Better off with Hillary?

[Anonymous]

I am just so damn thankful that this is a question. I think it would of been horrible to have Hilllary as president. Obama is bad enough.

[Anonymous]

Ah the liberal you don't want to fund anything statement. Not true-most conservatives believe in funding eduation and infrastructure and limited social services--we usually are not for unions because they hinder productivity --this is certainly the case of the auto industry and also teacher unions which is the reason why a lot of underperforming schools are still around. As for anthrax --I think the government was aggressive on it and last time I checked thank god only a few people were killed. As for the war-a necessary evil and I would rather fight the taliban and other bad guys over in Iraq than here. Last time I checked Gates was the defense secretary so something must have gotten through Obama's brain that Bush was doing something right--oh yes and General Petraeus is still in. We don't believe in bailouts--and I would have said no to any of them--and yes I am mad that Bush funded the first one--no conservative would have been for that because it is weak and it lets the government in business in a way that will ultimately hurt the country. I am now seeing government people trying to say how much someone should be paid and also am hearing Geitner talking about getting involved in more businesses--this sounds like socialism to me and it isn't good.

Now I am sure if you are someone who has no aspirations of making a high salary or creating your own business, the idea of the government stopping other people from making money sounds great because then you won't actually have to be worried that someone else is making more than you but..at some point, these bills are going to have to be paid and what to do when the government has bankrupted the country and has already taken all the wealth away from the wealthy??? Hmmmmm--Unfortunately I seem to be in the minority since it's so popular to get mad at sucessful people instead of god forbid working to be successful yourself--no one stopped anyone from building a business or going into a business area that was lucrative. As for Bush--many good years of positive GDP, low unemployment and no attack after 9/11--but he is awful ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ah the liberal you don't want to fund anything statement. Not true-most conservatives believe in funding eduation and infrastructure and limited social services--we usually are not for unions because they hinder productivity --this is certainly the case of the auto industry and also teacher unions which is the reason why a lot of underperforming schools are still around. As for anthrax --I think the government was aggressive on it and last time I checked thank god only a few people were killed. As for the war-a necessary evil and I would rather fight the taliban and other bad guys over in Iraq than here. Last time I checked Gates was the defense secretary so something must have gotten through Obama's brain that Bush was doing something right--oh yes and General Petraeus is still in. We don't believe in bailouts--and I would have said no to any of them--and yes I am mad that Bush funded the first one--no conservative would have been for that because it is weak and it lets the government in business in a way that will ultimately hurt the country. I am now seeing government people trying to say how much someone should be paid and also am hearing Geitner talking about getting involved in more businesses--this sounds like socialism to me and it isn't good.

Now I am sure if you are someone who has no aspirations of making a high salary or creating your own business, the idea of the government stopping other people from making money sounds great because then you won't actually have to be worried that someone else is making more than you but..at some point, these bills are going to have to be paid and what to do when the government has bankrupted the country and has already taken all the wealth away from the wealthy??? Hmmmmm--Unfortunately I seem to be in the minority since it's so popular to get mad at sucessful people instead of god forbid working to be successful yourself--no one stopped anyone from building a business or going into a business area that was lucrative. As for Bush--many good years of positive GDP, low unemployment and no attack after 9/11--but he is awful ...

Ok, I'll take the first shot at this:
Repeat after me: THERE WAS NO AL QAEDA IN IRAQ BEFORE WE GOT THERE how many times do you people have to be told this? There was not, and never has been proven any relation between 9-11 and Iraq! The Taliban is in Afghanistan and Pakistan, not Iraq.

Next issue:
Bush is awful for a host of reasons but a very important one is that he took office with a very healthy economy and a large surplus and left a huge deficit and an economic shit storm. I'll admit he cannot be blamed for all the financial mess the US is in now but his squandering the surplus sure hasn't helped.
Clearly trickle down economics does not work. But I guess Republicans are too entrenched in their thinking (see Iraq/Taliban issue above) to get this into their thick skulls.

[Anonymous]

Oh god why do I even bother --the economy was a mess before the Republican revolution of 94 so basically you can thank that Republican Congress for the healthy economy during the second half of Clinton's tenue--that and Clinton realizing that his stupid policies would not work so went along with things like cutting welfare etc. The economy was affected briefly after 9/11 but quickly rebounded and yes we are continuing to pay a price for 9/11 in terms of money toward the military so the fact that the GDP continued to grow and unemployment was so low despite having to fight the war shows how strong Bush was. Right now there is a hostility towards people who are running businesses --it's almost as if you are a bad American if you make a lot of money. I am sick of it and I am sick of being told that I should pay more taxes. I am going to take a wild guess that pp doesn't own his/her own business or make over 250K and if you do and still like Obama's policies you won't be making that for long.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh god why do I even bother --the economy was a mess before the Republican revolution of 94 so basically you can thank that Republican Congress for the healthy economy during the second half of Clinton's tenue--that and Clinton realizing that his stupid policies would not work so went along with things like cutting welfare etc. The economy was affected briefly after 9/11 but quickly rebounded and yes we are continuing to pay a price for 9/11 in terms of money toward the military so the fact that the GDP continued to grow and unemployment was so low despite having to fight the war shows how strong Bush was. Right now there is a hostility towards people who are running businesses --it's almost as if you are a bad American if you make a lot of money. I am sick of it and I am sick of being told that I should pay more taxes. I am going to take a wild guess that pp doesn't own his/her own business or make over 250K and if you do and still like Obama's policies you won't be making that for long.

Country first! I will happily pay more taxes to support this country moving in a positive direction.

[Anonymous]

Yes Country first-I have paid my share and I think it's time that more of the country pay their fair share. Currently the top 10% of earners pay 70% of the taxes--maybe if we could get the rest of the country to give more percentagewise us top 10% would not be so angry about getting soaked. Please don't say that because we earn more we should pay more--we already pay too much as it is. Also-please don't go on about how Obama wants to put taxes back to Clinton days as it is a false argument because 1)the numbers do not add up since we are spending waaaaaaaaaay to much and 2)the changes in the tax code mean that Clinton day taxes were much much lower and 3)inflation means the dollar went further then so to sum up--going back to Clinton is not going back to Clinton.