Update: McCain Selects Gov. Sarah Palin as Running Mate

Oh, Biden says "Be Patriotic and Pay More Taxes". This is just what I have thought of them all along. They are going to use the economy as a reason to keep lowering the income range to tax more people. I can hear it now from Obama if elected. I know I said I would only raise taxes on a small % of wealthy people in the US but things are even worse than we thought. We are going to have and lower the income level to ? so we can help the people of this great nation. So up goes my taxes agian (I pay more than my share) and I'm guessing he would go to around $75,000 income.
Biden: Wealthy Americans Must Pay More Taxes to Show Patriotism - America’s Election HQ (http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/18/biden-wealthy-americans-must-pay-more-taxes-to-show-patriotism/)

The socialism isn't even subtle any more, it's in-your-face socialism.

The percentage of taxes paid already increases with income, in other words the wealthy are paying a higher percentage AND a higher dollar amount. What more do they want?

I fall squarely in the middle class and wouldn't be affected directly in the least bit by an increase in taxes on the wealthy, and I think it's the stupidest plan I've ever heard.

The wealthy are the people keeping this country running - they're paying more in taxes in a year than most of us gross in income. They're already paying for damn near the entire government, the government needs to stop wasting the money they have and stop trying to be everyone's mommy and daddy.

They need to get a court order for the AP to hand them over. Sounds fair. What's really troubling though is the allegation that she conducted state business using a semi-private email account.

How exactly is this troubling? I've heard the argument that "she was trying to hide communications, but NOTHING in that account was illegal or all that damning." I mean talk about a witch hunt. And how is this MORE troubling than the actual crime (hacking into her account) that was committed.

Winston Churchill summarized Socialism pretty well:

"...a socialist policy is abhorrent to the British ideas of freedom. Socialism is inseparably interwoven with totalitarianism and the object worship of the state. It will prescribe for every one where they are to work, what they are to work at, where they may go and what they may say. Socialism is an attack on the right to breathe freely. No socialist system can be established without a political police. They would have to fall back on some form of Gestapo, no doubt very humanely directed in the first instance."

Friedrich Hayek: A Biography (http://books.google.com/books?id=Z0lpZhenN6AC&pg=PA137&lpg=PA137&dq=a+socialist+policy+is+abhorrent+to+the+British+ ideas+of+freedom.&source=web&ots=GXcOjvekO5&sig=uMeXjFgJt7U8yN95X8ihjMB27AA&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result)

How exactly is this troubling? I've heard the argument that "she was trying to hide communications, but NOTHING in that account was illegal or all that damning." I mean talk about a witch hunt. And how is this MORE troubling than the actual crime (hacking into her account) that was committed.

I think it's troubling just from the standpoint that she's using a free, public email platform for conducting government business. It's not illegal or immoral as much as it's just kind of dumb.

Running a government from a @yahoo.com address just looks and feels wrong. It's like signing some piece of important legislation in your living room while wearing a bathrobe.

The socialism isn't even subtle any more, it's in-your-face socialism.

The percentage of taxes paid already increases with income, in other words the wealthy are paying a higher percentage AND a higher dollar amount. What more do they want?

I fall squarely in the middle class and wouldn't be affected directly in the least bit by an increase in taxes on the wealthy, and I think it's the stupidest plan I've ever heard.

The wealthy are the people keeping this country running - they're paying more in taxes in a year than most of us gross in income. They're already paying for damn near the entire government, the government needs to stop wasting the money they have and stop trying to be everyone's mommy and daddy.
Good post, agreed.

I fall squarely in the middle class and wouldn't be affected directly in the least bit by an increase in taxes on the wealthy, and I think it's the stupidest plan I've ever heard.

Actually, if you work for a wealthy person, you might be more affected than you think. Most of the people who work in this country work for small businesses. So if there are small business owners who are classified as "rich" or "wealthy" by the Dems, and a larger portion of their income is taken by the government in the form of tax increases, one of the first ways they will make up for that loss is by cutting labor costs.

For everyone out there who thinks tax increases for the rich are just fine and dandy, just wait until your pink slip arrives.

Actually, if you work for a wealthy person, you might be more affected than you think. Most of the people who work in this country work for small businesses. So if there are small business owners who are classified as "rich" or "wealthy" by the Dems, and a larger portion of their income is taken by the government in the form of tax increases, one of the first ways they will make up for that loss is by cutting labor costs.

For everyone out there who thinks tax increases for the rich are just fine and dandy, just wait until your pink slip arrives.

Excellent point.

Hacking away at the top level indiscriminately probably appeals to romantic notions of "taking on the man" and "fighting big business" without a realization of the trickle-down effect.

How exactly is this troubling? I've heard the argument that "she was trying to hide communications, but NOTHING in that account was illegal or all that damning." I mean talk about a witch hunt. And how is this MORE troubling than the actual crime (hacking into her account) that was committed.

Note the usage of the word allegation. Also note that there are two accounts in question. Her personal one was hacked (I don't approve) and the status of whether the other account was hacked is unknown.

Note the usage of the word allegation. Also note that there are two accounts in question. Her personal one was hacked (I don't approve) and the status of whether the other account was hacked is unknown.
Saden we agree on something!

Here's a question for you guys:

If Candidate A wants to raise taxes (on the rich), but will spend more frugally, and Candidate B wants to lower taxes (on the rich), but will spend more frivolously, who do you choose?