JPF Home Page Forums Stop The Bailout

Mike
Unfortunately that is not the plan our soon to be great leaders are pushing.
The one on the floor is the only one that will get considered.
It will make a lot of people a whole lot of money.

Yes, Bill, but if those who are up for re-election hear from enough constituents before the vote, it will fail. I've sent this to my representatives already, along with a polite note that I'm not in favor of the bailout as it stands, and will not vote for anyone who is.

Brian, there are a lot of things you can do that use solar energy other than solar panels. It can be used, for example, to preheat the water you send to your water heater, which then reduces the energy it takes to heat it to your preferred temperature. Also, there's a simple window box panel that you can make or have made. It is a pane of glass in a box outside the window that hangs down on an angle. The sun heats the air inside the box and, since hot air rises, it moves warm air into your house. A friend of mine in Oregon had both of these devices. Also, there's a waterless toilet that converts human waste to compost. You can find a lot of great solar and other money savers with a search on the net.

Bill, that is what I worry about most of all- special interest doing what they are so good at- bending congressional elbows and positioning themselves in the first row of the money troff. But I would be happy if congress posted a website that accounted for every penny of the money used to make this "adjustment". It would probably be too complicated to follow, but at least they should make the attempt.

I saw Warren Buffet last night on Charlie Rose. Metaphors are flying from congress like the lines of lame songwriters lately (economic Pearl Harbor etc.) but Buffet had a good one. He is more optimistic than most investors, but he described the problem like this: We have a world class athletic (the American Economy) who just had a heart attack. We could talk about what kind of treatment he needs and we could bring in a team of doctors to form a committee to reach a consensus on what needs to be done but that is foolish because we have got to get his heart started again! The problem is that everyone is loosing confidence in money. So to Buffet, it is less important what is in the "package" and more important that we do something now to restore confidence.

The whole economy was, is, and forever will be just a confidence game. In my opinion it is wrong to think about our economy as "wealth" that moves around and to think that some have it and some loose it. The economy is just the scorekeeper of the amount of "activity" in the country or in the world. If we decide, as a nation, to go green; put a man on Mars; rebuild the nations highways and bridges, provide college education to every young American and insure health care for all, there is nothing that is "subtracted" from anything else. To do all those things will make the country much more prosperous- there is no down side to it- nobody gets shorted and it doesn't come with a crushing debt burden. It is selfishness and greed that "bottle up" the potential for this nation to do unlimited good things. In a way, it is exactly the "small mindedness" of or representatives that hold back the real promise of economic security and prosperity for all. What do we fear? Economic slow down- where banks are afraid to loan to innovators and businessmen are afraid to hire, and employers are afraid to quit their lousy job and look for better ones. Why do we fear? Well, the banker's fear is based of the fact that so many of them are guilty of misdeeds and they are afraid they have Hell to pay. The worker is afraid because he feels powerless. The congress and president are afraid because they may lose their job or legacy. Fear is definitely the enemy- but like the biblical Satan, it is a liar from the beginning.

I think this is the one that's alive and well...

http://banking.senate.gov/public/_files/latestversionAYO08C32_xml.pdf

(pdf)

$20 bucks a ton for carbon dioxide sequestration. Best news Wall Street has heard all week.

the wool's still in there, too.

Mike
I have already notified my US Senator, Carl Levin, of my displeasure at his vote. I am sending a note off to my Congressman Fred Upton today. I will urge him to consider the other plan.

It is too sad that we cannot trust these folks to pass a bill that we can all live with.
We all know something must be done.

They must be getting barraged with e-mails. I can't get logged on to E-mail my congressman.

For everyone who thought it was a good idea...

The bailout passed.

What a disaster.

Oh well

We elected them.
Again
and again
and again
and again.

But for me..not this time.

700 Billion dollars down the drain....If you divide that by the population wonder how much that would be individually. to many zeros for me.

Umm I think some may be forgetting the facts??

This is not a get out of jail free card for the agencies involved by any means... Sure their debt was taken care of, but along with that their assets will also liquidated and part and parcell of the united states government... Some are even estimating the the Government could potentially gain a lot from this move over time... So I say to all the doom and gloomers... wake up! Life isn't over yet! Unless you believe it is... and if you do... then you might as well go an bury yourself now...
Derek

Derek
I cannot help but wonder what is our Government going to do with a couple hundred thousand houses that are worth a lot less than the mortgages that are owed on them.
No one is going to buy them. Are these are the so called "Assets"?
Many of which are in Neighborhoods where entire blocks of homes have been foreclosed on. Most of these homes have been ransacked for the copper wire, Aluminum siding, or anything else of value. Some of these cities have said most of these home will be declared condemned and will be torn down.

What are they going to do with the house two doors down from me that has a $140,000 mortgage on it. The house is worth about $110,000 in a good economy. The people who own it refinanced it and bought new cars with the money. Now they are going to walk away leaving the taxpayers to deal with it.

When I got over extended in my business the Government didn't bail me out. I went broke. Lost my arse and it took me ten years to recover.

In any of these companies that get saved by this fiasco the principles should lose everything they have. Their homes, bank accounts, cars, everything.
That's what the Government did to me.

IMHO if this bailout failed we would recover just fine. It might hurt a little but we would recover.

Then they went and added 100 Billion in pork pet projects to the bill to get the Senators to go along with it.

Hey Bill

I agree entirely! There are going to be many homes that won't be worth the ground they occupy, but I'm also thinking that this was taken into account and that there are also some that are... I know of a couple of cases recently from people I've come in contact with who bought foreclosed homes that there is still a big market for it.. and even if the homes themselves are valueless eventually the property they occupy may hold some value... I'm not saying it's a wash by any means, but the fact remains it's not without some form of "compensation" whether it will be equal to the loss... only time will tell.. As for the added pork? Sigh that's Congress for you , but on that note... why are we letting Congressmen run for President without finishing their current term anyways?
Derek

If you divided it among the taxpayers (200,000) it comes out to around 3500.00 bucks. But, that was before the add ons. It passed the House and within an hour, 48 minutes to be exact Bush had already signed it into law. Guess he didn't want them changing their minds. Or maybe he was in a hurry to get out town. Which he did.

"If you divided it among the taxpayers (200,000) it comes out to around 3500.00 bucks" thanks for doing that, looks like that would've paid one years college tuition on maybe a years health premium, or at least a great guitar

A year's college tuition? What school is that cheap? I have two daughters in college right now, albeit private schools, not state universities, but cheaper of the two colleges compares with our state university system and it is more like $17000 a year. You guys are throwing numbers around that are entirely wrong, however, the bottom line per taxpayer is pretty close.

Just a couple of bailout thoughts.

I have lived through owning bad investments before. Since I managed to survive, I consider the condition survivable.

My wife and I were the proud owners of a little house in the little lumber mill town of Cascade Locks, Oregon, when the timber market collapsed in the late '70s. Four of the five lumber mills in our town of 800 people closed, and never re-opened. For most of the next ten years, our house was worth less than the $8500 we paid for it in 1977. (For a while, the county was saying it was worth only about $3,000.)

And so what? That the house was worth less than I paid for it meant only that I wasn't going to be selling it any time soon. (We still own it, in fact.) There was a mortgage on the place, and I still had to pay it off, even though I was paying more than the house was worht. Again, so what? My main concern was being able to make the payments (which was occasionally difficult).

The primary people who would be hurt by a real estate collapse under normal conditions (and we do not have normal conditions--I understand that) are those who deliberately bought things they could not afford in expectation that prices would go up and the market would remain "hot." And I'm sorry--they were wrong. The lenders who financed and encouraged such activity get bit, too, under normal conditions. It does seem that we're bailing out the lenders without bailing out the guy who is stuck with the unaffordable house and mortgage. But I wouldn't bail out either one, myself. (I am a firm supporter of Mike "the Foot" Dunbar for President.)

Now, the collapse--and the bailout--are going to have rippleeffects throughout the economy, just like the timber market collapse had ripple effects through my hometown in the 1980s. And a lot of folks who had not done anything wrong will still get bit through no fault of their own. And I frankly don't see a lot being done to help them, either.

Joe

I meant one semester Jack, sorry. I just had one go thru too.

let's check that math...the U.S. has roughly 300,000,000 million people with 25% being under 18 so -75,000,000 and another 12.5% being over 65 so-37,500,000 which leaves us with a work force age population of around 188,000,000 folks left. Now there's where i can't find the numbers for those on welfare, and disability that would not pay taxes...for the sake of argument let's round our tax base (wage earners actually paying taxes) to 165,000,000 folks (give or take for the numbers i'm unsure of...let's try the math...$700,000,000,000 billion recovery bill divided by number of folks in the tax base 165,000,000 =$4242 ...that's assuming we all pay the same thing, which we don't and won't, the rich will pay more, the middle class will bear a great deal of the burden, and so forth...i've got so much extra i think i'll just write them a check to cover my part now anybody else want me to cover your part?...oh yeah, ya'll are probably doing so well too so you don't mind or need help...but the alternative in the given scenario was worse than non-action...the whole thing kind of reminds me of an accountant i had to fire one time...well good luck everyone, we're gonna need it...mj

Don't forget the 150 Billion plus or minus pork they added to it.
And also someone will be making up for the 100 Billion plus or minus tax breaks they snuck in there.
This thing is gonna go way beyond a Trillion before they get done spinning the crap out of it.
They can tell you they have our best interest at heart but I bet you a bridge to somewhere they are taking care of some people who are very important to them staying in office.

I say vote them OUT. It's time we got some new blood in there.

Michigan has John Dingell. He is 81 years old. He's been there since 1955. That's 53 years.
Our Senator Carl Levin in in his 6th term. That's 36 years.. He is up for reelection to his 7th term in November.

My congressman Fred Upton has been reelected 10 times.

We limit our President to 2 terms and allow this?

Michigan has just about the highest unemployment in the country and I think is only second to California in lost jobs.

There is something seriously wrong with this.

I think I'll put on my Camo and go in the woods and Kill something.

Bill don't go take it out Bambi's offspring,i happen to know Bambi voted against Upton if you're gonna kill something atleast make it a snake or something i would love to see those pinheads have to scramble around to try and pay their bills like the rest of us...mj

Hi Moker
How ya doing friend?
I sure wish I could play I Got a Phone Call like you guys do. I can get close but not quite. You did a wonderful job on it.

Bambi's Momma or Poppa will put meat in the freezer.
They led a good life running free, not like penned up cattle or Pigs. That's what I feel sorry for when I have to buy meat.

I have seen numerous versions of this same calculation in the past week or two, so I know roughly how it will come out depending on whose numbers you look at. They come out within about $500 dollars of each others' calculations.

I am sorry, but the bailout plan costing 750 Billion dollars in another chance to fleece us all. There are very real options to solve this that do not cost that kind of money (see Mike Dunbar's post). It is simply a matter of implementing them. Bill has already posted some of the pork barrel B.S. attached to this and it is totally inexcusable.

Bill, i like venison too, was just pokin' at ya... mj

Moker,

I've lost way more in the market SINCE they passed it than the amount I will also now owe for the bailout. As I have said from the start.. it's a bad idea and now we're stuck with it. And the PORK that was added should be cause to identify those who did it and have them put in jail along with their family and close friends. That's what SOCIALIST countries do right? Since we've become one, let's follow suit and lock away the evil slimewads responsible for doing that. Even if you were FOR the bailout, this added pork should enrage you beyond belief.

Obama and McCain both supported it. Neither deserves to be president. Our entire savings in the stock market is gone already (90% down in 2 months, losing 30% in the last 2 days since they APPROVED this bogus piece of crap). And NOW.. in ADDITION.. I have to cover OTHER people's losses? I don't have enough money left to even cover that bill per person.. and since as a family (me and my wife) we will likely bear the burden of far more than one share each. 50% of the workers in the US pay less than 3% of the taxes. The top 50% pay the other 97%. Most people who work full time in a two worker household are in that top 50%. We all just got majorly screwed on top of being majorly screwed. I generally never vote for an incumbent of any party anyway.. and I don't plan on doing it for many going forward. If only the other 50% who are getting screwed would do the same. And for any Democrats who think it's not their problem, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd and those gangsters are the root cause of this. I am not excusing the Republicans either, but those two (along with Obama and his Acorn friends.. do a little research on THAT) are the evil most behind this. Don't fall for their "this is Bush's fault" spin. Bush was simply too stupid to stop them.

Brian

Hey All

Not saying it makes all the sense in the world.... it just seems people are getting quite worked up over this... Politicians are going to be wasting our money I think it's part of the job description... and honestly without pork I'm not sure any bill would ever even make it to legislation let alone be voted on... Just the way this corrupt system works... I agree if it's unwanted then vote the bottom feeders out! Hasn't Teddy been in there long enough as well? I figured Chappaquiddick would dent his armor at some point (Poor Mary Jane will never recieve justice) how come this class clown reject his withstood the Kennedy cure? Musta struck a deal with the devil, but I digress...
Derek

Hmmm interesting

(I might start a thread on this)

Actually I will... To be continued
Derek

$700,000,000,000 (bailout) divided by 302,000,000 (population of USA) equal about $2300 for every man woman and child here legally.

Of course a few things were added to the bill which started out at 3 pages and now is 400 pages. But one good one that I may try to take advantage of is that the $2000 federal rebate for adding solar panels has been lifted so now a $30,000 solar system in your house (one big enough to actually pay most of your power bill) will now only cost you $15,000. So at an average of $400 a month that I now pay for power, it might be worth it because I could pay it back in less than 5 years. For the next 10 years I will save $50K.

Jody posted a video about the history of the Federal Reserve and though it was over 3 hours long I watch it. The theme of that video was that EVERY recession and depression since the mid 1800's has been deliberately contrived by bankers and that the Federal Reserve (formed in 1913 along with the income tax) is the key manipulator and orchestrator. The game plan is to periodically crash the economy (they call this a natural "business cycle") by freezing lending, crash the stock market with fear; force families and small businesses to give up property at pennies on the dollar, buy up the "bargins"; consolidate money including gold (Fort Knotts may be empty according to this theory); start wars if necessary because war is the most lucrative investments for bankers because they can lend to both sides; finally control the word economy as a shadow (sometimes called invisible) government.
Wow! what a nice plan.

Now a few presidents like Andrew Jackson and Abraham Lincoln saw the danger and issued (in Lincoln's time) "Greenbacks" which is a note printed and honored directly from the US treasury. It is inherently stable- but the bankers were left out so in 1913 most of Congress was in recess, a technicality keep congress officially open and two congressmen secretly pass a bill that formed the perverse Federal Reserve which let bankers control "Our" money and to parcel it out and actually earn interest by a system called "fractional" banking. It virtual skims off 90% of the value of our money and it keeps the US government in perpetual debt- yes it makes it IMPOSSIBLE for the US government to be debt free. We got trouble in River city folks and it's deep and wide.

Hey Samuel... hmm makes me wonder

Interesting points no doubt, but it brings something to mind... didn't we have a "surplus" starting into Clinton's second term? Seems we had all this extra money just lying around? Or was this another evidence of mr Clinton's malfeasance? I vote for the latter
Derek

Derek the debt was as big as ever. It was the "deficit" they were talking about. All that means is the the rate a which we were accumulating debt was slowed to zero. That was quite an accomplishment but it wasn't Clinton's achievement. Clinton was president during a Republican controlled congress. It was probably Newt Gingrich you can thank for the drop in the deficit. Clinton likes to take credit for it. Here is what you need to know about Clinton. On the day he was sworn in as president, he signed an executive order that no one from the Bush senior administration could be a lobbyist for 3 years. On the day that he left office he signed an executive order revoking his first order opening the way for virtually every one who worked directly for him to become a lobbyist. Of the 400 who worked for him, half (200) became lobbyist. Clinton is revolting! Politics is revolting and I am amazed this government works at all.

The 200,000 figure I got from somewhere but it was registered voters. Just because you're over 65 doesn't mean you can't vote. And of course that figure went up with the added pork. It really doesn't matter. Who knows. It's just an estimated figure. Nobody knows how this thing is going to turn out, but if I were a betting man, I would bet it is gonna be worse than what they estimate. Not less. And, the bottom line, is we're still gonna be in a recession for sometime to come. Did anybody notice on Monday when the House voted it down, the market dropped 770 points. When it went to a vote today, the market was up around 250 points and when they passed it ended up down some 150 plus points. Go figure. Probably the smart money knows this bailout ain't gonna do one thing to heal this ailing economy.

Well I think I'll take a chill pill.
I didn't have anything in stocks directly. I'm not sure where our 401's stand right now.
I guess I'll be hanging on to both houses for a bit. Hopefully this crap shoot they are taking will cause the prices to rebound a little.
In the mean time I'll keep plenty of ammo on hand just in case.
I think I'll go to Tennessee this weekend. Gas in down a bit.

As far as Clinton goes I read the debt was actually around 6 Trillion when he left office. History will eventually show Slick Willie was just that. Slick.
Newt Gingrich and the GOP were the reason the deficit was held in check.

Until we have fewer people on social programs and the government payroll than we have people working for a living paying taxes we will always have National debt.

In 2002, a non-presidential election year there were 128,000,000 registered voters in the US. Your number is not even close.

If we want to start talking about presidents and debt, start with Ronald Reagan, who presided over the greatest percentage increase of our national debt of any president. This is someone from your own party (presumably). Reagan has even admitted that the debt increase was the greatest fault of his presidency. So Bill, just because you have someone trying to shrink social programs and cut taxes does NOT mean you will see debt go down. Quite the opposite.

Hey Bill:

The debt is the accumulated debt. The surplus was a yearly thing. We had a few good years with a surplus but it wasn't enough to pay off the accumulated debt. That's my understanding anyway.....

Scott

Well, I sat through the 3 hour program that Jody and Sam were talking about and it is a mind-blower. I knew some of this from previous studies, but had no where near the whole picture. It is curious to me that they insinuate that the modern banking system started essentially with the Bank of England. Actually, the Bank of England was modeled on the earlier Dutch banking system from the late 14th, and 15th Century that financed shipping world-wide and the exploration of the New World. They seem to have forgotten about that period of the banking story altogether.

I know few of you will sit through this program, and yes there is propaganda in this video, but there is enough factual and verifiable information that it behooves you to educate yourself. You will have a much better understanding of what is going on and what we should be doing to resolve the economic problems.

Pelosi says they are going to have hearings as why this crunch happened. Anybody want to guess how this will come out? Get on your boots.

That is Absolutely true Scott.
But to say you have a "Surplus" is misleading. The debt did rise with Clinton but not very much. I should have included that.
It is a complex issue and sound bytes don't tell the whole story.

When Clinton took office the debt was around 4.5 Trillion. It continued to rise but slowed dramatically and almost completely leveled out at about 6 Trillion.
Who was responsible is the question. My position is that Clinton did not reduce the debt.

I can say one thing for Clinton. He was an Honest Liar. He did finally almost admit he lied, under oath, to congress. LOL.

My Party Andrew? No. Not any longer. I do admit to being Republican in the past but the last couple years have tainted my view.
But I won't be joining the Democratic party either. Just too liberal for me.

Reagan? Yes the rise did start with Reagan.
Yes the debt did rise about 1 Trillion. from about 1.5 Trillion to about 2.5 Trillion.
About the same as Clinton.

Well.... actually:

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo4.htm

In 1981 (beginning of the Reagan presidency) the debt was $997 billion. By 1989 it had risen to $2.8 trillion, an increase of nearly 200%.

In 1993 (beginning of the Clinton presidency) Clinton inherited a $4.4 trillion debt (hmm, Republican president before him) and left with a $5.8 trillion debt. An increase of 31% - nothing to scoff at, but not even remotely close to 200% under Reagan.

Again the issue with the last 4 or so Republican presidents we've had is that they all seem to have this idea that if you reduce spending a little bit, that will somehow even out massive tax cuts for the rich. But as we've seen over and over and over, this just isn't true. You need to pay for your tax cuts with something.

Before you say something like "But Obama is going to increase spending and put us into even more debt..." that's true, his plans WOULD increase debt to $5.7 trillion over the next ten years. But McCain's plans, though they involve less spending, would increase the debt $7.9 trillion in that same period.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411749_updated_candidates.pdf

Again it would be nice, in a perfect world, to give tax cuts to everybody and somehow still take in government revenue, but the fact of the matter is that even under widely-respected presidents like Reagan with presidencies considered to be successful, debt WILL increase dramatically when you do that. Just something to keep in mind.

I don't understand how people can justify a debt increase from one President but not another.
I don't care what the percentage was 1 Trillion dollars is still one trillion dollars.
Then to compound that they won't look at the Congress or the Senate.
It's as if they don't have anything to do with it.

Democrats blame the Republicans for our jobs heading south but won't discuss the fact that Clinton signed NAFTA.

They Blame Bush for 9/11 while the planning and prep for it was under Clinton's watch. Maybe if Clinton had been a little more concerned with National Security instead of saving a few bucks we wouldn't have had 4 planes crashing into Buildings in 2001.
But maybe it would have happened anyway.

I don't like what Obama stands for.
I ain't crazy about McClain either.

This last little 800 Billion plus fiasco is a typical example of how things get done.

Bush didn't write the Bill. The Senate did.
I blame Bush for not vetoing it.

Bill, my family (Mom, dad, brothers and sisters) are all democratic. I was a rebel so I registered independent but couldn't vote in the primary. Then I registered Libertarian until I had a daughter with Down Syndrome and realized that according to the Libertarian philosophy, society has no responsibility to protect her. Then I went independent again but again couldn't vote in the primary so I decided to register Republican because I hate the media polls and I wanted to be a "contrarian" to baffle pundants who think Republicans think a certain way. I have not voted for a republican presidential candidate since my daughter was born in 1985. Come to think of it, I haven't voted for a democratic candidate either. Ralph Nader doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell but I will vote for him for the very reasons expressed here on this thread. He understands when, how and why our economy was hijacked by unbridled greed unleashed by a congress bought and sold by the greed merchants.

Sam
We don't have to register as a party here. We just register to vote.
I had to check my voters registration card to be sure, LOL.
It has no affiliation on it.
Most of my family has always been Democratic. I have always been Republican.

I have come to the conclusion that I am now independent. I still haven't decided which way to go. Unless someone decide to give one of the other Candidates 50 Million bucks to blitz the nation with ads over the next month none of them have a chance.

But one thing is certain I am NOT voting for any incumbent this election. I don't care which party they belong to.

No better time than to throw out some quotes by Will Rogers:

A fool and his money are soon elected.

About all I can say for the United States Senate is that it opens with a prayer and closes with an investigation.

Alexander Hamilton started the U.S. Treasury with nothing, and that was the closest our country has ever been to being even.

An economist's guess is liable to be as good as anybody else's.

Anything important is never left to the vote of the people. We only get to vote on some man; we never get to vote on what he is to do.

Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for.

Don't gamble;take all your savings and buy some good stock and hold it till it goes up, then sell it. If it don't go up, don't buy it.

Everything is changing. People are taking their comedians seriously and the politicians as a joke.

I bet after seeing us, George Washington would sue us for calling him "father."

I don't know jokes; I just watch the government and report the facts.

If I studied all my life, I couldn't think up half the number of funny things passed in one session of congress.

If you make any money, the government shoves you in the creek once a year with it in your pockets, and all that don't get wet you can keep.

It's easy being a humorist when you've got the whole government working for you.

Make crime pay. Become a lawyer.

Now if there is one thing that we do worse than any other nation, it is try and manage somebody else's affairs.

On account of being a democracy and run by the people, we are the only nation in the world that has to keep a government four years, no matter what it does.

Our constitution protects aliens, drunks and U.S. Senators.

Politics has become so expensive that it takes a lot of money even to be defeated.

The income tax has made liars out of more Americans than golf.

The man with the best job in the country is the vice-president. All he has to do is get up every morning and say, "How is the president?"

The more you observe politics, the more you've got to admit that each party is worse than the other.

The only difference between death and taxes is that death doesn't get worse every time Congress meets.

There is no more independence in politics than there is in jail.

Things in our country run in spite of government, not by aid of it.

This country has come to feel the same when Congress is in session as when the baby gets hold of a hammer.

Does lowering the value of dollar even come up anywhere?

John

Yes, absolutely. It has been going on for several years now. It is all part of this engineered economic meltdown.

...as paranoia sets in.

Thinki what you want. Study history.

Some smart guys have been engineering this meltdown Huh? They must be pretty old by now. Like a couple of hundred years? They are so smart that they can outlive life.
....Paranoia sinks in.

Okay.. so am I the only one who looks at these posts and asks why we're ever happy with one party because it put us less in debt than the other, or that one screwed the pooch less than the other rather than asking: Why can't we cut taxes AND spending at the same time? Why can't we, from this moment on, never spend a dime more than we take in in a given year? After all, if we can't pay for it today, why doesn't anyone assume we can pay for it all PLUS what we're short today, later on? That's the crux of this problem.

The government isn't happy with just wasting the money we give them, they want to waste more than we give them.. and BOTH parties do it and we let them.. hell, we PAY them to do it...

What rational sane person wouldn't want a balanced budget amendment? There are states that have it.. and guess what? It WORKS. Why would we EVER bailout a private company? They exist to make a profit.. not to support the TAX payers. So why would they EVER get our taxes?

BOTH parties grow government.. and BOTH parties waste our money. And they are so good at faking all of you out with this partisan bullshit that they themselves don't even really believe, that we let them keep doing it while we fight over things that have nothing to do with what the government is REALLY going to do. Listen to these discussions.. it's all a head fake. Both parties are corrupt. I don't care if one is 51% of the problem and the other is only 49%. That's a LOT of problem on both sides. And we've been taken hostage by this two party system that is KILLING us from inside.

So, stuck with that, some try to make the best of it. But extremists on both sides won't let that happen either. Both sides demonize the other and then within each side, the various parts demonize themselves.

I think both McCain and Obama are good people. But the parties they lead and hungry, angry monsters that won't let EITHER of them fix anything... both will be forced to satisfy the partisan interests of their party masters and if they don't, that party will through them unprotected to the monsters on the other side to be devoured and replaced by the next drone.

So then the last hope is to find something we all agree on, or to take one issue at a time. But that's not allowed either. Instead, we MUST align with one side or the other and if we can't then we must drown the baby in the bathwater and then look to kill it's parents, friends and relatives as well. It's a vicious angry 2 mob mentality that lets the real bad guys and gals get away with murder and worse.

People.... please start opening your mind. No one is always right or always wrong. Sometimes we can BOTH be right and sometimes we can BOTH be wrong. But arguing over who is MORE right or MORE wrong is the least productive thing we can do. Anyone who "thinks" straight ticket philosophy on anything isn't actually "thinking" at all. And while we get angry at each other the people who should really FEEL our anger mutter along doing more damage.

The entire country can win or lose with either McCain or Obama. If we simply supported doing the right thing with either of them, we'd all be better off. Sometimes we might not get our away, other times we'll get exactly what we want while someone else suffers. That's the reality of life. And the fixes for our ills are so simple. Don't spend more than you have. Don't steal other people's money or things. Don't do the wrong thing. Why is that so hard to figure out? Little kids can usually figure that out.. but not the adults.

Brian

Brian, if there were a third party candidate with values I aligned with more than either of the two major candidates right now I'd consider voting for them. But frankly there's nobody that has come up in this entire election process that I consider a better choice than Barack Obama. Yes, I've heard and read countless interviews with Ron Paul also. He's a wonderful person, probably the most honest politician I've ever seen, and I have a great deal of respect for him, but his policies are completely wacko. A shame, really.

I agree with you on the third party choices... very slim pickings. I voted for Nader the last 2 elections, but not this time. I no longer think he's able to lead. I think the years have just worn him down. (For me he was the only rational option last election... Bush is an idiot and Kerry was the worst candidate that has ever run on either ticket in my lifetime). Both choices we have right now are better than any choices we had in the last 5 elections. At least that's my view of it.

The green party has a complete moron at it's head. Though I am not that in tune with their politics, I was rooting for them to become a viable third party, but this election has pissed that all away. I am not sure why they decided to lose any good will or credibility they'd built with that candidate. Oh well.

My natural tendency to tell government to leave us all alone is usually matched by the Libertarians who want to limit government as much as possible. But they chose a complete sell out Republican to head their ticket thus setting that fine idealogy back decades and selling out all they believe in. As someone who supported the Libertarian party in Indiana all the way back in High School, it's sad to see it so abused by hack leftover politicians.

So that leaves us with McCain and Obama. I think both have assets. If I could disconnect them both from the bloated parties they represent, I could find a lot to like. But both have been "handled" by the handlers nearly to death. I don't think Obama is particular;y open to bi partisan work, not because he doesn't believe in it, but rather he doesn't have the balls to go against his own party yet. He might grow a pair in office though. I think he's smart enough to adapt if he can get away from the old school democrat apron strings. I think McCain on the other hand, is already one of the most (if not THE most) bi-partisan players in the government. But he also has let the handlers get him off message. He's clearly the most liberal Republican nominee in history. In fact, I put him significantly left of Clinton. But he's right on Defense and I happen to think he's been more right in all of this than just about anyone else. I don't believe for one second that Obama, had he been in the Senate, would have voted against the war. It would have been too anti-political expedience for him. He's FAR too smart for that. McCain was right there with Biden to vote for it. But McCain, war hawk that he is, also knew it was being run poorly. And he had a way to take a terrible situation and get us out in the most positive possible way. And that's what has happened. I have no doubt that in terms of the war in Iraq, it's going to end the same no matter who gets elected. But it wouldn't have EVER ended if the surge had not worked. It would have devolved into chaos and Iran would be 100% in control. If the government there can survive (and that's in question ALSO no matter who wins) they'll counter Iran and give us a military ally in the region to support Israel as well as keep peace with our allies in Turkey who have serious issues with their Iraqi border.

Afghanistan is a whole other issue. Obama is definitely right that it's been neglected due to Iraq. But he hasn't offered up a solution there other than to rattle sabres with Pakistan. In truth, neither he nor McCain have a solution there and that's why nothing has been done to this point. It's just too problematic politically and geologically. A surge mentality might be a new approach, but I am not sure it will work. It certainly didn't work for Russia.

McCain's problem, for me, is that he's not as adaptive as Obama. You can't be at 72. I am not afraid of his age, but rather his years in Washington. It's both an asset and a curse.

Both of them have very serious flaws as well. Obama has deep roots in this Fannie Mae fiasco. His support of ACORN is very troubling. His connections to organized crime (Rezco) and his willingness to be friendly with terrorists and extremists (Wright and the Chicago Weather Underground crew) is likely just part of his political expedience to move up in the political ranks, but it also suggests he doesn't have core principles that limit what he's willing to do to keep his agenda. That's a scary thing. On the other hand McCain sells out his core principles when the heat is on, as he did with immigration. Thankfully in that case, he changed to the right side. That whole idea was a fiasco. He's also moved falsely to the right in general to appease his party. It's a different style of political expediency, but in the end, it's the same.

Ron Paul doesn't believe strongly enough in his ideas to run as an independent. He wants to keep sucking on the nipple of his party. I guess he's also just being politically expedient. I mean, it's nearly impossible to get elected even to local office without being attached to the two-headed monster. The Green and Libertarian parties don't respect their own views enough to run viable candidates. And there's not any money for someone not in one of the major parties so unless you're Bloomberg and can use your billions to try and change the laws to let you stay in office or Ross Perot who can afford to run on his own dime, you're stuck with a party. Isn't that sad?

Perhaps, in the end, the notion of "political parties" is the actual root of the evil? If so, perhaps we can change it. Or perhaps we could start a brand new party that does it the right way. That actually includes everyone and welcomes dissent and picks the greater good over the special interests. Perhaps we could call it the Just Plain Folks Party.

Brian