John Smith

Ultimately it will be a non-story when they lose and she heads back to AK. Eisenhower. Moderator, we are over our limits here, 1000+ posts already.

It

Do judges really have anything to do with the number of abortions not going down? They can't make that argument with a striaght face, If no laws are put out there to work the court system the judges are irrelevant. I think the point being made was that for eight years nothing was done to curb the need for abortions as well as nothing being done to curb the actual number of abortions.

He's not? Can we at elast agree that he is the Anti-Christ? Of course once again McCain & his minions take Obama's quotes & comments out of context convieniently leaving out the part where Obama talks about his team the white sox.

I've been saying this for twenty years now and the last eight have borne this notion out more than at any other period in time. Those people runing our government during this adminsitration have been able to get all sorts of unsavory laws passed through congress, and what they did not get through congress they managed to circumvent via presidential order or signing statement, yet not one attempt was made on abortion by this adminsitration or the republican congresses who eagerly dry humped Bush and his whims. They made no efforts, none, and that right there shoudl tell the anti-choice anti-p

Joe said it in the context of spreading fear

I Went to a concert at that race track once. It was Molly Hatchet (almost seems like they might be the house band, they had the chubby guy singing, not the original singer) Blue Oyster Cult and Black Sabbath (Dio). It was a good time. I like Budokan it was on at every party for a solid year when I was in college. But another re-issue? I got the two disc re-issue for the twentieth anniversary. Enough

The whole Joe put his foot in his mouth is really not accurate. Staunch republican and McCain supporter Joe Lieberman said the same thing not too long ago. Of course he was saying it in terms of mccain being better able to handle the test, but the same thing has been said on both sides fo the line.

Most parishes/diocese (sp?) are silent, but the few who have the bishops and priest speaking out endorsing a candidate are essentially statting an official position. The Catholic church, as you well know, is a patriarchal top down organization. With the pope at the top and the parishioners at the bottom. If a bishop, a mid to upper level manager to non-catholics, states a position, it, to my understanding from growing up in the church, is the defacto position of that particular diocese. Granted in America we don't generally follow all the rules and teachings of the church, but regardless

I don't think it has to be "official" positions of the church. They seem to be advocating voting for a particular candidate. Way back in 2004 didn't a california church get investigated for the minsiter saying that he did not believe Jesus woudl support either Bush or Kerry? A couple of mega churches int he south said they were going to actively support McCain. The results of this are yet to be seen. Keeping governmentout of the issue is being in favor of government involvement? Interesting. Roe v Wade is not government involvmment by the way, it is a decision regarding govern

Is the catholic church officially endorsing candidates and using their position as stewards of their parishioners souls to leverage votes? It sounds like it to me. And really it has been the last couple elections where they have become increasingly vocal about this. Are they now political organizations as well as religious? A church gets investigated for letting Obama speak (cleared by the way) yet the catholic church gets a pass for direct political activity? (I'm a former Catholic by the way>)

Ditka has way more baggage than Ryan could ever imagine and it all would have come out had he run. Not running preserved his income, lifestyle and legend.

The last time they "simplified" the code in 1986 we got the current mess we have today

I agree with the complexiy issue. RIght now we have code shecking in at thousands of pages, regualtions at five or six times the number of pages and 100 years of case law, publications, notices comittee reports etc... So as complex as it it, it's what we have, it's what we know and to re-do it entirely would possibly negate a lot of the stuff out there and bring cause to litigate and work through all the issues once more using new definitions etc...

Is that what you got out of what I wrote? Interesting. I'm all for simplyfying the code, I'm against stupidfying it, which is what flat tax and the so called fair use tax are all about. Regardless of what they do to the tax code everyone with $$ to spare will have their hand in the writing of it so it will always end up just as complex as ever. Just the nature of what is being taxed or how it is being taxed will change.

Fear and balanced or Balanced with Fear

Both of these statements are true. Here is an example. In the early 1980

Regardless of the legality/illegality of the doctrine you have to admit that homogenization of radio in the US has not been a good thing. Radio has lost it's regional identity and going from town to town there is so little variety music wise that I never listen anymore. Radio today is no different from fast food. McDonalds= burgerking=wendy's=culvers etc.. with an occasional taco bell or KFC thrown in for variety that does not stray too far from the burger barns. He shoots, he scores!

That is the key statement in yoru response. From what I gather, any policy not eminating from the far right willswing us left in a harsh and grinding manner. It's why they "fear" an Obama presidency. The fear is from the knowledge that he will enact polciy and any polciy he enacts will be leftist and hated by the right, even if it is a continuation of a Bush policy they will hate it.

But when you talk about the close poll numbers you have to discuss this because it is ahuge component. Use taxes are inherently unfair to a huge majority of the population as are flat taxes. No I do not work to reduce the effective tax rate for any clients now or in the past. The rate is what it is after taxes are calculated (both deferred and current). I work to help them calculate the correct tax liability they should be paying, though now I work for a fortune 50 company so I have a client base of one. And my job is to help achieve the lowest possible tax working within the cu

Taxes were @94% during the Eisenhower era. If the majority is currently polling for Obama, how does that show that America is so far off from the democratic party? Also never ever underestimate the power of racism in our country.

That is a bunch of crap. Every single democrat is the most liberal in congress depennding on who you are talking to. If the issue is Kennedy tomorrow he will be the most liberal, if it is Pelosi the next day she will be and on and on. More talk radio bullsh*t How about we start talking about the most conservative members of congress as being the truely scary people they are? Palin may not be in congress but she is one frightening person. Michelle Bachman (Bush stalker from MN)? Hmmm calling for new McCarthy style hearings? Interesting. How about McCian himself? Portrays himself as a

I

What would your reaction to Obama have been if he said/implied that only the portions of America who were voting in his favor was the real America? That only Americans who were voting for him were real Americans? You would not have an answer because Obama has not and would not stoop so low. The McCain campaign is the first I can remember that is running not on real issues but on the premise that the other guy is disloyal, a traitor, not a real American etc