[sherman14]

Since yall were talkin about how bad Republicans are. Look at JFK did. He almost ended the world with th Missle crisis.

[More Cowbell]

well i don't like him because i know were going to be living under bush policys

Again, Bush's policies are not necessarily McCain's policies. Do you really think all Republicans think alike? The two have some differing views on certain issues, as do Hillary and Obama.

[thecavemaster]

Since yall were talkin about how bad Republicans are. Look at JFK did. He almost ended the world with th Missle crisis.

The Soviets were ACTUALLY placing weapons of mass destruction in Cuba.

[Coach_Owens87]

The Soviets were ACTUALLY placing weapons of mass destruction in Cuba.

Yeah, that point kinda kills sherman14's argument.

Conservatives like to live in their own little world, where facts , honesty and common sense don't have much value.

[PHS95]

Yeah, that point kinda kills sherman14's argument.

Conservatives like to live in their own little world, where facts , honesty and common sense don't have much value.

And most conservatives could say the same about the liberals!

McCain has gone against republicans in the past (McCain-Finegold, anyone?) I can't see him going strictly by Bush Policies and anyone who says so is showing their lack of commitment to learning about the candidate they are bashing!

[thecavemaster]

And most conservatives could say the same about the liberals!

McCain has gone against republicans in the past (McCain-Finegold, anyone?) I can't see him going strictly by Bush Policies and anyone who says so is showing their lack of commitment to learning about the candidate they are bashing!

McCain is not a Bush clone any more than Obama is of Jeremiah Wright. To temporarily waive the gasoline tax (it seems to me) does not solve any long term problems, and costs the Federal Government several billion dollars when we just borrowed money from China to rebate American taxpayers. Borrowing money from the Communists to pay the Capitalists' tax refund!

[RammsteinFan92]

Yeah, that point kinda kills sherman14's argument.

Conservatives like to live in their own little world, where facts , honesty and common sense don't have much value.

ans that's the world sherman14 lives in he thinks bush has helped our economy so much said that whatever goes wrong is blamed on bush....

[RammsteinFan92]

Since yall were talkin about how bad Republicans are. Look at JFK did. He almost ended the world with th Missle crisis.

erved:....lol

[More Cowbell]

And most conservatives could say the same about the liberals!

McCain has gone against republicans in the past (McCain-Finegold, anyone?) I can't see him going strictly by Bush Policies and anyone who says so is showing their lack of commitment to learning about the candidate they are bashing!

Good post, thank you.

I wish more people would actually do some research and find out for themselves what a candidate's position is on a particular issue, rather than just assuming what it is based on their political party. Again, everyone affiliated with a certain political party (Democrat, Republican, whatever) doesn't have the same position on every issue.

[launchpad4]

if he wins will be dealing with bush policys :mad:

That's so strange that we would have more Bush policies since Bush and McCain only have common ground on the war in Iraq. You need to educate yourself about candidates not just say "Well he's a republican he must not like working people." Honestly look at their voting records in the senate. Research what they stand for then make an educated statement. My parents always said to think before you speak, maybe you should think before you type.

[Coach_Owens87]

As I said before I did look at McCain's stance on certain issues, and McCain's stances on the ones that are important to me like the environment, war, taxes, and rising energy cost are eerily similar to Bush's policies.

McCain recently scored a zero on his environmental stance from the League of Conservation voters.

McCain who has repeatedly said he wants to provide America with "Clean, renewable energy" doesn't seem to vote that way. In December of 2007 a bill that would have provided billions in incentives for clean energy failed by one vote (59-40), guess who didn't vote? I give you a hint, his last name is McCain.

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/environment/77913/

it's well known that bush hasn't been friendly to the environment.

And McCain would like to be known as the candidate who can lead us through this war on terrorism, but first you would have to have knowledge about the terrorist, and thats something McCain doesn't have much of.

Here are a few ridiculous things McCain has said recently.

At a stop in Jordan he claimed that it was common Knowledge that Al-Queda was being trained in Iran. A few moments later he was corrected by Joe Lieberman and corrected himself to say "extremist are being trained". Which is it McCain?

He also was filmed saying it was safe to walk alone in the streets of Baghdad, all while being followed by body guards, and black hawk helicopters. But does the media report this, nope, there too busy bashing the real people who are harming America, The trinity church and Reverend wright.

A lot of people have claimed, and reported that Bush had little knowledge of the Sunni and Shia relations in Iraq. But's that was a long time ago, McCain should know this stuff right? Apparently not! McCain claimed that there was 'copious' evidence that Iran is supplying, and assisting Al-Qeada and other terrorist groups in Iran, and that the 9/11 commission itself documented this. That isn't quite true, In July, Lt. General Ray Odierno, then the No. 2 commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, said, "We don't see any evidence, significant evidence, that shows that [Iranian-controlled] groups that are funding and providing arms to Shia extremists are directly related to al Qaeda. ( Huffington Post")"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-hu...93165.html

And McCain's plan to lower gas prices is riduculous, dropping the federal tax (18.4 cents on gasoline, 24.4 cents on diesel) from memorial day to labor day will not help anything. We need renewable clean energy, but thats something McCain wont vote for.

Many experts are saying that if the war continues on the path it is on gasoline will be $10/gal in the next four years. McCain stance on the war is that we need another surge in troops and that he will stay in Iraq 100 years if neccessary! If gas will be $10 in 4 years, imagine what it will be in 10, 20, or 50 years. We may get to find out if we elect McCain.

McCain also wants to make Bush's tax cuts permanent, (which went almost entirely to the rich, Cheney got an 18% decrease in taxes) which some say are contributing to the recession, trickle down economics don't work.

So it's like I said, we will just get 4 more years of Bush policy if McCain is elected.

[launchpad4]

So what you are saying is that you would like an increase in taxes to help pay for a program that the government can not handle. Imagine how long the lines will be at the emergency room when everyone is there for any reason. Ole Hill and Barack also neglect to tell you that in all countries with universal healthcare taxes are around 50-60 percent. I know a professor from Norway and he explained how taxes in most European countries were much higher than the US. Also, in some European countries elderly people are often neglected because there are much more people that go to the hospital and thus the elderly are left out of being treated in favor of younger citizens. I agree that a freeze on federal gas tax isn't a good idea, but something has to be done and if we were able to drill for oil in areas of our country that had plenty and build new refineries the price would go back to below $1. Imagine that going to fill up your 12 gallon tank for $12. Also, because someone votes against a bill doesn't mean that they are against a position, maybe he thought the bill had too many earmarks or was not extensive enough.

[thecavemaster]

So what you are saying is that you would like an increase in taxes to help pay for a program that the government can not handle. Imagine how long the lines will be at the emergency room when everyone is there for any reason. Ole Hill and Barack also neglect to tell you that in all countries with universal healthcare taxes are around 50-60 percent. I know a professor from Norway and he explained how taxes in most European countries were much higher than the US. Also, in some European countries elderly people are often neglected because there are much more people that go to the hospital and thus the elderly are left out of being treated in favor of younger citizens. I agree that a freeze on federal gas tax isn't a good idea, but something has to be done and if we were able to drill for oil in areas of our country that had plenty and build new refineries the price would go back to below $1. Imagine that going to fill up your 12 gallon tank for $12. Also, because someone votes against a bill doesn't mean that they are against a position, maybe he thought the bill had too many earmarks or was not extensive enough.

A body does grow tired of tired old mantras. Talk to a working pharmacist. Ask them which of the insurerers poses less problems. They will tell you Medicare and Medicaid. Social security... checks like clockwork... government does it. Tax refunds? Very reliable... government does it. Take a hike with your uninformed, kneejerk "government can't do it" nonsense.

[PHS95]

Look at these stats and then tell me that Bush's tax cuts only helped the RICH:

[B]Taxes under Clinton 1999 Taxes under Bush 2008[/B]
[B]Single making 30K - tax $8,400 Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $14,000 Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $23,250 Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K - tax $16,800 Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $21,000 Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $38,750 Married making 125K - tax $31,250

Are these tax cuts for wealthy??? Someone making 30 grand is RICH??? Where did I miss this memo?!?

Both democratic candidates will return to the higher tax rates

It is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above think Bush is screwing them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Obama or Hillary are elected, they both say they will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can't wait for it to happen. This is like the movie The Sting with Paul Newman; you scam somebody out of some money and they don't even know what happened.
[/B]

[Coach_Owens87]

Look at these stats and then tell me that Bush's tax cuts only helped the RICH:

[B]Taxes under Clinton 1999 Taxes under Bush 2008[/B]
[B]Single making 30K - tax $8,400 Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $14,000 Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $23,250 Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K - tax $16,800 Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $21,000 Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $38,750 Married making 125K - tax $31,250

Are these tax cuts for wealthy??? Someone making 30 grand is RICH??? Where did I miss this memo?!?

Both democratic candidates will return to the higher tax rates

It is amazing how many people that fall into the categories above think Bush is screwing them and Bill Clinton was the greatest President ever. If Obama or Hillary are elected, they both say they will repeal the Bush tax cuts and a good portion of the people that fall into the categories above can't wait for it to happen. This is like the movie The Sting with Paul Newman; you scam somebody out of some money and they don't even know what happened.
[/B]

Please show me where I said it only helped the rich, because I didn't say that. But his tax cuts did heavily favor the rich, while placing most of the tax burden on the middle and lower classes.

Lets really breakdown these tax cuts. In order to enact these cuts America had to BORROW money, which has significantly raised our national debt. Someone has to pay this debt off, and that includes us and our children. Here is some data on how the cuts affected Kentucky.

The lowest 20% of the income level had an additional $7,362 dollars in debt per person, while they only averaged a $132 tax cut over the next six years. That results in a additional $7,230 dollars in debt per person. The middle 20% has an added debt of $6,929 per person. All this is occurring while the top 1% of the state will not have debt added, but will have $20,273 to the good. You must be crazy if you can tell me that doesn't benefit the rich. I guess my $100 in savings is really gonna help with the $7,000 in added debt my parents and I will have. You have to look at the whole picture to really understand the issue. The fact that McCain wants to make these tax cuts permenate really just ticks me off, lets just add more debt to the lower classes. If anyone knows their history they will know that the mal-distribution of wealth was a primary factor in the great depression. When all the money and benefits go to the rich, bad things happen.

http://www.ctj.org/bushtaxcuts.htm

These numbers are very similar across the country. People just think this money to fund these cuts comes from some magic bank that will never run out of money, and will never require us to pay it back. I thought Conservatives wanted to CONSERVE, not waste money to help the rich.


It's amazing how people only look at the numbers that support their opinion, while ignoring the future impact of these "tax cuts".

[Coach_Owens87]

So what you are saying is that you would like an increase in taxes to help pay for a program that the government can not handle. Imagine how long the lines will be at the emergency room when everyone is there for any reason. Ole Hill and Barack also neglect to tell you that in all countries with universal healthcare taxes are around 50-60 percent. I know a professor from Norway and he explained how taxes in most European countries were much higher than the US. Also, in some European countries elderly people are often neglected because there are much more people that go to the hospital and thus the elderly are left out of being treated in favor of younger citizens. I agree that a freeze on federal gas tax isn't a good idea, but something has to be done and if we were able to drill for oil in areas of our country that had plenty and build new refineries the price would go back to below $1. Imagine that going to fill up your 12 gallon tank for $12. Also, because someone votes against a bill doesn't mean that they are against a position, maybe he thought the bill had too many earmarks or was not extensive enough.

First off I didn't mention UHC in my post, so why don't you respond to what I did type, like has tax cuts on gas, or his lack of knowledge on the issues going on in the middle east. The man doesn't have a clue what is going on, but yet he is willing to to spend 100 years in Iraq, I guess he would have time to learn the issues if that where to happen. The only bad thing would be that he wouldn't be around to see many of those years, so I can see why getting to learn the issues doesn't matter, because he wont have to deal with them for long.


So what you are telling me is that you can only use right wing rhetoric and talking points to respond to my opinions.

I dont think privatizing everything is really going to help, I don't trust having the decisions in this country made by huge, private organizations. Universal health care does have it's problems, but I believe those can be worked out and UHC could work. The system we have now is horrible, so a change could be a good thing.

McCain on environment

McCain scored a zero, a big fat 0 on his environmental voting record, so I dont think the earmarks had anything to do with his NOT VOTING on the issue. If he didnt like the bill, he should have shown up and voted no, but he just didnt show up. Which tells me he isn't concerned with the future of renewable energy. He was in DC two days before the voting occurred, so he had time. Both Obama and Hillary had time to vote, so I dont see why McCain had any excuse to not show up. What really ticks me off is that the NEXT day after the clean energy incentives where cut from the stimulus package McCain shows up to vote, and the bill passes.

http://sierraclub.typepad.com/carlpope/2...-stra.html

[launchpad4]

First off I didn't mention UHC in my post, so why don't you respond to what I did type, like has tax cuts on gas, or his lack of knowledge on the issues going on in the middle east. The man doesn't have a clue what is going on, but yet he is willing to to spend 100 years in Iraq, I guess he would have time to learn the issues if that where to happen. The only bad thing would be that he wouldn't be around to see many of those years, so I can see why getting to learn the issues doesn't matter, because he wont have to deal with them for long.


So what you are telling me is that you can only use right wing rhetoric and talking points to respond to my opinions.

I dont think privatizing everything is really going to help, I don't trust having the decisions in this country made by huge, private organizations. Universal health care does have it's problems, but I believe those can be worked out and UHC could work. The system we have now is horrible, so a change could be a good thing.

McCain on environment

McCain scored a zero, a big fat 0 on his environmental voting record, so I dont think the earmarks had anything to do with his NOT VOTING on the issue. If he didnt like the bill, he should have shown up and voted no, but he just didnt show up. Which tells me he isn't concerned with the future of renewable energy. He was in DC two days before the voting occurred, so he had time. Both Obama and Hillary had time to vote, so I dont see why McCain had any excuse to not show up. What really ticks me off is that the NEXT day after the clean energy incentives where cut from the stimulus package McCain shows up to vote, and the bill passes.

http://sierraclub.typepad.com/carlpope/2...-stra.html

Clinton also supports the gas tax holiday. Now, what if we leave Iraq? What does that say to anyone who is willing to go to war against us. To me that shows that if you can inflict some causualties on the US then we will go home without finishing the job. Keep in mind that if we had finished the job in Somalia a few years ago terrorists may not have the belief that they could defeat what truly is the greatest army in the world. Plus there is a difference in McCain controlling a war than Bush. McCain has been there he knows what it's like to fight and to be captive. Also what does that say about all those that we lost. If we leave the job unfinished basically we kill them again by saying their lives were not meaningful enough to finish the job we started. It won't take 100 years all we need to do is help stabilize their government so that they can control these extremists groups. And about him not voting maybe he had a 24hr virus??

[Coach_Owens87]

Clinton also supports the gas tax holiday. Now, what if we leave Iraq? What does that say to anyone who is willing to go to war against us. To me that shows that if you can inflict some causualties on the US then we will go home without finishing the job. Keep in mind that if we had finished the job in Somalia a few years ago terrorists may not have the belief that they could defeat what truly is the greatest army in the world. Plus there is a difference in McCain controlling a war than Bush. McCain has been there he knows what it's like to fight and to be captive. Also what does that say about all those that we lost. If we leave the job unfinished basically we kill them again by saying their lives were not meaningful enough to finish the job we started. It won't take 100 years all we need to do is help stabilize their government so that they can control these extremists groups. And about him not voting maybe he had a 24hr virus??

Yes Clinton does support the gas tax holiday, and economists agree that it's a bad idea.

You keep resorting to old right wing rhetoric, lets just blame everything on the democrats, especially clinton. Why dont you stop using the "cut and run" BS and actually add something to the debate. I never said to leave Iraq unfinished, we are commited now, but the problem is the war has been mishandled from the beginning, because we never should have been there. What ever happened to those WMD's?

Terrorism didn't start with Somalia, and it wont end with Iraq.

Did you forget about the Iran-Contra scandal? the US arming saddam hussien? Why didnt you mention the mujaheddin, where the us sent thousands of young afghans, egyptians, and "black muslims" to Camp Peary in Virginia to get trained in sabotage skills? The US knew of Osama ties to radical islamic and terrorist groups in the early 80's, but we don't nothing about it because he had ties through his rich family to the US. This situation isnt as simple as blaming it on one president.


Yes McCain is a war veteran, and I appreciate his service, but the man doesnt have a clue about whats going on in the middle east, which is what I was trying to say. Do we really want someone running a war, when he doesnt know who is fighting who?

a 24 hour virus? lol, hilarious, you just keep making excuses for the people you support.

[jetpilot]

Please show me where I said it only helped the rich, because I didn't say that. But his tax cuts did heavily favor the rich, while placing most of the tax burden on the middle and lower classes.

Lets really breakdown these tax cuts. In order to enact these cuts America had to BORROW money, which has significantly raised our national debt. Someone has to pay this debt off, and that includes us and our children. Here is some data on how the cuts affected Kentucky.

The lowest 20% of the income level had an additional $7,362 dollars in debt per person, while they only averaged a $132 tax cut over the next six years. That results in a additional $7,230 dollars in debt per person. The middle 20% has an added debt of $6,929 per person. All this is occurring while the top 1% of the state will not have debt added, but will have $20,273 to the good. You must be crazy if you can tell me that doesn't benefit the rich. I guess my $100 in savings is really gonna help with the $7,000 in added debt my parents and I will have. You have to look at the whole picture to really understand the issue. The fact that McCain wants to make these tax cuts permenate really just ticks me off, lets just add more debt to the lower classes. If anyone knows their history they will know that the mal-distribution of wealth was a primary factor in the great depression. When all the money and benefits go to the rich, bad things happen.

http://www.ctj.org/bushtaxcuts.htm

These numbers are very similar across the country. People just think this money to fund these cuts comes from some magic bank that will never run out of money, and will never require us to pay it back. I thought Conservatives wanted to CONSERVE, not waste money to help the rich.


It's amazing how people only look at the numbers that support their opinion, while ignoring the future impact of these "tax cuts".

I don't have time to respond right now...but I will over the weekend. LOL, haven't seen anything this far out in left field in ages.

[PHS95]

Please show me where I said it only helped the rich, because I didn't say that. But his tax cuts did heavily favor the rich, while placing most of the tax burden on the middle and lower classes.

Lets really breakdown these tax cuts. In order to enact these cuts America had to BORROW money, which has significantly raised our national debt. Someone has to pay this debt off, and that includes us and our children. Here is some data on how the cuts affected Kentucky.

The lowest 20% of the income level had an additional $7,362 dollars in debt per person, while they only averaged a $132 tax cut over the next six years. That results in a additional $7,230 dollars in debt per person. The middle 20% has an added debt of $6,929 per person. All this is occurring while the top 1% of the state will not have debt added, but will have $20,273 to the good. You must be crazy if you can tell me that doesn't benefit the rich. I guess my $100 in savings is really gonna help with the $7,000 in added debt my parents and I will have. You have to look at the whole picture to really understand the issue. The fact that McCain wants to make these tax cuts permenate really just ticks me off, lets just add more debt to the lower classes. If anyone knows their history they will know that the mal-distribution of wealth was a primary factor in the great depression. When all the money and benefits go to the rich, bad things happen.

http://www.ctj.org/bushtaxcuts.htm

These numbers are very similar across the country. People just think this money to fund these cuts comes from some magic bank that will never run out of money, and will never require us to pay it back. I thought Conservatives wanted to CONSERVE, not waste money to help the rich.


It's amazing how people only look at the numbers that support their opinion, while ignoring the future impact of these "tax cuts".

Pardon, but I threw numbers out there that would shock some people who have been saying that Bush only cut taxes for the wealthy. The reasoning behind cutting taxes, of course, being that more dollars in our pockets would help to boost the economy. I don't know about you, but I personally CANNOT afford to do without the 3,000 dollars that Bush tax cuts put back in my pocket, so, YES I will support those numbers ANY day!

[Coach_Owens87]

I don't have time to respond right now...but I will over the weekend. LOL, haven't seen anything this far out in left field in ages.

Prove me wrong. Prove those numbers wrong! Show me how the tax cuts where fair to everyone, becuase they weren't. The BS average savings of over 1,000 per person are so skewed because the rich got such a huge break that it makes the average numbers look good for everyone, but in reality thats not true. It's well known, and documented that the bush tax cuts helped the rich!

Republicans think just using tax cuts will fix everything, but when their party is in office the deficit increases by an average of 2% per year, post ww2 democrats have decreased the deficit by an average of 1%. McCain's proposed tax cuts will cost us around 300 billion per year, is this really going to offset the deficit. McCain who once hated the bush tax cuts, now backs them, I guess pressure from the GOP forced him to do so. You always have to help your rich buddies. Here is a report from an ECONOMIST who says if McCain is elected expect tax cuts for the rich, and a huge deficit. It would be another 4 years of bush, and another four years with america heading straight down the toilet.
http://economistsview.typepad.com/econom...t_deficit/

Albert Einstein said that insanity is trying the same thing over and over again expecting different results. using this definition we could say that bush qualifies as being insane. Reagen tried "supply side economics" and lowered taxes on the wealthy. What happened you might ask? The national deficit quadrupled 12 years after it was in-acted, and the economy shrank by 2.2% (The worst performance since the great depression). Then Clinton came in and reversed the cuts that Regan had imposed, he raised taxes on the wealthy and cut them for the lowest wage earners. What happened then? Well lets see, interest rates fell by over 40% resulting in the greatest housing boom ever. Economic growth 4.0% per year, it was only 2.8% under the Bush 1/Reagen years. Instead of yearly deficits we had surpluses, which where used to help pay down the national debt.

So now Dubya comes in and re enacts the same BS supply side, trickle down economics. Over half of Bush's 1.6 trillion dollar tax cuts went to the wealthiest 1%. He promised this would create 800,000 new jobs. What really happened? America has lost 2.7 million jobs, the worst performance since the GREAT DEPRESSION.

This years budget deficit is already running at a pace that will double the record high of $413 billion in 2004. The tax cuts didn't work, Trickle down economics wont work, but Insane McCain thinks we can just try it again and good things will happen. Mr. Einstein thought different, and so do economist.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/1...2385.shtml

[Coach_Owens87]

Pardon, but I threw numbers out there that would shock some people who have been saying that Bush only cut taxes for the wealthy. The reasoning behind cutting taxes, of course, being that more dollars in our pockets would help to boost the economy. I don't know about you, but I personally CANNOT afford to do without the 3,000 dollars that Bush tax cuts put back in my pocket, so, YES I will support those numbers ANY day!

lol, have you been asleep for 8 years, the economy is collapasing, TRICKLE DOWN economics don't work. They didn't work for Reagan they wont work now.

And I don't know about you but my life sure the **** hasn't gotten easier under bush. Rising prices on energy, food,school tuition and the total collapse of the dollar has made that tiny tax cut you speak of meaningless, well unless you earn over 1 million a year. (P.S I dont make that much money, and I doubt you do either)

[PHS95]

Actually, NO, I obviously have NOT been asleep for 8 years and I can say nothing for the state of your life... I said that I, personally, cannot make due without the money I have been given back because of tax cuts. If you can, more power to you! Honestly, I don't know what the point of debating with someone who knows everything is.... I wish I were as omniscient as you seem to be, then I could hit the lottery next week and be one of those millionaires that get all the perks!

[DevilsWin]

Actually, NO, I obviously have NOT been asleep for 8 years and I can say nothing for the state of your life... I said that I, personally, cannot make due without the money I have been given back because of tax cuts. If you can, more power to you! Honestly, I don't know what the point of debating with someone who knows everything is.... I wish I were as omniscient as you seem to be, then I could hit the lottery next week and be one of those millionaires that get all the perks!

Here is the illusion. This isn't your money. It's China's money. And it's a loan. Bush actually suggested that using it for gas is a good idea. LOL Yeah, Give the hard working people 600 bucks of Chinese money so we can spend it in a couple weeks on Gas for Big Oil.

Come on now, who is Bush really looking out for? You, China or his Oil buddies?

Please rank your choices in order.....

[DevilsWin]

To get back to John McCain.

Can any of you McCain supporters answer me why McCain hasn't endorsed the "New GI Bill"?

I thought he was "For The Troops"!

Guess I was wrong.................

[Coach_Owens87]

Here is the illusion. This isn't your money. It's China's money. And it's a loan. Bush actually suggested that using it for gas is a good idea. LOL Yeah, Give the hard working people 600 bucks of Chinese money so we can spend it in a couple weeks on Gas for Big Oil.

Come on now, who is Bush really looking out for? You, China or his Oil buddies?

Please rank your choices in order.....

This is exactly what I was trying to tell everyone earlier. But they just looked over that part, I guess we can just magically get this money in order to enact these "tax cuts". It's kinda hard to get a country like china to listen to us when they practically own us.

[launchpad4]

I thought this thread was about McCain not Bush's tax rebates or big oil.

[Coach_Owens87]

I thought this thread was about McCain not Bush's tax rebates or big oil.

McCain wants to make the bush tax cuts permanent, thats how the thread got to this point.

[sherman14]

McCain wants to make the bush tax cuts permanent, thats how the thread got to this point.

If McCain makes the tax cuts permanent then America is screwed.

[vundy33]

....I can't stand democrats. So close-minded and set in their ways. You guys don't even want to stay on topic. This thread is about John McCain, not Bush. Get over yourselves, I'm sorry you guys have two horrible candidates running that don't have a chance against McCain, but it's your own faults.