way or the other.

 

Obviously, if you find a suitable job in your current location, this conversation is moot. Therefore that is exactly what I hope happens.

Apology accepted. Think nothing more of it.

 

I hate prejudice of any kind. My parents are European immigrant who speak with an accent and my last name is hard to pronounce. Not only did I have to put up with the teasing from other kids and getting beat up when I was growing up, but a few ignorant teachers thought it would be funny to get together and come up with a new way to mispronounce my last name. Every day. For two weeks. God I wish I was exaggerating. Took the football coach and the vice-principle to get them to knock it off. I hate racism. I hate the kind of bigotry that thinks every Southerner is either a redneck or a moron. The sooner society gets rid of that kind of stupidity, the better.

 

I'm not that reluctant to leave. I've grown to hate Detroit. And I've fallen in love with Dallas. And guess what - North Carolina sounds pretty cool too. Just frustrating as hell trying to figure out how to do it, with the wife having the only job, but also in the career that's the most easily relocatable. Legal Assistant. She's applying for a government position in Las Vegas. I like Vegas. It's my favorite playground.

 

The problem with the credit situation, and a potential default is that not only are insurance companies running your credit, with a credit record ding being grounds for a rate increase even with no accidents or claims, but now employers are running credit checks as part of the hiring process. Default on a mortgage, I'm told, and the job offer is withdrawn. And many don't run the check until they're real close to offering you the job or they offered it. I've already twice, to see what reaction I would get, put up a "what if I defaulted because I had to relocate for a job" scenario. Guess how that went over with the managerial robots?

 

I'm tired too. Time to hit the sack. Over did my half assed workout, and I'm already sore. Can't wait to see what kind of pain I feel in the morning...LOL. Now I know what they mean by "youth is wasted on the young!"

 

You know, that CPU overload nonsence is really getting freaking old, isn't it. Use Firefox instead of IE. It remembers what you typed and you can go hit the Back button, go back and copy and paste it to a word or text file. I found out by accident!!

Edited by Len_A
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not that reluctant to leave. I've grown to hate Detroit. And I've fallen in love with Dallas. And guess what - North Carolina sounds pretty cool too. Just frustrating as hell trying to figure out how to do it, with the wife having the only job, but also in the career that's the most easily relocatable. Legal Assistant. She's applying for a government position in Las Vegas. I like Vegas. It's my favorite playground.

 

The problem with the credit situation, and a potential default is that not only are insurance companies running your credit, with a credit record ding being grounds for a rate increase even with no accidents or claims, but now employers are running credit checks as part of the hiring process. Default on a mortgage, I'm told, and the job offer is withdrawn. And many don't run the check until they're real close to offering you the job or they offered it. I've already twice, to see what reaction I would get, put up a "what if I defaulted because I had to relocate for a job" scenario. Guess how that went over with the managerial robots?

 

That was what I had in mind when I suggested you go ahead to Texas (if you get/got the job) to live with your brother until such time, you can move your wife, but still make payments on the house you have with her there. Not the best answer, but it at least prevents default. Maybe you could hire an agent to rent/lease/sell your house on your behalf?

 

Prior to my parents moving back to Charleston, WV (to take care of their parents), this is exactly what they did. Dad found a nursing job easily, and was able to live with my grandmother until such time they sold their house in Charlotte, and bought another.

 

That doesn't answer the question of how to watch over your parents, but you can only solve one thing at a time.

 

BTW, a good card dealer in Vegas can live very well. (But I suspect you already knew that) I got married in Vegas, and learned that speaking to a dealer whose table I was playing Blackjack (Imperal Palace)

 

With your salesman's (social) skills, being a card dealer might fit you very well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was what I had in mind when I suggested you go ahead to Texas (if you get/got the job) to live with your brother until such time, you can move your wife, but still make payments on the house you have with her there. Not the best answer, but it at least prevents default. Maybe you could hire an agent to rent/lease/sell your house on your behalf?

 

Prior to my parents moving back to Charleston, WV (to take care of their parents), this is exactly what they did. Dad found a nursing job easily, and was able to live with my grandmother until such time they sold their house in Charlotte, and bought another.

 

That doesn't answer the question of how to watch over your parents, but you can only solve one thing at a time.

 

BTW, a good card dealer in Vegas can live very well. (But I suspect you already knew that) I got married in Vegas, and learned that speaking to a dealer whose table I was playing Blackjack (Imperal Palace)

 

With your salesman's (social) skills, being a card dealer might fit you very well.

LOL! My wife also forwarded an email she gets from something Called the Las Vegas adviser,and her take on my sales background was casino host. Which, when you think about it, is part sales rep, part customer service rep. I've been thinking the same thing. Only thing is, and it's not a problem, just a work condition, under Nevada gaming law, you can't play in any casino owned by the one you work for. So if you work in any of the Harrah's casinos (btw, rumor has it Harrah's as a corporation is going to rename themselves Caesars), then you can't gamble at all in any of Harrah's properties in Nevada. Small price to pay for a really well paying career. I love Vegas as a tourist. I think I could adjust to the life style quite nicely.

 

But one way or another, I'm looking at all possibilities. I'm going to be looking at all forms of financial aid again next week, for school. Since the value of my house dropped (which means now my assets are less than they were a year ago), my ability to qualify may now be different. If so, I'm going to look at going back to school as long as the wife can handle the day-to-day bills. The other thing is that the boneheads in our state government finally passed a nice tax break package for the movie and television industry, and now we've got a lot of new productions going on here (Clint Eastwood was in two weeks ago filming part of Gran Torino in Grosse Pointe, one of the more "old money" 'burbs just east of Detroit) and there's a lot of support industry having to start up for that. If I can hold out, there will be openings I qualify for there. May go back for a second bachelors while that industry ramps up. Unless whiners on BOTH sides of the aisle get their way and try to curtail the tax break because it's "too generous" . An equal number of Republicans and Democrats want to scale it back, but I doubt they'll get their way, because of the number of new jobs that are starting to come in. Then I again, you can't trust any politician of any party.

 

The wife wants out of here, but she's real reluctant to just walk away from the house, and with employers now starting to run credit checks on applicants (quite a few of the interviews I've had in the last eleven months either ran one already, or I had to sign consent for them to do so if things moved forward), a ding on my credit history can cost me a job offer. So you end up damned if you , damned if you don't. If some of you guys weren't aware this was happening, now you are. Might affect some Ford people's decisions to take a buyout and take their chances back on the open job market. Here's a good article on that: Link Here and the results of a search on the topic here: Link Here

 

That's another big reason I get touchy on the subject of safety nets - New hiring practices are putting everyone between a rock and a hard place, with no place to go.

 

One of my favorite things in Vegas is closing September 1 - Star Trek: the Experience at the Las Vegas Hilton. Guess it's run it's course. Part of the attraction is an exhibit of all the costumes and props from the TV shows and movies. Looking at those, plus what I saw in Florida at MGM's Studio at Disney World, there is a lot of jobs, in the TV and movie industry, for skilled trades people to build sets, make props, costumes, build stuff for stunt work, etc. With all the buyouts in skilled trades and semiskilled production workers here in the Detroit area, plus Lansing, and Flint-Saginaw areas, there is a big supply of good people to staff these positions when they start opening up, and it means that industrial supply sales start going back up. So my hope is that our "wonderful" leaders on both sides of the political aisle don't screw the pooch on this.

Edited by Len_A
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, that CPU overload nonsence is really getting freaking old, isn't it. Use Firefox instead of IE. It remembers what you typed and you can go hit the Back button, go back and copy and paste it to a word or text file. I found out by accident!!

So does Opera, great browser. :)

 

Hopefully the BON will up-grade the server from an XT to a 386 with a co-processor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter who our next president is, he will have one tough presidency. Dealing with the Weak Econonemy, Oil prices ( although they are going down) , Health care and ETC.

 

But if i were to have it my way, i would like to have McCain as our next president.

Vote the way you think is best. Everybody looks at the situation from the point of view of their own experiences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter who our next president is, he will have one tough presidency. Dealing with the Weak Econonemy, Oil prices ( although they are going down) , Health care and ETC.

 

But if i were to have it my way, i would like to have McCain as our next president.

 

Watch your man on you tube

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGfGtC4Ldms...feature=related

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I watched McCain and Obama on that Presidential Forum last night.

 

I thought McCain was the more decisive; although I think he was trying a little too hard at times.

 

I thought Obama wasn't decisive enough. Some may say he is just a deep thinker, but I see a man who hasn't yet formulated his basic principles, mostly due to lack of (life) experience. Not every question asked last night required a paragraph. Most didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Wow, what a great video. It really puts things into perspective. It reminded me of Bush, remember him pre-9/11? His ratings were tanking, he was spending a great deal of his presidency in Texas and he looked very uncomfortable in his position. Then, after the terrorist’s attacks, he sort of gained his footing and fit in the role as a war president.

 

In one of the McCain videos to the left (associated links), a moderator had asked McCain if he thought Bernanke was cutting rates too aggressively; McCain responded that he didn't have that sort of expertise to comment, WOW!! I was floored. The Feds role in the economy is pretty significant and to not know something as basic as that was rather stark, to say the least.

 

McCain does have significant experience, but only in foreign policy. He has no experience in economics, as the above clearly shows and he readily admits as much. So, how can that be good for us? He makes jokes about bombing Iran, but then again, HE'S NOT JOKING. This guy would love to succeed Bush as Mr. War President Part II. Like Bush, economic issues are uncomfortable for him and he relishes war.

 

What really is reprehensible is that Iran requests to negotiate in 2003 were rebuffed by Bush. If we had negotiated then, from a position of strength, we likely would not even be in this predicament now.

 

Meanwhile, regardless of your position on the wars, the last seven years have been disastrous for us economically. Doubling the National Debt, and nearly a six hundred billion dollar deficit; in other words, Bush states he makes the hard choices, but if you ask me, he took the easy way out and left the really hard ones for his successor. Do we really want a Bush like president for another 4-8 years?

 

Do we want a guy that has graduated magna cum laude at Harvard or a guy that graduated at the bottom of Annapolis? I want someone smart enough that will look at it from both sides and has enough intellect and reason to make good choices. The bottom line is that the president, whoever that might be is going to face a multitude of choices and issues he knows little or nothing about. I work with the elderly in my profession at times, and I know something about their cognitive abilities, and while I have great respect and admiration for many of those people, I WOULD NOT WANT ANY OF THOSE TO BE PRESIDENT!! I don’t give a damn if that is not PC, but it’s just the reality of their plight. You get older but you don't necessarily grow wiser, and they process information slower, FACT.

 

Republican's when faced with the issue of age like to cite past example such as Winston Churchill. I am fairly well read on Churchill, and McCain is neither that man nor nothing like him. Sure, there are examples of great men/women that excelled in their senior years, but for every one of those, there are hundreds of examples to the contrary. Like I said, it might not be PC, but its reality.

 

The bottom line is that from what I’ve read, and know, his cognitive status is questionable. The reports are mixed via cognitive scientists. I feel he is impaired or at the very least will be during his first term, so why in the hell would I want this guy as president? Some cognitive scientists have suggested he undergo a mental fitness examination to determine his current status. I agree, personally, I would feel better. I hope, but seriously doubt he ever allows it. If anyone knows of any links to the contrary please post one.

 

I disliked Clinton personally, but I liked how he made his decisions. He really did look at both sides of an issue and he had some pretty good people under him. With Bush, we’ve had too much corruption and no one looking out for us; too many bills favoring corporate America, but none favoring the citizenry; for example, the Medicare prescription bill.

 

They say it’s no longer the American Century. We have some tough choices to make, and are facing some tough global competition. Our future has always been based on our economic strength, as well as our military. Without the former, we don’t have the latter. If we don’t get someone in there who is capable, economically speaking, then this country has no future.

 

Our current course is not viable. If we want to excel in this century it’s going to require drastic changes, many of them technological. Do we want a president so awkward, technologically, that is not even internet savvy? We need to streamline government and maintain and create jobs at home. Both of which government plays a huge role via trade agreements and tax incentives; frankly, given the circumstances, it’s amazing that McCain is even close in the polls, go figure?

Edited by methos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meth,

 

Congratulaions on writing the single most prejudiced post I have ever read on this forum.

 

I work with the elderly in my profession at times, and I know something about their cognitive abilities, and while I have great respect and admiration for many of those people, I WOULD NOT WANT ANY OF THOSE TO BE PRESIDENT!! I don’t give a damn if that is not PC, but it’s just the reality of their plight. You get older but you don't necessarily grow wiser, and they process information slower, FACT.

 

Republican's when faced with the issue of age like to cite past example such as Winston Churchill. I am fairly well read on Churchill, and McCain is neither that man nor nothing like him. Sure, there are examples of great men/women that excelled in their senior years, but for every one of those, there are hundreds of examples to the contrary. Like I said, it might not be PC, but its reality.

 

The bottom line is that from what I’ve read, and know, his cognitive status is questionable. The reports are mixed via cognitive scientists. I feel he is impaired or at the very least will be during his first term, so why in the hell would I want this guy as president? Some cognitive scientists have suggested he undergo a mental fitness examination to determine his current status. I agree, personally, I would feel better. I hope, but seriously doubt he ever allows it. If anyone knows of any links to the contrary please post one.

 

So it is okay to be prejudiced against old people? You feel good about that? What if you changed old to Jewish, or Black, and kept the rest of your statement the same? What if you changed it to young people? Fill in the blanks:

 

 

I work with (women, Jews, Blacks, the elderly, UAW members) ___________ in my profession at times, and I know something about their cognitive abilities, and while I have great respect and admiration for many of those people, I WOULD NOT WANT ANY OF THOSE TO BE PRESIDENT!! I don’t give a damn if that is not PC, but it’s just the reality of their plight; they process information slower, FACT.

 

Republican's when faced with the issue of (gender, religion,race, age, union membership) ___________ like to cite past example such as (pick some one who proves the stereotype untrue) ________________. I am fairly well read on _________________, and (pick your candidate) ___________ is neither that man nor nothing like him. Sure, there are examples of great (women, Jews, Blacks, the elderly, UAW members)______________ that excelled, but for every one of those, there are hundreds of examples to the contrary. Like I said, it might not be PC, but its reality.

 

The bottom line is that from what I’ve read, and know, the cognitive status of (pick your candidate)______________is questionable. The reports are mixed via cognitive scientists. I feel (women, Jews, Blacks, the elderly, UAW members) ___________ are impaired or at the very least (pick your candidate)________________will be during his first term, so why in the hell would I want this guy as president? Some cognitive scientists have suggested he undergo a mental fitness examination to determine his current status. I agree, personally, I would feel better. I hope, but seriously doubt he ever allows it. If anyone knows of any links to the contrary please post one.

 

 

For McCain to be defeated because of prejudice is just as wrong as it would be for Obama to be defeated because of prejudice.

 

I am very proud of a country that has not only over looked race for the most part, but actually is affirming that diversity is strength. One of the reasons I am for Obama is that he does bring a different view to the table. I am not in agreement with everything he says, but I think we need to hear new ideas. It is the lack of diversity of IDEAS that has us stuck in this rut.

Edited by xr7g428
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...