Scratch

since obama won, i will be poor -_-

element990 wrote:

the thing i say about the election is ANYTHING is better then having bush lol

Fo show!!!! (for sure)

Freestylin_Monkey wrote:

he may have won, but palin will always be hot to me

Sick

You're Sick.

I'm so ecstatic that Obama won!   We had a party at my house and it was just so fun and I cried!

theUnderscene wrote:

Lanie wrote:

I did not want Obama to win racism did play a role in the election and I think it was not a fare election. People voted for the wrong reason

I agree...

well you neglect to mention the fact that the media (*cough* NBC*cough) gave Nobama a free ride.

mationmaker wrote:

since obama won, i will be poor -_-

to be honest, I dont think that Mc Cain would be any different, if he was elected, we probably would be in economic crisis longer, because he is so caught up with invading Iraq, he will use up all the money for the military, by the time he starts puting more money in the U.S ecomony, we will be low on money.

alexpja wrote:

Obama Is The Best Prez!!! Mccain Is So A Lozer!

we havent seen what Obama can do yet, dont be so optimistic

Mayhem wrote:

24ever wrote:

theUnderscene wrote:

I agree...

well you neglect to mention the fact that the media (*cough* NBC*cough) gave Nobama a free ride.

Oh yeah, a totally free ride.  There was nothing in the media about
his contraversial preacher
his connections with fellow charity board member Ayers
his having the a middle name that is the same as the first name of a dictator
his wifes "really proud" statement
the "whitey" tape
his confessed, past, drug abuse
his supposedly being a marxist
his inexperience
his 57 states gaffe
his buying a house for less than the asking price
the OMG he might not even be an american
the "secret muslim" stuff
the "he's going to raise YOUR taxes" nonsense
the "hes going to take your guns!" nonsense

No, the media never mentioned any of that.  Oh wait.  They did.  Lots.  AND HE STILL WON!  Mostly because the above was either made up smears or totally irrelevant to the job of president.

OR< you could believe that all of the above is true and realise that he was STILL considered a better choice for president than McCain...

OH PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZ
the only place you could hear any of that was on Fox News ( a CABLE channel, and the only one to ever get it right when it comes to politics) and talk radio!

Freestylin_Monkey wrote:

Lanie wrote:

I did not want Obama to win racism did play a role in the election and I think it was not a fare election. People voted for the wrong reason

Maybe to most people it was because he was black, but not only did he win the populat vote but he won the electoral votes too, maybe it was just because Obama was more ready to be president than McCain, he seemed more prepared than him with his campain and everything, even though if he had Hilary, there would be no chance for MCcain, if McCain recruited someone with experience like Hilary instead if Palin, he could have had a chance to win

YES!

Sorry I haven't been on in a while, but I saw someone had it covered so I left this site… though I do see some disturbing things here, mostly about knowledge of Obama. Now I don't really feel like debating as I'm having some friend issues and lots of stress, but I do want to point out a fact Mayhem claimed false, the "taking your guns away".

That is true. Obama wants to get rid of the…� second amendment? The right to bear arms. You also notice how he is deliberately picking Democrats for his cabinet. I mean, he was thinking (or did) about Hillary! Only cause she's a democrat. Anyways, I forget where I heard the gun one but all the facts were there, and the Hillary part was from CNN. Anyways, just wanted to point out your, to use bigger words  , ignorance on some subjects. Oh, I know I said this, but as my friends were debating, it completely blew away from me, only to be remembered shortly after, so why not just get it off my chest?

He claimed that Bush caused this debt. O.K.… I'm not denying that. What I'm saying though is DEMOCRATS, not Republicans or Bush or Obama to single someone out, caused this crisis. They wanted to sell everyone a home, no matter if they could afford it or not, so they would take 110% loans, pay off the house for a year, take 10% in their pockets, and move, causing this crisis. You say this is a good thing, giving everyone a house, aka "spreading the wealth". Well, you already have seen it's affects for only a few months. We can't last 4 years of it.

Anyways, that was irrelevant to what i was saying. And mostly at Mayhem here just because from memory he/she (guessing he) never actually read my posts, which would mean I would state something, like "this is irrelevant", and he would reply "what does that have to do with anything?". So please, read it all, read it again, look for key words, and debate. 24ever, watch my back. Out.

Oh yeah, Palin is smokin' 

Freestylin_Monkey wrote:

Tommythesuper wrote:

I'm so ecstatic that Obama won!   We had a party at my house and it was just so fun and I cried!

oh get a room

He already has a house, you anti-happy person.

Mayhem wrote:

I love your authoratitive stance on the issues.

"What I'm saying is definately true, but I can't remember where I heard it."

Not what people call a reliable source, that.

As for your assertion that I don't read your posts - a foolish notion.  I have yet to see any fact-based claims based upon reliable sources, however.  If you are going to claim that Obama has a certain policy, why not give us the quote from his own speeches in which he makes that statement, instead of your "Yeah, I heard it somewhere so it must be true."

After all, I heard somewhere that McCain was actually brainwashed whilst he was a POW and so would have turned the country over to the enemy.  I heard it somewhere (don't rememember where) so it must be true, right?   

I never said that, so why is it in quotes? You could make the fact I said it in a similar way, but why the quotes. And you never read my posts as I will state something, and you will restate it in a different way (again, read my post). As for the source:

skinheads.net is one. There was another but my computer can't connect to it. And as for you saying (not Mayhem, someone else) getting rid of our Second Amendment is a good thing, I have something to say. Obama lied than, saying he supports it, than saying, after becoming elected, he wants to get rid of it. I call that lying. Second, what happens when someone breaks into your house. What happens if, now that Obama is president, he stole a gun? Or smuggled it in the US. You used to have one, but were forced to get rid of it, so now some burglar has a gun and you are defenseless as you are living alone with no animals of any kind to protect you, you only had a gun. What now? What about the Elk population? And the deer? Well, now we can't hunt, and where I live the Elk population is getting too big. Well, now there is too many, not enough food, and towns being overrun with Elk because we don't have hunters to help stabilize the population. Thank you Obama! Oh, and on his lowering the tax to help the middle class:

Food for thought!!!!!!



Bar Stool Economics



Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all

ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it

would go something like this:



The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The fifth would pay $1.

The sixth would pay $3.

The seventh would pay $7.

The eighth would pay $12.

The ninth would pay $18.

The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.



So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar

every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the

owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers, he said,

'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten

now cost just $80.



The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so

the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But

what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide

the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized

that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from

everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up

being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be

fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded

to work out the amounts each should pay.



And so:



The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).

The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).

The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).



Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four

continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began

to compare their savings.



'I only got a dollar out of the $20,'declared the sixth man. He

pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'



'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a

dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!'



'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10

back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'



'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't

get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'



The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.



The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine

sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill,

they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money

between all of them for even half of the bill!



And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how

our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most

benefit from a tax reduction.



Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may

not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the

atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.





David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.

Professor of Economics, University of Georgia



For those who understand, no explanation is needed.

For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.