Obama elected President

[Tek7]

Perhaps by the time 2012 rolls around, the Republican party will pull its act together and the nation will be ready for the next Reagan:

Our Constitution is a document in which "We the people" tell the government what it is allowed to do. "We the people" are free. This belief has been the underlying basis for everything I've tried to do these past eight years.

But back in the 1960s, when I began, it seemed to me that we'd begun reversing the order of things--that through more and more rules and regulations and confiscatory taxes, the government was taking more of our money, more of our options, and more of our freedom. I went into politics in part to put up my hand and say, "Stop." I was a citizen politician, and it seemed the right thing for a citizen to do.

I think we have stopped a lot of what needed stopping. And I hope we have once again reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited.

Source: Ronald Reagan, 1989 Farewell Address

 

[Kralgon]

What really hurts is the jump that it takes from 249,999 by earning that last extra dollar. Take into consideration that inflation was nearly 5% this year (4.9% YTD), then make $1 too much and get smacked with a 11% tax hike? ouch.

Taxes have never worked that way, and that isn't going to change. The tax hike is on the amount earned beyond $250k. e.g. if you earn $300k, the first $250k will be taxed exactly the same as it has been. The extra $50k will be taxed more. This is how tax brackets have always worked.

 

[Kidan]

I did vote for McCain because I was told it was going to be a close race in Ohio but tbh I didn't like him either.

So, you voted for someone that you actively didn't believe in? You voted for someone that you felt would not be a good President.

Next, you're going to tell me that you chose something evil in order to "choose the lesser of two evils."

But hey, the guys doing the campaigning for that lesser of two evils told you that it'd be a close race, so maybe evil is a good choice some of the time....


Sarcasm aside, I do need to correct a logical fallacy in your statement. You didn't vote for McCain--you voted against Obama.

Think about it. Take a look at what type of negative statement you're sending. It screams "I don't care who gets into the office, as long as it's not 'that' guy."

Additionally, it creates the fallacy within the Republican party that candidates like McCain are good and what the people want--despite the fact that you are a member of the Constitution Party.

So, there were two messages sent by your voting against a candidate rather than for one:

1. The negative concept behind the vote against a person as described above
2. The request for more candidates like the one we were given this year

 

[Odale]

taxes by their very nature are socialist policies. Especially the way that Obama views taxes and the thought that they are there to be used for wealth redistribution:

exactly! Consider, we are under duress to pay these taxes, and if you don't then you are punished, and your property is taken. Despite the long history of private ownership of property, with the introduction of property taxes we no longer own it, but rather rent it from the government (don't believe me? don't pay the property taxes and see how quickly you get evicted by the county).


There is no mandate in the Constitution to allow for a nationalized health care system. At least none of the proponents of it have ever been able to point it out to me.

One could argue that it is under the 9th amendment, which says: " [FONT=&quot]The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."[/FONT]

It basically says that just because it is not there does not mean it does not exist. Much like "freedom of privacy".

Look at the supreme court hearing of Griswold v. Connecticut (1965).

The Justices reasoning:

[FONT=&quot]The foregoing cases suggest that specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance. Various guarantees create zones of privacy. The right of association contained in the penumbra of the First Amendment is one, as we have seen. The Third Amendment in its prohibition against the quartering of soldiers "in any house" in time of peace without the consent of the owner is another facet of that privacy. The Fourth Amendment explicitly affirms the "right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures." The Fifth Amendment in its Self-Incrimination Clause enables the citizen to create a zone of privacy which government may not force him to surrender tohis detriment. The Ninth Amendment provides: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."[/FONT]

 

[Goblit]

What really hurts is the jump that it takes from 249,999 by earning that last extra dollar. Take into consideration that inflation was nearly 5% this year (4.9% YTD), then make $1 too much and get smacked with a 11% tax hike? ouch.

Correct me if I'm wrong...but only the $1 is taxed at the higher rate. I assume it is after all your deductions as well, so if you give your church or your local charity another $10 (est. here only a percentage can be written off) you can save yourself the 11 cents in taxes.

 

[tjguitarz]

I do need to correct a logical fallacy in your statement. You didn't vote for McCain--you voted against Obama.

Kidan, I'm on the Ron Paul boat (voted for him in the primaries). However, when it came down to the election, it was between McCain and Obama. I voted AGAINST Obama because I knew this next president would be appointing 3 supreme court justices and Obama scares the crap out of me. I voted AGAINST Obama because to do otherwise was foolish.

Third party candidates do NOT stand a wink of a chance because the word has not been spread far enough about them. While I believe the third party candidates were much more highly qualified than McCain or Obama, I do see it as a wasted vote until the mindset of Americans has changed. The time to fight for third party candidates is not during the election--it's before and after.

 

[inkelis]

Well said TJ. I wholeheartly agree.

 

[Elader Arkon]

The only wasted vote is the one not cast.

I find it very interesting that the two largest Third parties tend to lean conservative, and considering the rate of growth in the Constitution Party, Republicans better start shaping up or they're going to be feeling it a lot more in the years to come.

Also, having voted Third Party, I believe my vote was worth more than if I had voted Rep. Why? Because a vote for McCain/Rep did nothing, whereas every vote counts for the Third Party candidates. Especially in the local elections, where they can, have, and do win. Change starts at the bottom and works its way up. If one of the major party(s) want me to vote for them, they'll have to earn it.

 

[Kidan]

One could argue that it is under the 9th amendment, which says: " [FONT=&quot]The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."[/FONT]

It basically says that just because it is not there does not mean it does not exist. Much like "freedom of privacy". Look at the supreme court hearing of Griswold v. Connecticut (1965).

I have looked at that, but frankly, that case ignores the 10th amendment:

The powers delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Kidan, I'm on the Ron Paul boat (voted for him in the primaries). However, when it came down to the election, it was between McCain and Obama. I voted AGAINST Obama because I knew this next president would be appointing 3 supreme court justices and Obama scares the crap out of me. I voted AGAINST Obama because to do otherwise was foolish.

so not voting for someone I found lacking, and considered an evil choice--when presented with three options that I viewed as much better, and non-evil (write in Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin & Bob Barr) is foolish? No, it wasn't between McCain and Obama. It was between McCain, Obama, Baldwin, Barr, and Nader. There were other options on the ballot, you just chose to to not vote your conscience.

Third party candidates do NOT stand a wink of a chance because the word has not been spread far enough about them. While I believe the third party candidates were much more highly qualified than McCain or Obama, I do see it as a wasted vote until the mindset of Americans has changed. The time to fight for third party candidates is not during the election--it's before and after.

So, again, your stance is that we should choose from one of the two worst possible choices, when given options hundreds of times better?

That's like choosing a McDonald's or Burger King meal instead of the local diner because McDonald's & Burger King are nationally known. Who cares if the local diner has better food and is cheaper--it lacks name recognition.

I knew my choice did not stand a chance of getting elected, yet I could not bring myself to vote for someone I viewed as a bad choice for president. In order for change to occur, the Republican Party needs to realize that its consituency has fled. It won't know that if we keep voting for the trashy, weak, liberal candidates that it holds up as shining paradigms of conservatism.

 

[Hescominsoon]

How exactly is his taxes "communist"? I would much rather that people stop throwing out FUD in this thread and present evidence with their points. If you need help with that try checking out snopes.com or factcheck.org to verify your claim before posting it.

taking the fruits of hte rich specifcally for hte purpose of giving to the less rich without the consent or will of the rick is theft. theft is how communism works

 

[Hescominsoon]

The article does not answer the question: Is the government mandated or compelled or even allowed by the US Constitution to be in the arena of providing national health care? That is to either collect taxes to pay for health care for those without insurance or to compell companies to pay for health insurance for its employees?

The Us constitution makes it very clear..if it is not written into the constitution then that duty falls to the staes..so:
healthcare..states

Oh, I didn't even read the first portion...so you expect people to pay more for you because you work part time? Wow...just...wow...

Perhaps we should consider taxing part time people more for not contributing as much to the economy and national production?

that's reverse socialism there..

Perhaps by the time 2012 rolls around, the Republican party will pull its act together and the nation will be ready for the next Reagan:
Source: Ronald Reagan, 1989 Farewell Address

the reagan republicans have been taken over by the "centrist" squishes that brought us mcinsane..it's the republicrats and demopublicans now..if you want true conservatism it's time to look at another party..better yet..don't look at hte party..look at only the candidate..research said candidate and vote your values and conscience..get the party affiliation out of it completly in your decision making process.

So, you voted for someone that you actively didn't believe in? You voted for someone that you felt would not be a good President.

Next, you're going to tell me that you chose something evil in order to "choose the lesser of two evils."

But hey, the guys doing the campaigning for that lesser of two evils told you that it'd be a close race, so maybe evil is a good choice some of the time....


Sarcasm aside, I do need to correct a logical fallacy in your statement. You didn't vote for McCain--you voted against Obama.

Think about it. Take a look at what type of negative statement you're sending. It screams "I don't care who gets into the office, as long as it's not 'that' guy."

Additionally, it creates the fallacy within the Republican party that candidates like McCain are good and what the people want--despite the fact that you are a member of the Constitution Party.

So, there were two messages sent by your voting against a candidate rather than for one:

1. The negative concept behind the vote against a person as described above
2. The request for more candidates like the one we were given this year

don't forget if you choose the lesser of two evils you are serving evil. If you don't like either islamobama or mcinsane why vote for either one? Vote another candidate..or use the power of your write in vote..either wya don't continue to serve the lesser of two evils two party lie.

 

[Odale]

I have looked at that, but frankly, that case ignores the 10th amendment:

The powers delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

I seriously doubt that the Supreme Court would make a decision regarding one part of the constitutionality of a case while ignoring another part of the constitution.

The powers delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

All this means is that the powers that are not assigned to the federal government are given to state governments and the people. The people's power consists of many things, mainly the vote.

The Us constitution makes it very clear..if it is not written into the constitution then that duty falls to the staes..so:
healthcare..states

It falls to the states and the people, a very important part.

The people's power is the vote... among other things.

 

[Hescominsoon]

Kidan, I'm on the Ron Paul boat (voted for him in the primaries). However, when it came down to the election, it was between McCain and Obama. I voted AGAINST Obama because I knew this next president would be appointing 3 supreme court justices and Obama scares the crap out of me. I voted AGAINST Obama because to do otherwise was foolish.

Third party candidates do NOT stand a wink of a chance because the word has not been spread far enough about them. While I believe the third party candidates were much more highly qualified than McCain or Obama, I do see it as a wasted vote until the mindset of Americans has changed. The time to fight for third party candidates is not during the election--it's before and after.

serving evil...it's not about a third party winning so much as it is letting hte current pols know we won't buy their lies anymore. If you use that logic you are feeding and serving the two party lie...stand up..be strong..and vote your values. you chose not too..that's your right..i wrote in ron paul because neither of hte other candidates came close to even constitutional values..much less biblical ones.

Well said TJ. I wholeheartly agree.

the only wasted vote is the one left uncast.

I seriously doubt that the Supreme Court would make a decision regarding one part of the constitutionality of a case while ignoring another part of the constitution.

The powers delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

All this means is that the powers that are not assigned to the federal government are given to state governments and the people. The people's power is the vote.

actually there's another claled jury nullification...

 

[Odale]

You quote... and POST too many times =P

I revised my post almost immediately after I wrote it at 10:26 EST and again at 10:41.

Third party candidates do NOT stand a wink of a chance because the word has not been spread far enough about them. While I believe the third party candidates were much more highly qualified than McCain or Obama, I do see it as a wasted vote until the mindset of Americans has changed. The time to fight for third party candidates is not during the election--it's before and after.

I understand what you did. You do not like Obama.. he scares you. I believe that voting against someone is a very valid way to vote, perhaps as valid as voting for someone.

The only wasted vote is the one not cast.

I agree. A vote to keep someone out of office is far more valid than one not cast.

 

[ppar3566]

Interesting question folks. Obama won both the popular and college votes from what I can tell. That means that there are more ppl out their that voted for him than anyone else. Now I ask you, if one of these ppl came to our forums and read this thread what do you think that would think.

Don't get me wrong it is your write to be angry with the result and it is quite acceptable for you to put that point of view forward in a supported and measured manner. But is this what is happening here. It is my belief that the more important the issue the more important it is for christians to maintain respect and dignity in their responses. The more people spread lies and rumour the more important it is for us to stick to the facts. The more people are rude and curse. The more important it is for us to respectfully everyone and to avoid slander.

Come on folks we can do better than what we are doing here. I know it is hard not to be harsh and respond to things in an angry way. I know I have written and then cancelled multiple messages on this thread, but we need to be much more measured in our responses.

 

[vibrokatana]

Don't get me wrong it is your write to be angry with the result and it is quite acceptable for you to put that point of view forward in a supported and measured manner. But is this what is happening here. It is my belief that the more important the issue the more important it is for christians to maintain respect and dignity in their responses. The more people spread lies and rumour the more important it is for us to stick to the facts. The more people are rude and curse. The more important it is for us to respectfully everyone and to avoid slander.

Thank you.

 

[tjguitarz]

so not voting for someone I found lacking, and considered an evil choice--when presented with three options that I viewed as much better, and non-evil (write in Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin & Bob Barr) is foolish? No, it wasn't between McCain and Obama. It was between McCain, Obama, Baldwin, Barr, and Nader. There were other options on the ballot, you just chose to to not vote your conscience.

That's like choosing a McDonald's or Burger King meal instead of the local diner because McDonald's & Burger King are nationally known. Who cares if the local diner has better food and is cheaper--it lacks name recognition.

Your metaphor doesn't quite work. Try this. There's a basketball tournament between Obama, McCain, and a third party candidate. I will put money on this game. Obama and McCain are both 7 feet tall. The third party candidate is 4 feet tall. I want the third party candidate to win because he's a great guy and the other two are jerks. I'll do whatever I can to help him improve his game (maybe even give him growth hormones). But if his skill doesn't add up, then I will NOT bet my money on him because I know he doesn't stand a snowball's chance. I will place my money on Obama or McCain until the little guy has a fighting chance.

 

[Cløud]

Interesting question folks. Obama won both the popular and college votes from what I can tell. That means that there are more ppl out their that voted for him than anyone else. Now I ask you, if one of these ppl came to our forums and read this thread what do you think that would think.

Don't get me wrong it is your write to be angry with the result and it is quite acceptable for you to put that point of view forward in a supported and measured manner. But is this what is happening here. It is my belief that the more important the issue the more important it is for christians to maintain respect and dignity in their responses. The more people spread lies and rumour the more important it is for us to stick to the facts. The more people are rude and curse. The more important it is for us to respectfully everyone and to avoid slander.

Come on folks we can do better than what we are doing here. I know it is hard not to be harsh and respond to things in an angry way. I know I have written and then cancelled multiple messages on this thread, but we need to be much more measured in our responses.

Very true. I am trying to get over 3 main things with Obama atm.

1. He said, "U.S. Constitution Reflects the Fundamental Flaw of this Country that Continues to this Day."

2. The fact that he would fail a FBI background test and be president

3. Hiding his birth records and trying to ignore the case against him from Philip Berg. In which case he would be an unconstitutional president?

 

[Hescominsoon]

Interesting question folks. Obama won both the popular and college votes from what I can tell. That means that there are more ppl out their that voted for him than anyone else. Now I ask you, if one of these ppl came to our forums and read this thread what do you think that would think.

Don't get me wrong it is your write to be angry with the result and it is quite acceptable for you to put that point of view forward in a supported and measured manner. But is this what is happening here. It is my belief that the more important the issue the more important it is for christians to maintain respect and dignity in their responses. The more people spread lies and rumour the more important it is for us to stick to the facts. The more people are rude and curse. The more important it is for us to respectfully everyone and to avoid slander.

Come on folks we can do better than what we are doing here. I know it is hard not to be harsh and respond to things in an angry way. I know I have written and then cancelled multiple messages on this thread, but we need to be much more measured in our responses.

I have seen inaccuracies in this thread..that i have addressed as i have seen them..otherwise i've seen only known facts or valid opinions posted in this thread.

 

[Hescominsoon]

Very true. I am trying to get over 3 main things with Obama atm.

1. He said, "U.S. Constitution Reflects the Fundamental Flaw of this Country that Continues to this Day."

2. The fact that he would fail a FBI background test and be president

3. Hiding his birth records and trying to ignore the case against him from Philip Berg. In which case he would be an unconstitutional president?

1: This comes form a man who is porposing more of the most unconstitutional programs ever thought of in this contry(natioalized helathcare)...frankly neither him or mccain know anything about hte constitution..

2: Just shows how little he truly cares about "the law"

3: This case will prove jjust how little the constituion means to the majority of the american public and the gov't.