Serious question for Dems...

[Deuce]

In all seriousness boys please educate me. What good will taxing Exxon Mobil and the coal industry do for America? How will Obama waive his magic wand over the Middle East and make it pretty with roses and pixie dust?

Here are my answers....

1. He will tax the shit out of them, in return they will tax the fukk out of consumers driving the price of pertol at the pump sky high again as well as increase the power industry to record highs. They don't give a fukk if they are taxed more, they will simply pass it to the consumer.

2. He won't. He will pull troops from Iraq turning it into a terrorist bed. Iraqi's have gone on the record saying that if Iraq is on its own, it will cripple and be worse than it was before. We need an exit strategy. Enough of the name calling. The politicians with Ivy-League educations should be able to brain storm a plan to execute and hand over democracy to the Iraqi's.

Tell me how I am wrong. I want input.

[Dbldown11]

Obama is not just going to pull out of Iraq, there will obviously be a strategy. But at some point they need to start using their own military. And the main point Obama makes with Iraq is that we never should have been there. Which is COMPLETELY true and if you deny that you're a fool. Because they had nothing to do with 9/11 and that has been proven, and they had no weapons of mass destruction which has also been proven.

And he is not going to tax the shit out of anyone....He is just not going to reduce their taxes which McCain for some unknown reason wants to do. And also since he plans to move towards energy independence it wont be a huge deal anyways, once oil companys start realizing that the largest consumers of oil in the world are not going to need it 15 years from now or so

[Deuce]

Obama is not just going to pull out of Iraq, there will obviously be a strategy. But at some point they need to start using their own military. And the main point Obama makes with Iraq is that we never should have been there. Which is COMPLETELY true and if you deny that you're a fool. Because they had nothing to do with 9/11 and that has been proven, and they had no weapons of mass destruction which has also been proven.

And he is not going to tax the shit out of anyone....He is just not going to reduce their taxes which McCain for some unknown reason wants to do. And also since he plans to move towards energy independence it wont be a huge deal anyways, once oil companys start realizing that the largest consumers of oil in the world are not going to need it 15 years from now or so

With the energy independence, he has gone on the record stating he wants nothing to do with nuclear/coal. What will he do to make this happen? Oil independence would be fantastic if we have started drilling already off shore.

[daggerkobe]

1. How much was gas under Clinton? Exactly. I love how neo-nitwits blame China for gas prices tripling yet prices keep dropping (close to 50%) and OPEC keeps shutting down production. It ain't China.... it's called specpulators and market manipulation by the Bush administration.

2. Didn't someone predict a quagmire if we invaded Iraq?????? Oh that's right, Bush's own fvcking father!!!!!!!! Gotta love "mavericks" that ruin two countries because he has no self control or the smarts to weight the consequences. Gotta love how Bush estimated the cost of this war at $100B yet the real cost will be $2.7 Trillion!!!!!! And the fact that there were no al Qaeda in Iraq prior to the invasion.

[Dbldown11]

Correction you are COMPLETELY WRONG. Obama has never said that he wants "nothing to do with coal". He has simply stated that he is in favor of clean coal technology.

[Dbldown11]

not only that....but have you ever heard up things such as solar and wind power?

[Sinister Cat]

1. He is planning a windfall profits tax on oil companies. But taxes on profits generally can't be passed on to consumers. If they are maximizing profits now, they will if there is a new tax on their profits, by charging the same as they were before.

Regarding coal, as far as I understand the big fear here is his rhetoric about cap & trade for CO2 emissions. Note that his plan is to establish this by 2050 (never?)

Having said all this, not really sure what Obama's plans are for energy, because he seems to be against every source of it, including nuclear, which one would think is something worth looking at if there's concern about CO2 emissions.

2. Not clear who has a better plan for Iraq, or even what their plans really are. I think Obama seems reasonable and won't just "cut & run" as some suggest. McCain likes to say "win" a lot with respect to Iraq, but note that General Petraeus doesn't use this language, and yet McCain seems to have so much respect for the guy.


Bottom line is that there's very little actual difference between these candidates. They try to make themselves seem different from each other with the bullshit they say. But correct vote is Dem because of lesser risk that they will continue to follow neocon foreign policy and pander to religious right on domestic issues.

[Dbldown11]

Deuce it is becoming painfully clear to me that you pay attention to every little thing that conservatives tell you on the television or in newspapers, without any real knowledge of the facts

[daggerkobe]

Neo-nitwits think drilling ANWR is the answer to every energy crisis.

Even though they have been wanting to drill there since the 1960s!!!!!!! They are about greed not energy independence! Plus it would take over 10 years to see a drop of oil!!!!!!!!!!!

We have alternative energy sources already in place. Like fuel-cell vehicles. Honda already introduced a hydrogen powered vehicle that gets close to 300 miles on a single tank and emits nothing more than water vapors!!!! What we need to do is pump more money into this to make them affordable and build hydrogen refuel stations not waste money drilling ANWR.

[jjgold]

we can never pull out of Iraq or they will be overun in one week by the insurgents

Also he is going to tax middle class

[Sinister Cat]

its nothing more than water vapors!!!! What we need to do is pump more money into this to make them affordable and build hydrogen refuel stations not waste money drilling ANWR.

and where do you get the hydrogen for these refuel stations?

[McBa1n]

1a - I'm not all that worried about energy. We're addicted to oil - we need oil. Our country will run on oil for as long as we all live. Oil is a bigger deal than people make out of it - to be honest, it's all posturing to me. It makes for good rhetoric - on both sides of this election - but both are wrong. Both should've just admit that there's not a whole lot you can do to slow down our need for oil. Drilling won't help, saying we'll develop alternatives won't either. We should look at Brazil's sugar cane ethanol program - as sugar cane is much cheaper and easier to produce, however, our corn lobby has basically made it impossible for that to happen right now - as all of Washington is owned by the subsidy money they feed the corn lobby.

1b - While coal plants are highly sensative topics for localities (heck, even places in Texas won't build them, although they are needed). From my understanding, "clean coal" is all bullshit. There's nothing clean about coal - and while you can cut down on emissions through some techniques they are advancing - that byproduct has to go somewhere. It's dirty - and it's something I don't think we can live without. I think all politicians play lip service to this issue. They've all been full of shit and I don't expect much to change - although who knows - with the right incentives, we could generate MORE renewable energy, although it's impossible to fulfill the nations needs with it. I really am not concerned, all politicians are full of crap on the issue - the issue handles itself and always has.

1c. To be honest, do you really think the Dems are going to go after big oil and our current energy superpowers? Cmon. The Dems are just as bought and paid for as the Republicans. They may posture one way - but as it always happens, $ talks and owns the day. I hope I'm wrong - but I don't think anyone is dumb enough to revolutionize our entire economy by being so naive on the reality of the situation - that's why no president that has wanted to get us off Middle East oil or off of coal has been able to - and it likely won't happen anytime soon.

2 - Iraq is a terrorist bed right now. Al Queda is as strong now as ever. Occupying muslim lands=more terrorists. 2 reasons to stay there - 1- the Powell doctrine in that we have to help Iraq rebuild. 2 - oil. No matter what we do in Iraq, we lose. We will lose our men/women over there regardless of our involvement. Muslims don't want us there - and I can't say I blame them. As long as we're there in any capacity, we are putting our nation and its citizens at higher risk. There is NO way we're leaving Iraq - you are right, it will breed MORE terrorist activity. However, as long as we are in the middle east - as long as the US is not a secular Muslim nation - we will have enemies there... I just hope things go well and my friends there now get home safe. I think Obama's position is the most conservative of them all - and as you can notice, our current administration is taking strides based on Obama's intended policy.

Anyhow - I don't think things are going to be as bad as the Right is having you believe. To be honest, many of the programs are more 'fiscally conservative' that Obama wants to do than McCain. The neocon is extremely radical and favors only the wealthy. A true conservative approach is that a strong middle class means less volatility to the system. A strong middle class means more investment money, more small business, more job growth and a stronger wall street. It's fundamental economics of the pre neocon and very conservative. The idea is to get more money into the system moving around, creating more tax revenue - it balances the budget and creates opportunities to lower tax rates responsibly.

As for the 'socialist' argument. Anyone crying socialist really really really really needs to rethink things.

[Deuce]

Correction you are COMPLETELY WRONG. Obama has never said that he wants "nothing to do with coal". He has simply stated that he is in favor of clean coal technology.

He said himself, "I will bankrupt the coal industry."

What do you interpret of that?

[EBSB52]

In all seriousness boys please educate me. What good will taxing Exxon Mobil and the coal industry do for America? How will Obama waive his magic wand over the Middle East and make it pretty with roses and pixie dust?

Here are my answers....

1. He will tax the shit out of them, in return they will tax the fukk out of consumers driving the price of pertol at the pump sky high again as well as increase the power industry to record highs. They don't give a fukk if they are taxed more, they will simply pass it to the consumer.

2. He won't. He will pull troops from Iraq turning it into a terrorist bed. Iraqi's have gone on the record saying that if Iraq is on its own, it will cripple and be worse than it was before. We need an exit strategy. Enough of the name calling. The politicians with Ivy-League educations should be able to brain storm a plan to execute and hand over democracy to the Iraqi's.

Tell me how I am wrong. I want input.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What good will taxing Exxon Mobil and the coal industry do for America?


It will make them pay for their prosperity, just as anyone does. BTW, anyone making that money is taxed, nit just oil companies. Money is taxed, not people.


>>>>>>>>>>>>1. He will tax the shit out of them, in return they will tax the fukk out of consumers driving the price of pertol at the pump sky high again as well as increase the power industry to record highs.


So when Bush gave them tax breaks and we saw record high prices, around 4.25, then how does your theory make sense? It doesn't, they were given breaks as they raised gas to record highs. Whereas under Clinton, who taxed corporations at a higher rate, gas prices were NEVER an issue. Once again, your claim is debunked. I see people trying to make common sense correlations all the time, most of the time they are way off.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>They don't give a fukk if they are taxed more, they will simply pass it to the consumer.


And then their competitors will undercut them, driving them lower in price or out of the market. Ever notice how Chevron stations are 10 to 20 cents higher? Ever notice how people are more often at Cirlce K and QT? Yea, corporations don't act with silly vengeance as you impart, they are a business and do what they can to maximize their profits.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>He won't. He will pull troops from Iraq turning it into a terrorist bed.


If we pulled out in 20 years it would be the same, the place is a hell-hole and it was when we first illegally invaded them - always will be. How long can we sustain 10b per month? Of course you will avoid that one.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Iraqi's have gone on the record saying that if Iraq is on its own, it will cripple and be worse than it was before

And Iraqi's have said they want us out, it goes both ways. Basically I couldn't give a shit less about them, I want to take care of us.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>We need an exit strategy.


I skydive. I was trained, read, learned, watched, practiced and then I jumped. Some people on tehir 1st jumps or their 1000th die. These people have preparation and training, they just have to go for it and try to fix what goes wrong along the way. What I am saying is that we can talk about it (exiting Iraq) till our balls fall off and never do it for fear that we will fail or Iraq will crumble and that failure to leave is yet another failure. If anyone thinks that place will be anything but hell after we leave, whether now or 20 years from now, they're a fool. We are in crisis, we can't help others until we get well.

[Igetp2s]

The height of idiocy is repeating a mistake again and expecting a different outcome. Windfall profits taxes on oil companies has already been tried in the 70's. Go check on history to see how well that turned out.

There's a reason Obama is seen as the next Jimmy Carter.

[EBSB52]

The height of idiocy is repeating a mistake again and expecting a different outcome. Windfall profits taxes on oil companies has already been tried in the 70's. Go check on history to see how well that turned out.

There's a reason Obama is seen as the next Jimmy Carter.

Obama might be seen as Jimmy Carter by the 12% of the geniuses that still support Bush. As for the idiocy of repreating mistakes, the election of the Bush's, all 3 terms, is a repeat of the mistake of the election/reelection of Reagan. Here is why:

http://www.lafn.org/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html

What was that about Carter?