It's true, there is criticism on both sides, but examining the brevity of the mistakes is key...LMAO at the backslappers new strategy to point out the supposed lesser of 2 evils,...or the McCain made 7 whole mistakes, while Obama only made 2...(I'll check)... I can't trust Obama when he fudges data, and when this happens: ...Both candidates accept donations from individual employees of oil companies. In fact, when Obama claimed in an ad last March that "I don't take money from oil companies," we criticized him for being a little too slick. The CRP puts Obama's total from oil and gas donors at $394,465
Sounds like you're much too willing to give McCain the benefit of the doubt and not Obama. That's fine since I'm guessing that you agree with McCain on more issues than Obama. Just quit acting like you're not biased one way or the other and stop with this faux indignation at Obama like you're some sort of undecided voter who will let this relatively minor embellishment sway your choice for president. We're all biased towards the candidate of our choosing. That said, I would be interested in seeing your "brevity" rankings for the nine mistakes cited.
Well...$83,000 for a family of four will see taxes go higher. A lot of families will see taxes get higher...$83,000 for four is not a lot. My wife and myself are struggling in this economy...I see no sense to have my taxes higher, and I am willing to swing for the fences to make the point that I'd rather not pay more taxes in a sluggish economy that will be made worse with this taxation strategy...
A married couple would have to be making $250K+ to see their taxes go up with Obama. I think $250K is a lot for anyone.
Guess what? You don't care if I offer up my opinion (and since I don't work for the campaign [officially] that is all I can give) on why I think the ad is accurate on its face. Just like I don't care if you give your opinion on why McCain's ads are more accurate. You have made up your mind, I have made up mine. So please, do us all a favor and stop acting like you give a crap what we think. I think your head would explode if you found out how the direction I want this country to move in. Obama ain't nearly liberal enough for me.
If I knew Obama would be trustyworthy, a man of decision such as Truman...Trust me, the backslappers would have me in camp...But for all McCain has done wrong,...I'm seeing examples of "red flags" to thrawt that possibility...Yall know I'm willing to accept social programs that help people, but the prerequisite is a command leader with strong decision making ability, and effective commander-in-chief ability... Obama has done some things that have enamored me...He was willing to be somewhat fair to national laws on gun rights...He went against Clark...He voted for compromise on the FISA issue...He is strong for the support of Israel, and has stated so on jis website... Listen, my appeal for Obama is more than the backslappers realize. He has charisma and appeal 10 fold over Gore and Kerry... But I'm going to address the red flags...The worst defense the backslappers can do is wel,..er look at McCain...That's the thing,...I'm looking at Obama, and the backslappers want me to turn my back to that??? I don't get it...I appreciate your reasonable comments though RM95. Glad you are back.
Charles Keating gave his personal friend John McCain $112,000 between 1982 and 1987. McCain's wife and father invested over $350,000 in Charles Keating owned investments in 1986. McCain has a Swiss bank account with money he was paid by Charles Keating to keep quiet during the Keating Five scandal.
It's on the way....Keep in mind, the proof will have criticism of McCain in it...But I ask you to initially overlook that distraction and realize the fact remains that families of four (2 working parents - as is most cases)combined income of a moderate $83,000,...will have taxes raised... A LOT of families will be penalized...
Did you eat your meat?... The resolution Obama voted for would not have increased taxes on any single taxpayer making less than $41,500 per year in total income, or any couple making less than $83,000. The $32,000 figure is approximately the taxable income of a single person making $41,500 per year, after all deductions and exclusions. Bottom line: Increased taxes for families earning as little as $83,000 Families that will be affected: LOTS of them.... http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/the_32000_question.html
Dear Backslobber, From the link: Under Obama's proposal "All those earning less than $169,480 would see tax cuts. In fact, that hypothetical taxpayer with the $32,000 in taxable income would get a $502 tax cut under Obama's plan. McCain's plan, by contrast, would leave that person's taxes unchanged." So again, your $83k person gets a cut under Obama. The facts have been posted, posted, and reposted. What were you saying about meat?
Are you not reading your own referenced link? "...we do find that the McCain campaign is simply wrong to say Obama supported raising taxes on those making "as little as $32,000 a year." In fact, according to the Tax Policy Center, only the top 10 percent of earners would see increases under Obama's plan, with most of the burden falling on the top 1 percent." I'll quote their bottomline for you: "We reiterate: McCain's $32,000 figure is phony."
