If the election was held today

KLHJ2 · 09-12-2008, 11:26 AM

In no way am I claiming that this information is mine or that I know the original sender. My mother forewarded this to me earlier today and I believe that it provides a simple explanation on each candidates views. Of coarse you have to dig deeper into each issue to get a full understaning of why each candidate supports or opposes a certain issue. Some issues are not as simple as yes or no answers, but this email makes is seem like there are.

Quote:

"This is a good summary of our candidates' views.

This came to me from a lengthy list of emails. Please pass it along to anyone you think may be interested in our future.

2008 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE COMPARISON TALKING POINTS
ISSUE JOHN McCAIN
BARAK OBAMA

Favors new drilling offshore US
Yes
No

Will appoint judges who interpret the law not make it
Yes
No

Served in the US Armed Forces
Yes
No

Amount of time served in the US Senate
22 YEARS
173 DAYS

Will institute a socialized national health care plan
No
Yes

Supports abortion throughout the pregnancy
No
Yes

Would pull troops out of Iraq immediately
No
Yes

Supports gun ownership rights
Yes
No

Supports homosexual marriage
No
Yes

Proposed programs will mean a huge tax increase
No
Yes

Voted against making English the official language
No
Yes

Voted to give Social Security benefits to illegals
No
Yes

CAPITAL GAINS TAX

MCCAIN
0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples). McCain does not propose any change in existing home sales income tax.

OBAMA
28% on profit from ALL home sales. (How does this affect you? If you sell your home and make a profit, you will pay 28% of your gain on taxes. If you are heading toward retirement and would like to down-size your home or move into a retirement community, 28% of the money you make from your home will go to taxes. This proposal will adversely affect the elderly who are counting on the income from their homes as part of their retirement income.)

DIVIDEND TAX

MCCAIN
15% (no change)

OBAMA
39.6% - (How will this affect you? If you have any money invested in stock market, IRA, mutual funds, college funds, life insurance, retirement accounts, or anything that pays or reinvests dividends, you will now be paying nearly 40% of the money earned on taxes if Obama becomes president. The experts predict that 'Higher tax rates on dividends and capital gains would crash the stock market, yet do absolutely nothing to cut the deficit.')

INCOME TAX

MCCAIN
(no changes)
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $31,250

OBAMA (reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 125K - tax $38,750
Under Obama, your taxes could almost double!

INHERITANCE TAX

MCCAIN
- 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)

OBAMA
Restore the inheritance tax

Many families have lost businesses, farms, ranches, and homes that have been in their families for generations because they could not afford the inheritance tax. Those willing their assets to loved ones will only lose them to these taxes.

NEW TAXES PROPOSED BY OBAMA

New government taxes proposed on homes that are more than 2400 square feet. New gasoline taxes (as if gas weren't high enough already) New taxes on natural resources consumption (heating gas, water, electricity) New taxes on retirement accounts, and last but not least....New taxes to pay for socialized medicine so we can receive the same level of medical care as other third-world countries!!!

You can verify the above at the following web sites:

Election 2008: The candidates and your money - CNNMoney

Taxes: Election Center 2008 - CNN.com

RAW DATA: Fred Thompson’s Remarks at GOP Convention - America’s Election HQ

McCain, Obama Offer Different Visions on Taxes

Fact Checker Archive by Category

Fact Checker Archive by Category

Bob Beauprez
Catch all the latest in policy and politics at A Line of Sight www.bobbeauprez.com"

saden1 · 09-12-2008, 11:30 AM

They lost me at:

Quote:

Will appoint judges who interpret the law not make it
Yes
No

KLHJ2 · 09-12-2008, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saden1

They lost me at:

Like I said, I didn't write it nor do I know the original sender. If you will look you will notice that McCain's answers are on top and Obamma's are on bottom.

I dont fully understand the Judge thing either, nor do I really care. Correct me if I should.

mheisig · 09-12-2008, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schneed10

McCain.

- Obama's healthcare plan, while noble, has no chance of getting put in place. Sometimes reality has to trump vision.

- Obama's platform for bringing the troops home from Iraq now is kind of losing steam, given that Bush and Petraeus have started setting the stage for pulling troops out.

- I'd rather have McCain in charge of our military than Obama.

- I'm in danger of getting hit by the alternative minimum tax sometime within this upcoming presidential term, and McCain is the only one suggesting we do away with it. That will mean a difference of several thousand bucks a year for me and my family. And yes, at least a portion of everyone's vote is selfish!

- Alternative energy is great and should be pursued, but I see no reason why we shouldn't use our own petroleum resources immediately. Drilling now makes sense, in conjunction with the search for other energy sources. It's not like drilling precludes us from also investing in other sources.

- McCain's economic and tax ideas make more sense. History shows tax revenue collected by the federal government is generally higher when policies similar to McCain's are put in place.

- Obama wants to stop jobs from being shifted overseas, yet he wants to raise taxes on businesses. Um, hello. The reason companies ship the jobs overseas in the first place is because the labor costs are way cheaper. If you increase taxes on them here in this country you're just adding more weight to that burden. You're actually incenting them to headquarter themselves elsewhere.

Basically my feelings in a nutshell as well.

I'm no fan of McCain and I have my issues with him. My vote for him, however, is more a case of "choosing the lesser of two evils." Which is what I did last election. And the one before that. In fact I can't remember a candidate that I truly, genuinely supported as much as I just didn't like the other guy.

I guess I vote out of spite

saden1 · 09-12-2008, 11:42 AM

I wonder if the imbeciles even know what the word judge means. What it means to be a judge. They would have been better served to just say "wants to appoint anti-abortion conservative judges."

Quote:

v., judged, judg·ing, judg·es.

v.tr.

1. To form an opinion or estimation of after careful consideration: judge heights; judging character.
2.
1. Law. To hear and decide on in a court of law; try: judge a case.
2. Obsolete. To pass sentence on; condemn.
3. To act as one appointed to decide the winners of: judge an essay contest.
3. To determine or declare after consideration or deliberation.
4. Informal. To have as an opinion or assumption; suppose: I judge you're right.
5. Bible. To govern; rule. Used of an ancient Israelite leader.

v.intr.

1. To form an opinion or evaluation.
2. To act or decide as a judge.

n.

1. One who judges, especially:
1. One who makes estimates as to worth, quality, or fitness: a good judge of used cars; a poor judge of character.
2. (Abbr. J.) Law. A public official who hears and decides cases brought before a court of law.
3. Law. A bankruptcy referee.
4. One appointed to decide the winners of a contest or competition.
2. Bible.
1. A leader of the Israelites during a period of about 400 years between the death of Joshua and the accession of Saul.
2. Judges (used with a sing. verb) (Abbr. Judg. or Jgs or Jg) A book of the Bible.

mheisig · 09-12-2008, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wilsowilso

Isn't Sarah Palin running for President now? John who? Matt Damon might have put it best so far. Think about it? Are we really going to gamble the future of this great country in a matchup between Sarah Palin and Vladimir Putin. It's absurd. Palin seems like a fine politician, but John McCain is so desperate to win that he has really put our country into a real mess. He met this woman once. Bad news.

Matt Damon has a point, but it doesn't resonate with me in the way I think he intended it.

If you're going to use the U.S. President vs. Putin scenario, the only one of the entire bunch (Obama, Biden, McCain, Palin) I would feel comfortable having go against Putin is McCain.

Obama is like the little kid trying to look tough in that scenario, Biden is just another long-term senator, and yeah, Palin is about as inexperienced or ill-equipped as the first two.

If I have two parties, and only one party has at least ONE person I'd feel comfortable standing up to Putin, why would I vote for the other?

saden1 · 09-12-2008, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mheisig

Matt Damon has a point, but it doesn't resonate with me in the way I think he intended it.

If you're going to use the U.S. President vs. Putin scenario, the only one of the entire bunch (Obama, Biden, McCain, Palin) I would feel comfortable having go against Putin is McCain.

Obama is like the little kid trying to look tough in that scenario, Biden is just another long-term senator, and yeah, Palin is about as inexperienced or ill-equipped as the first two.

If I have two parties, and only one party has at least ONE person I'd feel comfortable standing up to Putin, why would I vote for the other?

There's something to be said for not playing your trump card before you know how the game is going to end.

mheisig · 09-12-2008, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saden1

Having the the majority of people on the planet wanting you as the president of the USA is a good way to start don't you think? What about Biden or does he not count?

It is a good start. Call me when Germany, France or any other country somehow factors into the U.S. election system.

mheisig · 09-12-2008, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angry

Like I said, I didn't write it nor do I know the original sender. If you will look you will notice that McCain's answers are on top and Obamma's are on bottom.

I dont fully understand the Judge thing either, nor do I really care. Correct me if I should.

Yes, you should. I would argue that the Judicial branch is far more important than the executive branch. The power that the U.S. Supreme Court has to steer this country, and interpret/make law is absolutely incredible and dwarfs ANY presidents power.

Frankly I wish the executive branch were FAR less emphasized. Nowadays it's all about who's president - I'm pretty sure most of the population has simply forgotten how the system works and that there's a lot more going on than what one guy/girl in the Oval Office does.

mheisig · 09-12-2008, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saden1

There's something to be said for not playing your trump card before you know how the game is going to end.

Not sure I follow...

KLHJ2 · 09-12-2008, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mheisig

Yes, you should. I would argue that the Judicial branch is far more important than the executive branch. The power that the U.S. Supreme Court has to steer this country, and interpret/make law is absolutely incredible and dwarfs ANY presidents power.

Frankly I wish the executive branch were FAR less emphasized. Nowadays it's all about who's president - I'm pretty sure most of the population has simply forgotten how the system works and that there's a lot more going on than what one guy/girl in the Oval Office does.

I wasn't looking at that perspective, but It still does not change my mind abut the candidates overall.

saden1 · 09-12-2008, 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mheisig

Not sure I follow...

You seem to find the fact that McCain talks tough a virtue. There is wisdom in not showing your fangs from the outset. You can stare Putin in the eyes and smile at the same time. It can be interpreted as a sinister or friendly smile. In any case, you should go pick up the "

The Art of War."

mheisig · 09-12-2008, 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saden1

You seem to find the fact that McCain talks tough a virtue. There is wisdom in not showing your fangs from the outset. You can stare Putin in the eyes and smile at the same time. It can be interpreted as a sinister or friendly smile. In any case, you should go pick up the "The Art of War."

Read "The Art of War" three times, but thanks for the recommendation.

You're correct in a sense, but it's not necessarily a universal truth that it's always, in every situation the best policy to take that approach.

I spent three years as an inner-city cop and have had an experience or two with talking to people in high-stress, hostile situations. Sometimes it's good to play nice, be gentle and sweet talk them. Sometimes you have to be polite but firm. Sometimes you have to look at them like you're the devil and if they say one wrong thing you're going to **** them up like they've never experienced.

It's dependent on the situation and it's incredibly naive to assume that one approach works under all circumstances

I'll freely admit there's little to base the opinion on, and it's just that, an opinion. My general feeling of Obama, Biden AND Palin is that none of them have any experience dealing with hostile situations and I there's no way of telling one way or another if any of them have the balls to make the tough calls when the situation calls for it. My general impression of Obama and Biden is that they'll pussy-foot around and might end up putting the country in severe danger because they're trying to play so nice and make everyone like us.

McCain hasn't been tested in the executive sense either, but his experiences as a POW lead me to believe he has the character to hold up, make tough calls and deal with the consequences.

The other three are simply unproven in ALL respects.

Again, totally just my subjective impression of Obama. Frankly I'm not sure anyone can argue with any certainty how anyone will perform for sure in a given future situation.

Unless you're Nostradamus, of course.

Mattyk · 09-12-2008, 02:22 PM

The latest smear ad from the fish

McCain Paints Obama as Disrespectful | The Trail | washingtonpost.com

12thMan · 09-12-2008, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angry

In no way am I claiming that this information is mine or that I know the original sender. My mother forewarded this to me earlier today and I believe that it provides a simple explanation on each candidates views. Of coarse you have to dig deeper into each issue to get a full understaning of why each candidate supports or opposes a certain issue. Some issues are not as simple as yes or no answers, but this email makes is seem like there are.

Angry, are you kidding with this stuff?

Drilling isn't a yes or no proposition. And for record, Obama is for drilling -- which he always has been -- but not as the primary and sole solution to our energy dependence. His first and foremost concern with drilling is that we first explore the land leases that have been granted but haven't been tapped.

I guess I could go down the list and tick off each one, but what's the point? Then is becomes just another talking point.

09-12-2008, 02:22 PM	#89
Mattyk ‎\m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 40 Posts: 72,722	Re: If the election was held today The latest smear ad from the fish McCain Paints Obama as Disrespectful \| The Trail \| washingtonpost.com __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

View Poll Results: If the election was held today who would you vote for?
McCain	24	44.44%
Obama	30	55.56%
Voters: 54. You may not vote on this poll

If the election was held today

Parking Lot