Liberalism has changed to Socialism

Im with you Guy ,on that...Obama=socialism...

Guy, thanks for your contribution to the site.

But I've got a question for you: If you're going to vote against socialism, who are you going to vote for?

I assume not John McCain, since he supported the bailout, which was essentially socialism for Wall Street bankers. He also co-authored McCain-Feingold, which aimed to <a href="http://www.reason.com/news/show/34642.html">limit free speech</a>. His latest plan to buy up mortgages from struggling homeowners sounds noble, but it's still socialism.

John McCain has spent his career seeing government as the answer, not as the problem. He tries to partner himself with Barry Goldwater, but Goldwater couldn't stand him. McCain is a nationalist who espouses American exceptionalism, but without really understanding what it is that makes America exceptional -- individual freedom, first and foremost, but McCain makes a religion of putting country first (though he hardly does it himself).

I'm no fan of Barack Obama, that's for sure -- and I share your concern about his tax policies -- but John McCain scares the hell out of me.

The Fox news clip with the "Husain" code for hate is a nice touch.. Kind of hard to talk about socialism without taking a long look at what Bush and his friends are doing.

Let me guess your next line. Obama is a terrorist, a muslim, an Arab or he works with them. Take some advice, if you like McCain, stop the hate, it's killing your guy.

Ron Paul is the Man....

Honestly, I have hard time seeing any difference between Obama and McCain.

Their tax policies split hairs. When it comes right now to it, there is only a marginal difference in what I'll pay in taxes between their proposals (I do do slightly better with McCain, but only slightly).

But in the end -- it doesn't really matter because with $11 Trillion in debt and a economic mess that will make both tax cuts and their proposed government programs impossible.

Neither has any plan for reducing the size of government -- McCain was part of a GOP majority that controlled both houses and the WH and didn't introduce a single piece of legislation (nor did any Republican) to seriously eliminate government bureaucracies.

And their both hawks on foreign policy, ready to get us entangled in affairs of other countries without a blink of an eye. Sure, Obama opposed Iraq, but he's made it clear, he's ready to go to war with Iran, or meddle in Georgia, or get American troops wrapped up in Darfur. He's hardly the candidate of peace. But then, neither is McCain.

The way McCain has run his campaign is particularly scary. He is so desperate to win, he shifts from tactic to tactic -- the absolute poor judgment, the idiotic judgment in picking Palin is exhibit #1 -- grasping at straws to get votes. Remember his pathetic "I'm suspending my campaign" move? And then he doesn't really, and then he LIES about it during the debates.

Ron Paul isn't a candidate, but Bob Barr is, as is Chuck Baldwin (whom Paul endorsed). Neither can win, but voting for McCain in New York won't do a thing to stop Obama. He'll win this state in a walk.

I am far from a liberal and don't care for our countrys turn to socialism either. With that said, I'm done hearing the code for hate. When you reference something that doesn't pass the smell test it reflects on everything you write. I'm not looking to stop you from fighting for your guy and I am also not looking to call you a racist.

Charlie, I'll defend Guy's choice of clip here.

I've been in a position of knowing that some quote is likely out on YouTube and it can be hard to find. You often want to grab the first version you find. Guy isn't responsible how it was edited. The meat of the club is what Obama said. Either you believe that the clip is undoctored, or not (I say not; I've little doubt Obama actually said it).

Guy's point was that key quote from Obama. He did an admirable job of offering up documentation. I think it's fair to excuse the packaging he found it in.

And like you, I'm sick of the racism. If New York's race where to tighten up and Obama could possibly lose the state, I could see myself switching from a third-party vote to Obama -- just to stick a finger in the eye of all the haters.

I can accept that as a reason for the clip. Guy has a right to disagree with Obama and state his point. I only objected to something that has become nails on a chalkboard to me at this point, this hidden hate. Disagree the mans ideas all you want Guy.

Charlie..What about the hidden hate for Sarah Palin.She has been hated and mocked since the day McCain picked her..There is so many haters on both sides..I believe in disagreeing with a candidate ,not do all this name calling and mean spritedness....no place for it..i thought we left that back at grade school....

Obama saves me enough to buy a new storage shed, according to <a href="http://taxcut.barackobama.com/">this tax calculator</a>.

McCain saves me: $0.00.

Of course, this is all based on campaign promises, which mean less than zero when it comes time to actually govern.

The idea that people who live a simpler life in smaller towns are somehow slower isn’t right either. Let’s face it, that one hits a little closer to home for those of us who live in Genesee County.

There comes a point at which enough is enough. I don’t want to hear about anything other than what each of these people is going to do about our economy. I’m fed up with the distractions and the hot button issues. I’ve heard enough bashing and name calling. If you think you’re getting somewhere referencing people as socialists, liberals, old, inexperienced or backwards you just don’t understand the type of people who are undecided at this point.

All four of these people would do at least an average job running the country, that should be obvious to anyone who has paid attention or has taken off the blinders. The only disagreement should be which two would do a better job. The end of our country isn’t coming no matter who gets elected. The parties are very close to each other and some, like Howard might say there is no difference. They are all socialists.

Don't count on it. That 95% of the people who are 'going to get a tax cut", includes all the ones who did not pay taxes in the first place. That's called welfare by any other name, at any other time except an election. McCain will not do any better, but Obama's lie is bigger.

John, the Washington Post points to the fact that individuals making 35k-66k will get on average a 1.7 further tax cut than what McCain will give them. Obama's plan gives an average cut for that income bracket of around 1,042 dollars, whereas McCain's will only provide on average around 319 dollars.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060…

You are all right but you are all wrong. There is a thing called congress and no matter what Mccain or Obama say they are going to do it doesnt mean they will have enuff backing or support to pass it thru. I am not political savy but C'mon u guys dont you see it ?

I agree, but on par you have to take both of the tax plans and compare their intent, McCain wants to cut more for the top, Obama wants to cut more for the middle and the lower. These plans are also good indications of whats very close to be passed in Congress, especially if its Obama working with a Democratic Congress.

I Thought Obama said he would change these tax cuts if we were in a financial mess,which is where we are now..
What cuts in government spending is he going to be doing..Trillions of dollars in debt,and they are talking tax cuts..no spending cuts..The scary thing is Obama and a Democratic Congress..

The way things are going with the economy any candidate who says that they are going to cut any taxes for any one demographic is a bold face liar. They might actually get it passed but it is going to affect another sector of the economy thus causing the original tax break to be offset by another rise in price or other tax. You cant borrow from peter to pay paul and end up better off.

I really don't understand this fear of Democrats after what Bush and the Republicans have done to this country. It sounds irrational not to want real change and instead trust that McCain is telling the truth. We have been following the same path for years, it isn't working. It is time to move on to something different. The Republicans can’t be trusted to do what they say anymore.

And what about the great give away of tax payments to people who don't pay tax now?

Neither one is telling the truth. Neither McCain or obama will say we are fighting 2 wars, added a drug plan to Medicare we can not pay for, put billions into bail outs that will not work and can not pay for Social Security. We are a debtor nation now and pay for our welfare programs by borrowing the money from China. Neither one of them will say we can not afford all fo this anymore. Obama's plan to raise taxes on the "rich" didn't work under Carter or Clinton. The rich (like them)just moved their money around or out of the country, along with the jobs.

And don't tell me about the false "balanced" Clinton budget. He only did it when the other side won the majority in Congress. Even then they didn't balance the budget and you all know it. They just moved spending items like Social Security and the military "off budget". The surplus they bragged about was on paper only, it was never really there.

The only advantage McCain would have is who he would put on the courts. That is the only thing that really scares me about Obama.

I agree with you 100%

Guy, your Joe the Plumber was the talk of the debate last night.

And, as John McCain put it, "Joe, you're rich."

You bet he is -- he makes $250,000 a year, which puts him among the top 2 percent income earners in the U.S.

Lucky, Joe.

Here's the thing -- Fox News is spinning this (and now it's a GOP talking point) as "Obama is a socialist; he favors redistribution."

But let's get real about this: Redistribution means taking from the rich and giving to the poor, as in tax people making money to give it to non- or low-wage earners through welfare, food stamps, medicare.

That's not what Obama is talking about. He's talking about letting people like you and me keep more of our money. The only way the GOP can counter this plan is to call it something it's not: Redistribution. Socialism.

Both McCain and Obama's proposals are merely rewriting of the tax code, not redistribution.

Unless you count putting more money in the hands of people like you and me as redistribution, because do you know what we're going to do with that money? We're not going to horde it like the rich, we're going to redistribute it throughout the economy. We're finally going to put those new tires on the car, or buy the kids some extra winter clothes, or save it so we can put a new roof on the house. We can't afford to horde our extra cash like the wealthy, like Joe the Plumber.

But here's the thing about that Fox News clip: It lies to you. It lies to you because it doesn't show you EVERYTHING Obama said. Fox doesn't want you to know the truth. They only want you to get the GOP spin.

Here's the <a href="http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/10/15/1550438.aspx">transcr… of Obama's chat with Joe</a>.

And here's a key part:

<blockquote>
The crowd cheered and Obama added, “for small business people, I’m gonna eliminate the capital gains tax, so what it means is if your business succeeds and let’s say you take it from a $250,000 business to a $500,000 business, that capital gains that you get – we’re not gonna tax you on it because I want you to grow (inaudible). So you’re actually gonna get some, you may end up – I’d have to look your particular business, but you might end up paying lower taxes under my plan and my approach than under JSM’s (inaud). I couldn’t guarantee that, ‘cause I’d have to take a look at ---
</blockquote>

Cutting the capital tax gain is right -- it allows wealthy people to take that part of their portfolio set aside for investment to reinvest it, and encourages more investment in business growth. Cutting cap gains can increase job growth.

When you cut income taxes for people like you and me, you encourage money to circulate through the economy, which causes all boats to rise. Everybody benefits -- the rich and the poor. That's not socialism. That's capitalism.

Here is the question Howard..Sounds like he is rich because he worked 10-12 hr days as he said,and now he should pay more taxes.Would he be better off to work 8 hr days,and get a tax break..Should people who don't pay any federal taxes get money sent to them .I still have not read or heard of any of the rich Democrats sending extra money to Washington
DC.If they think this is a great idea why don't they do this on their own,most of them find ways to cut their tax liabilty.Case in point Charles Rangle,head of some tax committe in congress,he didnt report taxable income on income proprety he owned for years.I just do not understand why a guy like Joe the plumber,needs to pay more,but all these Businesses on Wall Street are getting money given to them on the backs of guys like Joe..seems unfair to me.Doesn't sound like capitalism .Joe sounds like he did it the hard way with out government bailouts..

Mark, if taxes were a disincentive to work hard to become successful, then nobody would work hard now, because of our progressive tax system.

If you want to look at taxes from a perspective of what's going to create the most wealth for the most people, then a plan to creates cash flow -- such as cuts for working families -- then middle-class tax cuts make the most sense. I've never been a fan of trickle down. I like percolate up.

If 40% of the people don't pay taxes now, and the rest of us not only have to pay for all the spending, but also have to give that 40% "tax rebates" also, there will be no middle class tax cut. clinton knew that and then after saying he would cut taxes, he raised them in his first year in office. When you look at what both candidates for president want to spend, the tax cut is dead.

Do you really think business will hire more people here in the US, if you raise their taxes, really? Or will they find new ways to cut labor costs with new technology? Maybe drive more big companies overseas or out of business? Do you really think if your own parent company has to pay higher and higher taxes, it will not sooner or later have to cut expenses?

Income tax cuts, from Kennedy to Bush worked every time. More and more money came into the treasury. You should know that. The problem is the American people want more bennies without having to really pay for them. So the Congress just kept spending on bigger and bigger programs with no money to pay for them. If we had to pay for all the "free' stuff we get from Uncle Sam, out of our taxes, we would be at the 90% tax level. We borrow from China to pay for Social Security, bank bail outs and to fund our wars. The 5% who pay most of our taxes now will only pay so much more, then move their money out. Then what?