Let's talk POLITICS ( NO FIGHTS)

[AKateisaKate]

The "Miss Congeniality" thing made me laugh. Although I don't think this debate changed many people's opinions. If you were for Obama before the debate, you still were. If you were for McCain, you still are after the debate. I'm really interested in seeing the VPs on Thursday.

[AKateisaKate]

I know! That is a major pet peeve of mine in any debate. Even if your opponent is pulling for taking the vote away from gays and putting women back in the home, you still need to show respect while they are speaking.

 

These two men are competing for the position of running our country, they are trying to convince us that they are qualified to make the kinds of major decisions that will affect millions, show diplomacy in sensitive foreign communications, hopefully pull this nation out of the mudhole it's been in for the last eight years, and both of them were snickering at each other like schoolboy rivals.

 

Totally unprofessional.

 

 

...Ok, I'm done with my rant.

 

I don't know, that's just what politicians do. Most of the time when they snickered or whatever, I think it was when the opponent was criticizing the other one (who in response refutes it by snickering). Yeah it's annoying, but politicians (not all of them) mostly are.

[Guest]

It was a (bad) joke.

 

OH. Sorry. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

(I thought you were really apologizing for something. I felt bad. Jurk.)

 

My mom works in an eye doctor's office, and she said people come in on a daily basis and say either one of two things:

 

"Do you have those Sarah Palin glasses?"

or

"Don't gimme any of those damn ugly glasses that Alaska woman wears."

[Niki27]

I'm interested in the answer to those questions too.

 

And I think you Americans vote separately for President and senate/congress (tho maybe at the same time?). Is that right? Unlike here where you vote for a local MP and the head of the party with the most MPs becomes Prime Minister

 

In fact, I hope an American will correct me if I'm mistaken, but they don't elect a president, they elect general electors who, in turn, elect a president, right?

The congress in fact refers to the Senate and House of Representatives together. Legislative elections (every two years for 1/3 of the Houses - not sure about the HR but defo the Senate) are separate from the presidential elections (every 4 years), although they can take place the same year.

 

Undirect democracies are quite puzzling for me. I'd like to have your opinion on them actually. In continental Europe, it's not like this. As opposed to the anglo-saxon model, we're direct democracies: if there are 10 Mo inhabitants, and 6mo individuals vote for one candidate, he wins, no matter the geographic "spreading". We don't have anything like MPs or General Electors for a constituency/state.

 

Anyway, my question is: how fair do you think both systems are? The question was raised 8 years ago (after the Gore/Bush "tight") and it's very likely to pop up in the continental european press again this year so I wanted to hear what you guys had to say about it.

[Pam Travers]

 

Undirect democracies are quite puzzling for me. I'd like to have your opinion on them actually. In continental Europe, it's not like this. As opposed to the anglo-saxon model, we're direct democracies

 

Anyway, my question is: how fair do you think both systems are? The question was raised 8 years ago (after the Gore/Bush "tight") and it's very likely to pop up in the continental european press again this year so I wanted to hear what you guys had to say about it.

 

undirect or direct, its a total mess ANYWAY

[Niki27]

undirect or direct, its a total mess ANYWAY

 

Well, that's for sure. If you want perfect order, a dictature is what you need

[Pam Travers]

Well, that's for sure. If you want perfect order, a dictature is what you need

 

 

thats exactly what i dont want and thats exactly what is happening behind the cover of democracy in some countries, i dream people would be responsible for themselves and free without any power above but free a slave and see what happens... i also think that politics are not meant to be understood by the mass and that only a few people are qualified enough to discuss it and im not one of them.

[Soaring Simpson]

I don't particularly want to see proportional representation in the UK, I must admit. I think the geographical link is still valid- perhaps more so in places like Redcar that wouldn't get a look in down in London without the need for at least one MP to care.

 

It might also make the governing party stronger, which is sometimes good and sometimes bad.

[kk448]

OH. Sorry. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

(I thought you were really apologizing for something. I felt bad. Jurk.)

 

My mom works in an eye doctor's office, and she said people come in on a daily basis and say either one of two things:

 

"Do you have those Sarah Palin glasses?"

or

"Don't gimme any of those damn ugly glasses that Alaska woman wears."

 

That was a pity laugh, wasn't it?

 

My cousin's boyfriend wears Sarah Palin glasses. He's a bit on the feminine side.

[A. Clay]

WRINGING OF HANDS:

GNASHING OF TEETH . . .

 

JEANNA BRYNER

Senior Writer

LiveScience.com

Tue Sep 30, 2008

 

How Much is $700 Billion?

 

The short answer: a lot. The long answer: depends on how you look at it.

 

Whatever your viewpoint, here's how $700 billion - the figure inked in the initial dead-in-the-water government bailout bill for Wall Street - compares to other vast sums.

 

NASA in fiscal year 2009 will launch several missions into space and pay for hundreds of people to operate a host of space telescopes and even remote robots on Mars and run a PR and media department that puts most large corporations to shame. The agency's budget: $17.6 billion, or 2.5 percent of the bailout sum.

 

The National Science Foundation (NSF) has an annual budget of $6.06 billion to support research and education on astronomy, chemistry, materials science, computing, engineering, earth sciences, nanoscience and physics (among others) at more than 1,900 universities and institutions across the United States.

 

You have to turn to much bigger initiatives, like war and defense, to get beyond this chump change and approach the bailout figure.

 

From 2003 through the end of fiscal year 2009, Congress has appropriated $606 billion for military operations and other activities associated with the war in Iraq, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The entire military budget for fiscal 2008 is $481.4 billion.

 

Social Security is a $608 billion annual program.

 

Many analysts fear the bailout because the cost must ultimately be borne by taxpayers.

 

Based on the U.S. Census Bureau's estimate of the current population of about 305 million people, each person would have to pay $2,300 to fund the $700,000,000,000. If each American (including children) paid a dollar a day, it would take more than six years to pay the money in full. One might argue, however, that this $700 billion would be a modest splash in the bucket of national debt, which already stands at well over $9 trillion (which means you already owe $31,642 each).

 

Even the New York Yankees third baseman Alex Rodriguez would lose sleep over all those zeroes. Currently the top paid major league baseball player, Rodriguez takes home $28 million a year, meaning it would take 25,000 A-Rod salaries to carry the $700 billion.

 

Nobody is rich enough to pay back this $700 billion by himself. In fact, the Forbes 400 richest list recently came out. It would take most of what these 400 people collectively have - a combined net worth of $1.57 trillion - to dig out of this mess.

 

Now, THAT'S Obscene!

[A. Clay]

FOOD FOR THOUGHT . . .

One person's thoughts--PART 2 of 2

 

4. IF YOUR BANK OR COMPANY GETS ANY OF OUR MONEY IN A "BAILOUT," THEN WE OWN YOU. Sorry, that's how it's done. If the bank gives me money so I can buy a house, the bank "owns" that house until I pay it all back -- with interest. Same deal for Wall Street. Whatever money you need to stay afloat, if our government considers you a safe risk -- and necessary for the good of the country -- then you can get a loan, but we will own you. If you default, we will sell you. This is how the Swedish government did it and it worked.

 

5. ALL REGULATIONS MUST BE RESTORED. THE REAGAN REVOLUTION IS DEAD. This catastrophe happened because we let the fox have the keys to the henhouse. In 1999, Phil Gramm authored a bill to remove all the regulations that governed Wall Street and our banking system. The bill passed and Clinton signed it. Here's what Sen. Phil Gramm, McCain's chief economic advisor, said at the bill signing:

"In the 1930s ... it was believed that government was the answer. It was believed that stability and growth came from government overriding the functioning of free markets.

 

"We are here today to repeal [that] because we have learned that government is not the answer. We have learned that freedom and competition are the answers. We have learned that we promote economic growth and we promote stability by having competition and freedom.

 

"I am proud to be here because this is an important bill; it is a deregulatory bill. I believe that that is the wave of the future, and I am awfully proud to have been a part of making it a reality."

This bill must be repealed. Bill Clinton can help by leading the effort for the repeal of the Gramm bill and the reinstating of even tougher regulations regarding our financial institutions. And when they're done with that, they can restore the regulations for the airlines, the inspection of our food, the oil industry, OSHA, and every other entity that affects our daily lives. All oversight provisions for any "bailout" must have enforcement monies attached to them and criminal penalties for all offenders.

 

6. IF IT'S TOO BIG TO FAIL, THEN THAT MEANS IT'S TOO BIG TO EXIST. Allowing the creation of these mega-mergers and not enforcing the monopoly and anti-trust laws has allowed a number of financial institutions and corporations to become so large, the very thought of their collapse means an even bigger collapse across the entire economy. No one or two companies should have this kind of power. The so-called "economic Pearl Harbor" can't happen when you have hundreds -- thousands -- of institutions where people have their money. When you have a dozen auto companies, if one goes belly-up, we don't face a national disaster. If you have three separately-owned daily newspapers in your town, then one media company can't call all the shots (I know... What am I thinking?! Who reads a paper anymore? Sure glad all those mergers and buyouts left us with a strong and free press!). Laws must be enacted to prevent companies from being so large and dominant that with one slingshot to the eye, the giant falls and dies. And no institution should be allowed to set up money schemes that no one can understand. If you can't explain it in two sentences, you shouldn't be taking anyone's money.

 

7. NO EXECUTIVE SHOULD BE PAID MORE THAN 40 TIMES THEIR AVERAGE EMPLOYEE, AND NO EXECUTIVE SHOULD RECEIVE ANY KIND OF "PARACHUTE" OTHER THAN THE VERY GENEROUS SALARY HE OR SHE MADE WHILE WORKING FOR THE COMPANY. In 1980, the average American CEO made 45 times what their employees made. By 2003, they were making 254 times what their workers made. After 8 years of Bush, they now make over 400 times what their average employee makes. How this can happen at publicly held companies is beyond reason. In Britain, the average CEO makes 28 times what their average employee makes. In Japan, it's only 17 times! The last I heard, the CEO of Toyota was living the high life in Tokyo. How does he do it on so little money? Seriously, this is an outrage. We have created the mess we're in by letting the people at the top become bloated beyond belief with millions of dollars. This has to stop. Not only should no executive who receives help out of this mess profit from it, but any executive who was in charge of running his company into the ground should be fired before the company receives any help.

 

8. STRENGTHEN THE FDIC AND MAKE IT A MODEL FOR PROTECTING NOT ONLY PEOPLE'S SAVINGS, BUT ALSO THEIR PENSIONS AND THEIR HOMES. Obama was correct yesterday to propose expanding FDIC protection of people's savings in their banks to $250,000. But this same sort of government insurance must be given to our nation's pension funds. People should never have to worry about whether or not the money they've put away for their old age will be there. This will mean strict government oversight of companies who manage their employees' funds -- or perhaps it means that the companies will have to turn over those funds and their management to the government. People's private retirement funds must also be protected, but perhaps it's time to consider not having one's retirement invested in the casino known as the stock market. Our government should have a solemn duty to guarantee that no one who grows old in this country has to worry about ending up destitute.

 

9. EVERYBODY NEEDS TO TAKE A DEEP BREATH, CALM DOWN, AND NOT LET FEAR RULE THE DAY. Turn off the TV! We are not in the Second Great Depression. The sky is not falling. Pundits and politicians are lying to us so fast and furious it's hard not to be affected by all the fear mongering. Even I, yesterday, wrote to you and repeated what I heard on the news, that the Dow had the biggest one day drop in its history. Well, that's true in terms of points, but its 7% drop came nowhere close to Black Monday in 1987 when the stock market in one day lost 23% of its value. In the '80s, 3,000 banks closed, but America didn't go out of business. These institutions have always had their ups and downs and eventually it works out. It has to, because the rich do not like their wealth being disrupted! They have a vested interest in calming things down and getting back into the Jacuzzi.

As crazy as things are right now, tens of thousands of people got a car loan this week. Thousands went to the bank and got a mortgage to buy a home. Students just back to college found banks more than happy to put them into hock for the next 15 years with a student loan. Life has gone on. Not a single person has lost any of their money if it's in a bank or a treasury note or a CD. And the most amazing thing is that the American public hasn't bought the scare campaign. The citizens didn't blink, and instead told Congress to take that bailout and shove it. THAT was impressive. Why didn't the population succumb to the fright-filled warnings from their president and his cronies? Well, you can only say 'Saddam has da bomb' so many times before the people realize you're a lying sack of ****e. After eight long years, the nation is worn out and simply can't take it any longer.

 

10. CREATE A NATIONAL BANK, A "PEOPLE'S BANK." If we really are itching to print up a trillion dollars, instead of giving it to a few rich people, why don't we give it to ourselves? Now that we own Freddie and Fannie, why not set up a people's bank? One that can provide low-interest loans for all sorts of people who want to own a home, start a small business, go to school, come up with the cure for cancer or create the next great invention. And now that we own AIG, the country's largest insurance company, let's take the next step and provide health insurance for everyone. Medicare for all. It will save us so much money in the long run. And we won't be 12th on the life expectancy list. We'll be able to have a longer life, enjoying our government-protected pension, and living to see the day when the corporate criminals who caused so much misery are let out of prison so that we can help reacclimate them to civilian life -- a life with one nice home and a gas-free car that was invented with help from the People's Bank.

Yours,

Michael Moore

MMFlint@aol.com

MichaelMoore.com

P.S. Call your Senators now. Here's a backup link in case we crash that site again. They are going to attempt their own version of the Looting of America tonight.

And let your reps know if you agree with my 10-point plan.

[A. Clay]

FOOD FOR THOUGHT . . .

One person's thoughts--PART 1 of 2

 

Friends,

The richest 400 Americans -- that's right, just four hundred people -- own MORE than the bottom 150 million Americans combined. 400 rich Americans have got more stashed away than half the entire country! Their combined net worth is $1.6 trillion. During the eight years of the Bush Administration, their wealth has increased by nearly $700 billion -- the same amount that they are now demanding we give to them for the "bailout." Why don't they just spend the money they made under Bush to bail themselves out? They'd still have nearly a trillion dollars left over to spread amongst themselves!

Of course, they are not going to do that -- at least not voluntarily. George W. Bush was handed a $127 billion surplus when Bill Clinton left office. Because that money was OUR money and not his, he did what the rich prefer to do -- spend it and never look back. Now we have a $9.5 trillion debt. Why on earth would we even think of giving these robber barons any more of our money?

I would like to propose my own bailout plan. My suggestions, listed below, are predicated on the singular and simple belief that the rich must pull themselves up by their own platinum bootstraps. Sorry, fellows, but you drilled it into our heads one too many times: There... is... no... free... lunch. And thank you for encouraging us to hate people on welfare! So, there will be no handouts from us to you. The Senate, tonight, is going to try to rush their version of a "bailout" bill to a vote. They must be stopped. We did it on Monday with the House, and we can do it again today with the Senate.

It is clear, though, that we cannot simply keep protesting without proposing exactly what it is we think Congress should do. So, after consulting with a number of people smarter than Phil Gramm, here is my proposal, now known as "Mike's Rescue Plan." It has 10 simple, straightforward points. They are:

 

1. APPOINT A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR TO CRIMINALLY INDICT ANYONE ON WALL STREET WHO KNOWINGLY CONTRIBUTED TO THIS COLLAPSE. Before any new money is expended, Congress must commit, by resolution, to criminally prosecute anyone who had anything to do with the attempted sacking of our economy. This means that anyone who committed insider trading, securities fraud or any action that helped bring about this collapse must go to jail. This Congress must call for a Special Prosecutor who will vigorously go after everyone who created the mess, and anyone else who attempts to scam the public in the future.

 

2. THE RICH MUST PAY FOR THEIR OWN BAILOUT. They may have to live in 5 houses instead of 7. They may have to drive 9 cars instead of 13. The chef for their mini-terriers may have to be reassigned. But there is no way in hell, after forcing family incomes to go down more than $2,000 dollars during the Bush years, that working people and the middle class are going to fork over one dime to underwrite the next yacht purchase.

If they truly need the $700 billion they say they need, well, here is an easy way they can raise it:

a) Every couple who makes over a million dollars a year and every single taxpayer who makes over $500,000 a year will pay a 10% surcharge tax for five years. (It's the Senator Sanders plan. He's like Colonel Sanders, only he's out to fry the right chickens.) That means the rich will still be paying less income tax than when Carter was president. This will raise a total of $300 billion.

 

b) Like nearly every other democracy, charge a 0.25% tax on every stock transaction. This will raise more than $200 billion in a year.

 

c) Because every stockholder is a patriotic American, stockholders will forgo receiving a dividend check for one quarter and instead this money will go the treasury to help pay for the bailout.

 

d) 25% of major U.S. corporations currently pay NO federal income tax. Federal corporate tax revenues currently amount to 1.7% of the GDP compared to 5% in the 1950s. If we raise the corporate income tax back to the level of the 1950s, that gives us an extra $500 billion.

All of this combined should be enough to end the calamity. The rich will get to keep their mansions and their servants, and our United States government ("COUNTRY FIRST!") will have a little leftover to repair some roads, bridges and schools.

 

3. BAIL OUT THE PEOPLE LOSING THEIR HOMES, NOT THE PEOPLE WHO WILL BUILD AN EIGHTH HOME. There are 1.3 million homes in foreclosure right now. That is what is at the heart of this problem. So instead of giving the money to the banks as a gift, pay down each of these mortgages by $100,000. Force the banks to renegotiate the mortgage so the homeowner can pay on its current value. To insure that this help does no go to speculators and those who have tried to make money by flipping houses, this bailout is only for people's primary residence. And in return for the $100K paydown on the existing mortgage, the government gets to share in the holding of the mortgage so that it can get some of its money back. Thus, the total initial cost of fixing the mortgage crisis at its roots (instead of with the greedy lenders) is $150 billion, not $700 billion.

And let's set the record straight. People who have defaulted on their mortgages are not "bad risks." They are our fellow Americans, and all they wanted was what we all want and most of us still get: a home to call their own. But during the Bush years, millions of them lost the decent paying jobs they had. Six million fell into poverty. Seven million lost their health insurance. And every one of them saw their real wages go down by $2,000. Those who dare to look down on these Americans who got hit with one bad break after another should be ashamed. We are a better, stronger, safer and happier society when all of our citizens can afford to live in a home that they own.

[A. Clay]

----------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------

[Mika4Life13]

......post whoreeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

[Guest]

lolz.

 

you guys watching the VP debate?

 

Sarah Palin: "Hi! So nice to meet you! Can I call you Joe?!"

[Mika4Life13]

No Im watching briget jones

[Guest]

Biden's talking too much about all the bad things Bush is doing/has done. I don't think he's talking enough about what they're going to do to change if they get elected.

 

Plus, he's mostly talking about how people shouldn't vote for McCain, but he's not mentioning reasons why we should vote for Barack.

 

I like Palin. She's being really personable.

 

*I'm Sarah Adelaide, and I approve this message.

[*carrie*]

Biden's talking too much about all the bad things Bush is doing/has done. I don't think he's talking enough about what they're going to do to change if they get elected.

 

Plus, he's mostly talking about how people shouldn't vote for McCain, but he's not mentioning reasons why we should vote for Barack.

 

I like Palin. She's being really personable.

 

*I'm Sarah Adelaide, and I approve this message.

 

I like her too. I thought she did pretty well.

 

Now I have to write a paper about the debate

[mommylovesmika]

Biden's talking too much about all the bad things Bush is doing/has done. I don't think he's talking enough about what they're going to do to change if they get elected.

 

Plus, he's mostly talking about how people shouldn't vote for McCain, but he's not mentioning reasons why we should vote for Barack.

 

I like Palin. She's being really personable.

 

*I'm Sarah Adelaide, and I approve this message.

 

 

WE DON'T NEED SOMEONE PERSONABLE, WE NEED AN ABLE PERSON

[Guest]

WE DON'T NEED SOMEONE PERSONABLE, WE NEED AN ABLE PERSON

 

I CAN TALK IN CAPS TOO.

 

TWAS BRILLIG, AND THE SLITHY TOVES DID GYRE AND GIMBLE IN THE WABE.

ALL MIMSY WERE THE BOROGOVES, ANDTHEMOMERATHSOUTGRABE.

[englishrose]

Sarah Palin can see Russia from her house.

 

 

 

 

*waltzes out*

[Guest]

[A. Clay]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DON'T VOTE--

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[sienna]

----------------------------------------------------------------------

DON'T VOTE--

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAU1vEDXKIQ&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x3a3a3a&color2=0x999999&border=1

----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Please tell me: Why all this sad and angry smileys?

This is a clip that encourages people to vote isn't it?

 

Don't you think its important to vote or am I quite mistaken?

[Wendi]

I CAN TALK IN CAPS TOO.

 

TWAS BRILLIG, AND THE SLITHY TOVES DID GYRE AND GIMBLE IN THE WABE.

ALL MIMSY WERE THE BOROGOVES, ANDTHEMOMERATHSOUTGRABE.

 

What is that from? :roftl: