That's not usually my thing, but if you'll just hold still I'll give you a sample.

Why undoubtably a common greeting in sum circles...no thanks.

Hankster, OK I see you're satisfied to give Bush a 3rd term by voting McCain. I'm not, and that's probably the main reason I won't vote for him.

Yes, the Democratic Congress is a seething cesspool of disappointment. They've had the majority for over a year and haven't done squat. Well maybe they squat, but that's about it. If a third party could become viable I'd like nothing more than to send the Dems and Reps packing. That's delusional, I know.

As bad as things are, I don't think it's a big risk giving the Obama kid a chance. His social programs will fizzle the instant he's introduced to fiscal reality. The only way those programs (undefined as they are) is to follow the fiscal plan developed by Bushco. I think the tide has turned such that any Dem elected now has no choice but to be fiscally conservative. At least the role reversal makes for entertainment, of indifferent quality of course.

Sg

this is not an endorsement for Obama, I'd just like to point out that nobody complains about the "socialist" aspect of our police and fire departments - you know, funded by public money.

Boo hoo hoo for GMC. What they don't publicize is that the $4 billion in benefits due to the auto workers is for more than one million people (I forget the exact number of past and current employees) while approximately 130,000 white collar employees have a $5 billion benefit package. I'll leave the math up to you.

Also, under current federal guidelines, by the year 2010, our automobiles will still not meet the pollution standards of China. I'm not making a statement about how great China is, in fact, they are currently the world's largest polluter - just funny that we can't produce an auto up to their standards.

You are correct Aunty! The "state" would have to own the means of production from which the money is collected. I just don't know why folks freak out because someone wants to allocate tax dollars for health care. Politicians piss away more of our money on haircuts and hackysacks everyday than I can count or am even aware of

The big "if" is it would be okay IF our government practiced fiscal responsibility, which they do not, Dem Or Rep.

Actually, part of the reason China is the biggest polluter is becasue of outsourcing. When we closed up our steel plants and other heavy industry, the acid rain and other pollution went overseas with it. Because of the jetstream, out here on the west coast, we get to enjoy and share in China's pollution even though we got rid of the manufacturing.

And I do enjoy your previous comment about having interesting discourse, even if we may not agree on all or any issues

I wonder if Ralph Nader is a CCA member, I know Hillary or Obama isn't!

[quote=AuntyM]

Hilliary is the more fiscally responsible candidate. McCain has already asked for trillions to support the war in Iraq by saying that we will stay the course.

Hilliary's health care is much cheaper than the war.

I wouldn't want Hilary in power even if she could walk on water.

not to mention that Hillary, the one time health care leader as first lady, now has the insurance lobby as one of her largest PAC contributors. Hmm, no hypocrisy here - or with any of the other cadidates!

Aunty,

McCain may be too liberal for many conservatives (and I believe that's a good thing, since those conservatives are the RWWJs), but he's too Bushy for me. Now if he would straight up say that invading the sovereign nation of Iraq was an idiotic idea propogated by idiots, but now that we're there, we have to stay until we can somehow stabilize the region, my respect for him would rise to the point of seriously considering voting for him.

Hankster,

You left out the $4 trillion that Reagan added to the national debt. As weird as it seems, over the last 28 years, Democrats are the new fiscal conservatives. It has me scratching my head, too. Apparently it costs this nation more to support corporate welfare than it does to support social welfare, based on this rather simplistic fiscal analysis.

Sg

But as a % of the federal budget, last I heard corporate welfare was still getting more $ than social welfare. There's tax breaks, plus there's handouts.

One creates jobs and economy....one leaches it. Which did you say you support?

KK-

You've entirely missed the point with your facts and figures - it was the Clinton's fault!!!