Let me hear from you repubs. What are your reasons for voting for McSame..

[Anonymous]

Majority of people who are in the top percent of earners are small business owners--that is a fact. That there may be small business owners who are not yet in the top income makes no difference--and they will be affected because many small service companies service the larger ones who will also be taxed excessely as part of Obamas plan. Why is it fair to tax the rich --because they have earned more money? We are not socialist here no matter how much the liberals would like us to be. Fact is the the world is moving more toward Capitialism and we are moving away from it. It's like the perception is that you are somehow a bad person because you have earned money and would like to keep it and save it for your retirement. Percentage one, more conservatives give to charity than liberals. Many business owners have to take risk that people working in the government or unions will never understand.--since a great many liberals tend to come from these arenas. There is something about having to make payroll for employees that just sets your experience apart because it is like you are caring for many families.
No conservative wants to take money out of anyone's pocket, they are just asking that you stay away from taking their hard-earned honest money away. Again, I am going to assume that anyone who perpetuates the taxing the rich is fine doesn't make over 250k a year so just is okay with that --I would love to see what you would think if I suddenly asked you to give away up to 60% of your total income to taxes--you would freak out and then make the excuse that you needed the money more. Well money is money and if you earned it, you should keep it whether you make 50K, 100K, 200K or a million.

[Anonymous]

Again, I am going to assume that anyone who perpetuates the taxing the rich is fine doesn't make over 250k a year so just is okay with that

Ha -- again, this capitalist-loving, giving-conservatives-a-bad-name PP is not in tune with reality. You live in a metropolitan area like D.C. that is absolutely chock full of (1) wealthy people and (2) liberals, but you don't realize that there is overlap between the two groups?

[Anonymous]

No I don't think when it comes to straight out finances there is not a lot of overlap-majority of people who are wealthy would like to hang onto their wealth and not have it stolen. Are there liberals who are rich. Of course but majority of those liberals are focused on issues like right to choose, envirnment, anti war. I am wealthy but I was not born rich so I am not someone who didn't have to build from the ground up and I am not some kind of Bill Gates in the smarts department. I am hardworking though and it has never and I repeat never been on my mind to get a hand out of any sort. Seriously-I have lost jobs early in my career and refused unemployment because it made me feel weak--and yes I know I paid into it but my feeling was that I would find my way out without a government handout--and that is the way I was brought up. We were taught that if you worked hard, it would all work out. There are again just too many whiney people who want the government to just take care of them. Somehow this is bad??? I could see some angst if I was asking for something--I'm not again I am just saying enough with the overtaxing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Please..conservatives have no problem paying taxes for things like infrastructure as well as protecting the country. We just don't believe that there should be excessive taxes and Obamas plan is excessive and it really calls for people who are already shouldering the nation to pay even more. The dumb thing is that this will hurt everyone because people who own a lot of smaller companies who also happen to be high earners will downsize more and pay less, smaller venders will be hurt and wealthy people will take greater steps to protect their income so it doesn't work--everytime it's tried, it doesn't work. Even Bill Clinton was forced to make a tax cut but Congress in 94. It goes back to a philosopy of freedom..freedom to be successful or not successful--your choice. I do believe if every able bodied person worked to the best of their ability, they would be fine and the only people who would get aid would be those who absolutely needed it. Sorry saw too many people growing up who milked the system.

Oh, when you benefit from it, it's infrastructure. When someone else benefits, it's milking the system. The point is you think you're "free" to be successful or not successful but in reality, you're just getting a handout from the government (road subsidies) so you can get to work in your car while pretending to yourself that you're pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps.

[Anonymous]

I just don't understand how anyone, liberal, conservative or independent can vote for a man who calls his wife a cunt in public. And never denies it, though he's had the opportunity. Because there were too many reporters around when he said it and they all heard it.

Who wants a President who calls his wife a cunt?? Show of hands, please!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just don't understand how anyone, liberal, conservative or independent can vote for a man who calls his wife a cunt in public. And never denies it, though he's had the opportunity. Because there were too many reporters around when he said it and they all heard it.

Who wants a President who calls his wife a cunt?? Show of hands, please!

As I said in my previous post, his action speaks volumes. I don't want a dinosaur sexist pr*ck as the man in the big house. What kind of bills will he sign into law calling for fair pay for women? What type of Supreme Court justices is he going to nominate that affect laws for women, girls, our daughters? Our granddaughters?

[Anonymous]

Vote for McCain, don't vote for McCain, but don't base your decision on hearsay. He supposedly said this to his wife 16 years ago. It was late, she put her hands in his hair, mentioned how it had thinned out, and he said "At least I don't plaster on the makeup like a trollop, you c*nt."

Did he really say this? Who knows? Base your decisions on real issues.

[Anonymous]

Did he really say this? Who knows? Base your decisions on real issues.

I am not the PP who raised this issue, nor will it be my voting issue, but it is quite unfair to dismiss it as not being a "real issue". I think a person to whom it would ever occur to address anybody in this way - much less a spouse - has some bit of misogyny in them- a character trait that I would not want in a leader. As the 22.53 poster pointed out, god only knows how that view may play out in policy terms.

[Anonymous]

Please-when people are fighting all kinds of bad words come out-seriously enough on this. I would be more worried about a person who belongs to a racist church than someone who says something off color to his wife.

[Anonymous]

I agree. I have been known to call my husband an F***ing Bastard. Was it right? Nope. He was being a jerk though, and calling him a jerk didn't seem powerful enough. If there was a male equivalent of the C word, I probably would have called him that.

[Anonymous]

If there was a male equivalent of the C word, I probably would have called him that.

If you want to speak in a vile way to your spouse, that is fine - you are entitled to do that, and in fact I've been known to do it as well. But it is disingenuous to say that there are many terms that are as derogatory as calling a woman a cunt. Fu*(&^$ bastard doesn't even come close. My point is that if you don't want to make an electoral decision based on that issue, then don't. I personally am not going to either. However, I think if someone has a deep-seeded concern over the use of that term, and the potential misogyny that it may indicate (like the earlier poster), I think it is a completely legit voting issue and it shouldn't be dismissed as not being a "real issue".

[Anonymous]

I would be more worried about a person who belongs to a racist church than someone who says something off color to his wife.

I agree - that Rev. Hagee is SCARY!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If there was a male equivalent of the C word, I probably would have called him that.

If you want to speak in a vile way to your spouse, that is fine - you are entitled to do that, and in fact I've been known to do it as well. But it is disingenuous to say that there are many terms that are as derogatory as calling a woman a cunt. Fu*(&^$ bastard doesn't even come close. My point is that if you don't want to make an electoral decision based on that issue, then don't. I personally am not going to either. However, I think if someone has a deep-seeded concern over the use of that term, and the potential misogyny that it may indicate (like the earlier poster), I think it is a completely legit voting issue and it shouldn't be dismissed as not being a "real issue".

It is also hearsay. We have no real way of knowing this was actually said. I think that often people will believe what they want, without regard for the truth.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:
I agree - that Rev. Hagee is SCARY!

Well, to be fair, McCain was never a member of Hagee's church. Ironically, religion is just anther issue on which the maverick straight-talker has flip-flopped. He was raised an Episcopalian and as recently as June 2007 told reporters he was Episcopalian. Then, while campaigning in South Carolina in September 2007, he suddenly announced that he was a Baptist.

"Honor" is supposed to be McCain's strongest character trait, yet he is reduced to dissimulating about his religion and running advertisements that contain outright lies impugning Obama's patriotism. With straight-talkers like that, who needs used car salesmen?

But, the best straight-talking yet was when the Tax Policy Center found huge gaps in McCain's budget proposals. The TPC had relied on McCain's public statements for some of their data. However, McCain's economics advisor, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, complained that the study was inaccurate because what McCain says is not official. It seems Grandpa Simpson just can't be trusted to get his own budget plan correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:http://firedoglake.com/2008/05/01/mccain-in-the-membrane/

It may be a blog, but I think the exchange speaks for itself.

If he thought he could get away with a denial, he would have emphatically denied it. He didn't deny it because there are three reporters who heard him say it and he knows they would all corrobate each other.

Judge for yourself. I think it speaks volumes.