unless of course you're operating 'under the table',and no legitimate business does that

additionally, declaring a home office deduction on your taxes is also one of the 'flags' to invite an IRS audit. So even if your records are squeaky clean, you still need a tax specialist, a CPA or attorney, to represent you, not to mention the added stress.

basic forms of ownership: sole proprietor, partnership, corporation. Under corporation is becoming an LLC, which protects the owner's personal assets from law suits against the business. It does not change the bottom line of expenses incurred to operate the business, even if the 'owner' is the only 'employee'. And the business & owner both pay tax, a double hit on the same money, + the double hit on social secuity, paying both the employer's AND employee's share. To know which method is best for any small business, you need to consult an accountant who specializes in small business accounting, and of course that is not free, either.

Now do you see why taxing the Main Street, Elm Street small business is a bad idea? It is truly the Nightmare on Elm Street.

Would it not be possible to incorporate and become an "employee" of your business. That way, your salary is considered part of the wages that the business pays out to all of the employees. And the business and the "owner" then pay taxes separately? I have to admit I'm a little unsure of how that would work out but I do remember talking to the owner of a local tavern about it a few months ago.

it's not 'appear' to make less money..it IS less money. A business has to pay their vendors for supplies, buy equipment, they have to market their product or service, they must pay their employees or subcontractors, they may need to utilize the services of an accountant to keep their books, they need to have electrical & water supply... All that costs money which is not available for the owner to spend on personal purchases.

I understand Gross net income, Individuals are taxed on their gross income while being allowed a few deductions. Businesses are taxed on their net income and are allowed to take many many deductions. Therefore, through careful manipulation of the tax code, businesses can pay significantly less in taxes due to their ability to make it appear like they are not making much money. Advertising, mileage, vehicle depreciation, capital investments, just to name a few.

we can't afford Obama because with his tax 'plan' many small businesses-and that means jobs- will be taxed out of existence. Do you not understand the difference between gross and net income?

whatdidyousay:
Yes, much of the sell off you see on Wall Street is because of the likelihood of Obama winning. Keep in mind the stock market is a LEADING INDICATOR of things to come. The reasons you hear given by the media for the DAY gains or losses in the market is normally just hot air. The market traded today is an indicator of what investors think will happen in about 6 months. After McCain BOTCHED the bailout, and all but lost the presidency, you now see wall street selling off HUGE. Keep in mind the bailout was suppose to stabilize markets! Well, that was what the clowns on Capital hill said anyway. The smart $$$ was of course getting out, or short selling when the bailout passed.
.
Capital gains is kind of a misunderstood tax. If your a trader like I am, it has ZERO effect; as for you to claim capital gains you have to hold a stock for OVER one year. If you do that, and sell with profit, the capital gains is then just a 15% tax on your profits. If you sell before holding a year, and profit, you are then taxed at whatever tax income bracket you fall into (normally in the 25-35% range). Basically all a tax in capital gains does is DIS-courage people from investing long term. If you raise the capital gains above 25%, what many will do is just unload stock before a year of holding to avoid the tax, and be taxed at the lower personal income tax level.
.
The next funny crisis your going to see is the huge decline in tax revenues to the treasury as hardly anyone will be claiming capital gains this year with the market getting smashed. It will be funny to see government squirm when revenues start to fall. Perhaps then they will actually CUT SPENDING! No doubt they will just print more $$$, or increase taxes, which will just exasperate the problem even more.

Janie: "We can not afford Obama"

HUH?

Of all the arguments against Obama - assumingly favoring McCain - "We can not afford Obama"

Look at where we are now.

clouds555 - I watch The Daily Show with Jon Stewart religiously, I can not miss it ever. Honestly, he's pretty good at finding out lies, half truths, and gaffes that both of the candidates have made. I think in 2012 the Independent ticket should be Cobert/Stewart or possibly Stewart/Colbert, either would be fine with me.

The party line has always been "we will lower taxes" sure that will get you votes, but the reality is he has no idea how to do it, he has no support in doing it, and once his ideas get to the congress and the senate, they are destroyed because they have no real validity. They just simply won't work. Now the other side is this Mc Cain has worked in Washington for 26+ years, has a proven track record of challenging those who make zero sence, and will get reform done through both of the parties. Working together and achieving the goals set forward so we may see the burden placed in the proper places so as we may not get into this situation again. People I believe in change, however Obama will make things worse not better. More business will fail, it will cost more to do business, that will increase prices and cost jobs. There is no other outcome. It is just the way it is.

My God people. Okay I run 2 small buisnesses in this town and have freinds that run many more. I ask you a simple question and esspecialy to this "cloud person" How many people do you know in the last 3 weeks lost their job or experienced a layoff? Simple question. Be it a child or a person maybe not in a skilled trade etc. The reason, rising cost of doing business. Simple. If Obama raisess taxes on small business and/or our cost of doing business who is going to pay for it. The employee, the consumer, and we the people. It has to come from some place. We in turn lower our "cost" to compensate. It is that simple, this fantasy that "95 percent will have a tax break" is just that. He states that he wants change, but yet he sticks with the party line.

No offense clouds555, but your comments are boardering on stupidity. Apparently you believe only democrat's should vote. You believe they should vote for who ever is selected regardless of qualifications. It makes no difference to you since you believe(?) ,which to me, smackes of one party,one rule, you know like those democratic countries, Russia, China, NKorea,and of course, Iran, etc., etc.. Anybody who is not a democrat is a racist. If the party decides to run someone or something, it's ok with you after all what could be wrong with him/her/it? You don't believe in choice, you believe in party line. Choice and opinion are the American way. Based on your limited comments, there is only one way, your way. So come on down off your cloud and join the rest of the real world. Stop trying to cloud the system with racist remarks, or is that your intention, to accuse everybody who doesn't think or see it your way that they are racist and not true democrats and that republicans and independents be damned because they don't adhere to the one and only demorcatic party line? Wonder what Obama would think of your comments. Would he approve?

Clouds: How about if I counter your ridiculous "Democrats who aren't voting for Obama are racist" with "Men who aren't voting for the McCain/Palin ticket are sexist" or "Women who aren't voting for the McCain/Palin ticket have been told by their "old man" who they can vote for--and it ain't no hockey mom!"
.
All 3 statements are equally absurd.
.
I don't "care" who you vote for--as long as you vote!

Those 5% of corporations and people that Obama wants to tax more are the corporations and people the other 95% of us work for and depend on to bring home a paycheck. If he wants to tax those 5% more than what's that going to do to them? Higher costs of operating and probably meaning they will have to cut jobs and scale back. It sounds good to tax the rich but, in reality it's going to hurt more than help. Just give businesses an environment to succeed and grow and the market will correct its self. These guys want Government more involved which is a horrible idea.

gstrube...I have a simple hypothetical question for you. If the company you own was just told your business taxes were going to increase what would you do? Lay off people? Cut your paycheck? Leave the lights off? Raise the price of your product you sell to consumers? Or...?

RAF: Your dead on with the tax comments. First off the unemployment rate is around 6%. If you are unemployed you are not paying federal income taxes, yet you will be getting a tax break according to Obama. In other words...WELFARE. Also many lower income workers who are employed still don't pay taxes (keep in mind FICA is not considered a tax; as you are suppose to get that $$$ back when you retire..Even though we all know thats a sham too). So those who pay ZERO in federal taxes will also get a tax break. Well, if you don't pay taxes, and get a break, that again is government welfare. That's fine if you support that, just call it what it is. Your taxing higher income people to provide welfare for those who do not work or do not pay taxes if you really are going to provide a tax cut for 95% of the people.
.
Massive corporate taxes, and taxes on the "rich" have been tried many times in the past, and have all failed. Before Reagan took office, the top marginal tax rate was 75%. Yeah; that worked out great. The "Robinhood" tax system always sounds good when your in the middle/lower class, but in reality it always fails and the economy gets punished. While often the middle class NEVER does get that tax break. Remember Clinton promised a middle class tax cut when he ran in 92, and once in office...Well.....SORRY, thanks for your vote, hahahha.

HAHAHHA..This poll now has 42% undecided and over 13,000 votes cast...Someone has WAY to much time on their hands, or is using a bot program. I hope they are using a bot program, or else Janesville really has some crazies!
.
WOW these debates are BORING. There was no baseball game on tonight to get away from it. I just have never seen answers so scripted by both sides in the many years that I have watched debates. The questions also did not really let you see their personality, or think on their own. Just the same auto pilot answers you see on the campaign stump. I think this debate was a total draw. Nothing of any real substance by either one. I think Obama scored good on health care, and McCain scored well on nation security/defense issues. The economy I am totally convinced BOTH these guys are clueless. Did I hear McCain wants a plan to help lower mortgage payments for those struggling to pay? WOW, what a bastardization of conservative principals. Guess we should all have bought million $$ houses years ago, as the government will now come to our rescue at the tax payers (the ones who WERE responsible) expense!

Obama lied again tonight on his tax plan for America. He continues to state that 95% of Americans will receive a tax cut. If we did assume that 95% of Americans worked, they would still not get a tax cut. Why? Simple, the 2 lowest quintiles of federal tax payers are in the negative as far as federal income tax---meaning after filling out tax return forms and receiving (if eligible) earned income and child care credits get back more than they paid in. There is NO WAY to lower the tax burden below a zero rate! So the truth is, the lowest two quintiles will not receive a tax break---there is nothing to give a break on. Yet Obama continues with the 95% statement and the media never question it.

Obama says the cut off for income tax is $200,000. What he does NOT say is whether that is gross or net. If you are a small business, $200,000 is not un unrealistic number for gross sales, or if you prefer, gross income. Out of that $200,000, you must pay your suppliers, rent or lease,electric, water & sewer, equipment, business insurance, bank fees, book-keeping, a variety of taxes- paid quarterly, phone, web-hosting or phone book ads, etc. Then add all the extras if you have even one employee. And before you know it, that $200,000. is now way, way under $100,000. These are not big, fancy "Wall Street" businesses--these are locally owned businesses, like small restaurants, mechanics, electricians, plumbers, hair salons, handy-man repairs, painters...

We can not afford Obama

When did respect leave? How many of you could put up with the abuse and insults that have been heaped upon both candidates. Would you want your life, your reputation out there to be torn apart. Lets start making comments that are constructive for a change. Otherwise, nothing is accomplished. It just fuels the anger and right now we need straight thinking to help us make an INFORMED CHOICE.

Come on people, who would even seriously consider voting McCain/Palin-McCain NOW is claiming he is going to change Washington....hmmm is that the same Washington that he has been a part of for more than 20 years??? He is now only using the phrase "change" because of how successful those words have been for Obama! People have heard Obama, they have heard McCain-the American people are finally starting to get it 28 days before the election. McCain would be another 4 miserable years with the same policies that we as Americans have had to endure for the last 8 years. And the real reason McCain chose Palin as a VP candidate-it was to try and scoop up the 18 million votes that Hillary got during the primary, that is the only way he will win this election. Do you think if Hillary were running against McCain instead of Obama, McCain would have chosen a black man as his VP??? If you are honest with yourself you know that answer would be a flat out NO!! Has anyone really sat down and listened to Palin anyway? She has yet to directly answer any question that has been asked of her in the interviews I have watched, she's good at dancing around the issues though. She would be one heartbeat away from being president-the most powerful person in the world!!! The republicans are worried every time she opens her mouth now as to how much damage control they are going to have to do when she gets done talking. These are serious times and we need serious people. McCain/Palin are not it. I hope that people get out and vote more than anything else. What would be even better is that the voters would be informed and have educated themselves on the issues and the candidates. I am proud to say I am voting for Obama 4 weeks from today, after listening to him all of these months I believe he would be the best choice to help get this great country of ours back on track. After reading some of these comments left by others, it proves to me how small minded some people are-worried about a candidates middle name? As if he had any control over what his parents named him as an infant. Those people who think like that are in need of some serious help in race relations. In 2008, I would like to believe that the election will be decided by issues and solving problems and not by something that none of us have control over-that being race, gender and the given name on our birth certificates.

Please do not come on here and show your stupidity by calling people racist. I think you are a racist trying to change your spots, ashamed of who you are. Well you should be! The important issue is vote. Pleaase vote, and use your own mind to decide what is important to you. Then vote acordingly to whatever party you find the best fit for you. Ignore the racist comments of some idiot. Be true to your own ideals and morals.

Now you are goping to call people racist because they can see through your BS, and have the power of reason, which you obviously do not. Then you are going to follow that up with being a Democratic lemming, and doing what your "party" has done and do your thinking for you. You see that is the problem not the solution. If you have the power to voice an opinion, then do so with thought and tact, not mudslinging and just plain stupidity. Think the issues through, what do you think will happen if all these new goverment programs take over for medical, social security, unemployment etc. well I can sure use my mind to say the money has to come from somewhere and I would assume that that means more taxes. Buy a paper from Chicago, and see how alot of Illinois citizens think about a man that has not done anything for his elected state. He has barely been in office and has done nothing. Their own govenor is about to go to jail for pete sake.

Who is this clouds55 person. First off i believe you ARE a racist. Second off Who are you to call Janesville a racist town, and why?
Listen, if you can not see that Obama does not have the leadership ability to do the job of President and Comander in chief, then you are also as ignorant as your comments. Both candidates have good qualities depending on what YOU feel is important to YOU. This is why we elect officials not by race or religion nor economic status, but election. Yes you have a voice but mudslinging is why your Hillary lost. That and the lies she tells. LOL McCain is my guy because I believe in what he says and his record, PLUS I like Palin and what she has acomplished. Obama, well he is the future that is for sure, but he lacks experience and certainly can not lead our military. Having served in the Marine Corps for 4 years I would run if Obama was our comander. He just lacks the ability to run a military.

whythink, I totally agree! What's the worse that can happen? I think things can and will change for the better with a new president of a different whether liberal or another affiliation.

whybesad

1. Why is being a liberal, or the most liberal, a bad thing?
2. Dennis Kucinech (sp) is the most liberal senator I know.
3. Again, why is being a liberal, or the most liberal, a bad thing?

Look where the conservatives have taken us.

McCain's new diversion tactic continues to backfire.

'WASHINGTON (AP) -- Barack Obama has his William Ayers connection. Now John McCain may have an Iran-Contra connection. In the 1980s, McCain served on the advisory board to the U.S. chapter of an international group linked to ultra-right-wing death squads in Central America.'

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/M...

cloud555 : Maybe you should have said--Democrat's who don't vote for Obama are racist. Then there would have been no confustion. So spin away but that is not what you said in your orginal statement.

Obama is a LIBERAL not a DEMOCRAT McCain is more of a Democrat than Obama. Obama is the MOST LIBERAL senator in the Senate.

There's only one thing that annoys me more than people who will be voting for John McCain, and that is people who are undecided. Come on people, what are you waiting for? These candidates have been campaigning for the past two years. Get your heads out of your arses.

Just in case my comment below is pulled, I didn't want the meat of my message to be lost.
.
clouds: Thank you for calling me a racist. You have no idea what ethnicity I am. You were ASSuming me to be white, but for all you know I could not be. I voted for Clinton in the primary because I did NOT like the other formiddable Democratic candidate. I vote for the person and their views. Whether they are an elephant or a donkey really holds little weight while making my political decisions.
.
I have never, nor will I ever, fill in the bubble on the ballot "straight party." I voted for Paul Ryan but yet a democratic presidential candidate. Hmmm....

clouds: Thank you for calling me a racist. You have no idea what ethnicity I am. You were ASSuming me to be white, but for all you know I could not be. I voted for Clinton in the primary because I did NOT like the other formiddable Democratic candidate. I vote for the person and their views. Whether they are an elephant or a donkey really holds little weight while making my political decisions.
.
I have never, nor will I ever, fill in the bubble on the ballot "straight party." I voted for Paul Ryan but yet a democratic presidential candidate. Hmmm....
.
BTW--I can't be racist. I have a color television.

clouds555: actually, I know people of several skin tones, religious persuasions-which includes 'none', as well as all across the political spectrum. Fortunately for the country, we don't pull a party lever when we vote. You would be wise to practice the same.

Shaun Hannity announced on Friday that his "Hannity's America" show on Sunday would be about Obama's extremist friends.

This is how desperate McCain is... He is having Hannity lead the charge - NOBODY is going to convince me that Hannity and Palin decided to focus on this issue on the same day was an accident.

Hannity is just a puppet for McCain, a man he said he wouldn't support not too long ago.

YUCK!

OMG I hope it ain't true....very very scary

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08iomNFrz...

Has anyone else seen this, is it really about Obama??? Scary!!!!

Let's face it, Barack Obama's middle name is Hussein, so he must be a Muslim. He voted against a ban on abortions, so he must hate babies. He's black, so he's obviously affiliated in some way with extremist groups like the Black Panthers. He attended a Madrasa, Fox News didn't visit the school to check out to see what it was all about, so it's obvious Sen. Obama has extremist hate views toward our country.
*
Hate-mongering will not work on those who can think for themselves. By the logic listed above, I will conclude that Todd Palin hates America because he was affiliated with a group trying to secede from the Union. By the logic listed above, because you have in your name something similar to that of an evil dictator, you're automatically evil.
*
Are some of you really so feeble-minded to believe this stuff? C'mon, people, think about what you're saying. Stupidity is no excuse for hatred and fear.

there's another presidential candidate on the ballot in Wisconsin that would not have given $700B of our tax money to corporate bankers. www.baldwin08.com

rsjeff01 - Show us all the story or press release that says Barack's middle name is "off limits". Everyone knows why you use Barack's middle name, but not McCain's (Sidney, by the way). Fortunately, for the rest of the free thinking country, your attempts at character assasination just makes the McCain campaign look even more desparate.

A Republican complaining about losing freedom is laughable. Where have you been the last 7 years? Thanks to Bush and Chainey, we have less freedom than ever. There is no indication that McCain would reverse that. He will be just more of the same.

To cloud555: your statement was; anyone who doesn't vote for OBAMA is a racist!you can say it r-a-c-i-s-t. no democrat would vote for a republican. you were always a republican and like most things just didn't know it.

:You just might want to re-read your statement. The first sentence seems to imply that if you don't vote for obama your a racist! No where does it say anything about democrat. The only connection is if your a democrat you won't vote republican. You brought it up now defend your statement which seems to indicate that if you don't vote for obama your a racist----clarify and your other implication is that republicans are racist. Come on Cloud555, wake up.

clouds555: you are still calling people who do not vote for Obama racist. It is very possible that the democrats who choose to vote for McCain have considered the full range of issues, and have determined that O is not the one. After all, there were still 18 million democrats who voted Hillary. Are you suggesting that if Hillary had gotten the nomination, then those who didn't vote for her are sexist? Talk about a (weak) single issue opinion! Race or gender has nothing to do with this! That is an archaic position-might have passed a century or two ago, but for the majority of Americans, not today.

jguernsey
You missed the point.
The point is the left wing media, the Obama campaign, to some degree the McCain campaign have in essence censored America by claiming the use of Baracks full name to be "off limits". For example, yesterday at a Palin rally in Fort Myers Florida a Repubican Sheriff, Mike Scott said, "Barack Hussein Obama" in his speech, and not 20 minutes later the McCain/Palin campaign, and the Obama campaign put out press releases against the use of Baracks middle name. Why? What is everyone afraid of? John McCain to most conservatives is not the ideal guy for the job either, but we can either put him in the White House and keep some of our freedoms or we can put Obama in and have them all chipped away. This is how it starts. Our freedoms get chipped away little by litte until one day (4 years from now) they are gone.
I know Barack has not been linked to any foreign terrorists (yet)of course, and by using his middle name does not make him Muslim, and not all Muslims are terrorists.........we get it.
The point is that the Obama campaign does not want all of us to connect the dots to his relationship with Bill Ayers. This is a guy he has called "a friend". A guy that by all accounts is an unrepentant domestict terrorist. A domestic terrorist who may soon have a free pass to the White House. Is this where we are at now in our society? Presidents paling around with unrepentant domestic terroists? What kind of message does this send to Iran, Venezuela, Russia, North Korea, Syria, Al Qaeda & Hamas?
Don't get me wrong the economy is a very important issue, but we have to keep our freedoms secure first so we can enjoy our free market capitalist society in the future. In spite of what the left wing media and Michelle Obama would like you to believe, America is a great place to live, even today. I am all for trying to make it better, but Obama is not the answer.

McCain's economic advisor, Phil Gramm, certainly isn't moderate. And with McCain admitting that he doesn't know much about economics, more of the same is not the answer.

no, sorry, that would be an overcorrection, & with the economic road as slippery as it is currently, a hard left swerve would cause us to skid off the roadway altogether & crash. Moderation is the way.

Janie7 - Actually, I think that 4 or 8 years of a "hard swing to the left" should just about undo the hard swing to the right we've had for the past 8 years.

oppps wrong place, sorry

Did the friends know about the plan before he so called carried the plan out??? This is just sooooo sad. To think you grow to hate the person that gave you life, so much that you want to kill them....just sick

well, it should be scary because that is the path we are on! Socialism is government ownership and control of natural resources (that includes land), industries, banking and credit (mortgages), and public utilites.

It is dangerously naive to believe that only owners are 'greedy' and workers never are. There needs to be balance between all, and it's not going to be reached when there is a hard swing to the left.

FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll. Sept. 22-23, 2008. N=900 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.

"Which one of the following issues will be the most important in deciding your vote for president: [see below]?" (Options rotated)

Economy and jobs
46%
Terrorism and national security
10%
War in Iraq
8%
Taxes
7%
Ethics/government corruption
7%
Health care
7%
Abortion
4%
Energy
3%
Immigration
1%
Other (vol.)
4%
Unsure
3%
http://www.pollingreport.com/prioriti.ht...

The people I listed were on another forum thread.
http://www.gazettextra.com/news/2008/sep...

rsjeff01
This is going to be easy.

As you so eloquently put,
"Barack HUSSEIN Obama, you have to be kidding me. Do all of you Dems out there really want a President with the name Barack HUSSEIN Obama? Really....?"
Yes, for a few reasons. The people who sling "Hussein" around are fear mongers. Playing on simple word association, it actually doesn't work on people who can think for themselves. Some quick facts, Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda had no ties what so ever, so that's debunked right there. The intelligence was wrong. Barack Hussein Obama was named after his father, Barack Hussein Obama Sr. Barack Hussein Obama Sr. was born in 1936 nearly a year before Saddam Hussein was born. The connection there is nonexistent. Anyone who tries to claim that there is a connection is incredibly misinformed.

"A guy who cannot even hold his hand over his heart during the pledge of allegiance. He does not truly believe what our flag stands for."
I don't feel like typing it all out I'd suggest that you click the link but I doubt you will.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/mus...

"Barack HUSSEIN Obama went to a medrasa"
it is spelled "madrassa"
CNN, the only news channel to actually visit this school pretty much debunked all claims that it is an "extremist" school.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/o...

His middle name is Exhibit A? I've never heard that it is "off-limits." It is of Arabic origin, other people with names of Arabic origin: Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Moses, Abraham (the father of three religions) - I guess they were "terrorists" as well. I already explained how he got his name.

Palin's husband was once a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, and Palin has addressed the AIP at least once. Just in case you don't know, the AIP is for the succession of Alaska from the United States. Seems kind of unpatriotic to me.

Okay that's fine, you can go vote for the guy who was a member of the Keating 5, who's campaign manager, Rick Davis, was still receiving money from Freddie Mac up until about a month ago, and is friends with G. Gordon Liddy amongst other people I already listed below.

I'll vote for the guy who actually has a plan for America, other than taxing health care benefits, deregulation, perpetuation of this war in Iraq while doing nothing about Afghanistan and whose energy policy consists of "drill baby drill." but that's just me.......

More untrue scare tactics. The "market" will not be socialized, but Banks will most certainly be more regulated in the future. That will help the small business owner get loans. If the Banking system isn't fixed, then God help us all.

The Keating Five scandal was a direct result of greed and under regulation, and McCain has learned nothing from his relationship with someone who committed fraud, and stole the money of thousands of people. Now, McCain's financial advisor is Phil Gramm:

'Before he retired from the Senate in 2002, he wrote the Gramm-Bliley bill, an act broadly deregulating the financial industry -- and now blamed by many economists for the epidemic of speculation and fraud that has shaken the global economy.

Touting those changes as a way to "modernize" American finance for a global future, Gramm said they would bring wonderful new efficiencies and savings to consumers. As with the energy deregulation that he sponsored -- which was supposed to bring lower prices and better service, but led to blackouts and price gouging -- those economic wonders never quite appeared. The damaging effects of banking deregulation took nearly a decade to be felt, but whether we have experienced the worst still remains to be seen.

Over and over again, from the savings-and-loan fiasco to the Enron shock to the global banking meltdown, the golden promises of deregulation have turned to leaden ruin. Perhaps nobody cares about the lobbyists surrounding McCain, but someone should ask him why he would cherish the advice of a man whose devotion to ideology has already done us so much damage.'
http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/200...

Economics is a real issue of this election, not someone's middle name, or trying to discount someones patriotism.

Regardless of who wins in November, the country is going to shift left, the question is: how far to the left? Obama is the most left leaning senator, ever. Over the years, many Republicans have often wondered why McCain even considers himself a Republican at all, so if you are wanting a more moderate person in the White house, you should vote McCain.

And the major unions backed NAFTA, too.

again, I know several small business owners...100's, in fact, locally, statewide, and across the nation. When the gov't dictates a price, instead of the market, the owner has to either raise the price they charge for their product or service, or they must cut expenses. It is NOT a question of the owner accepting less in his or her back pocket...many owners actually make less than their employees. Additionally, the owner may well work way over 40 hours a week, try 80+. Many are red-taped out of existence. Sure , there is greed in some business owners, but be fair and honest: there is also greed on the part of some workers, too.

Socialization the market place will not solve the economic woes-it will ultimately make them worse. If it would, the Soviet Union, et al, would not have failed.

This is too easy.
Barack HUSSEIN Obama, you have to be kidding me. Do all of you Dems out there really want a President with the name Barack HUSSEIN Obama? Really....? A guy who cannot even hold his hand over his heart during the pledge of allegiance. He does not truly believe what our flag stands for. His own wife hates our great country. As she said her self "america is a mean place", and "I have never been proud of my country before". I am betting on inauguration day he will have his fingers crossed too. We all grew up pledging allegiance to the flag and holding our hands over our hearts. Barack HUSSEIN Obama went to a medrasa...who knows to what he was pledging allegiance.
What ever happend to patriotism? Is patriotism really about paying more taxes as Joe Biden says? Is this the new Democrat logic or just more of the same old thing.
"just words, just speeches", right Barack?
I would like a president that will fight back when our country is under attack. Not a president that will befriend the enemy and sit on boards with them. I would like a President that has a overwhelming desire to serve his country. Not a president with an overwhelming sense of entitlement.
I have news for you people....not voting for Barack HUSSEIN Obama is okay. Do not buy into the left wing media hype. This is why I am using Baracks middle name. We have all been told by the media that Baracks middle name is "off limits". Why? Is it because it is exibit A in the evidence of why we should put him under the microscope? Say what you will about McCain and Palin, but they have never once hated this country. They have never once befriended a terrorist.
I am going to vote for the guy who did not start his Presidential campaign in Bill Ayers living room. But that's just me.......

How come Ralph Nader is not even an option in this survey? Vote Green!
The following issues are priorities for Ralph Nader and guess what, Obama and Mccain haven't even "brought these issues to the table". The Green Party represents the views of the majority of Americans today.

-Adopt single payer national health insurance

-Cut the huge, bloated, wasteful military budget

-No to nuclear power, solar energy first

-Aggressive crackdown on corporate crime
and corporate welfare

-Open up the Presidential debates

-Adopt a carbon pollution tax

-Reverse U.S. policy in the Middle East

-Impeach Bush/Cheney

-Repeal the Taft-Hartley anti-union law

-Adopt a Wall Street securities speculation tax

-Put an end to ballot access obstructionism
-Work to end corporate personhood (Corporations enjoying constitutional rights as if they are a person)

-Defend, Restore and Strengthen
the Civil Justice System

-Adopt the National Initiative

If Nader was allowed to debate and covered in the mainstream media I believe that people would start thinking about finally shifting the change from the few to the many, to the people.

Janie7 - and your point is? I'm fully aware of who signed NAFTA. Clinton was historically more of a moderate. In Congress, Republicans supported NAFTA more than Democrats did:

House Republicans:
132 Ayes - 75.4%
43 Noes - 24.5%

House Democrats:
102 Ayes - 39.5%
156 Noes - 60.5%

Senate Republicans
34 Ayes - 77.2%
10 Noes - 22.7%

Senate Democrats
27 Ayes - 48.2%
29 Noes - 51.8%

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/1993/roll575....

So, while Clinton may have signed NAFTA it was passed largely by Republicans. Even if he would have vetoed NAFTA, it is likely that it wouldn't have taken much to override his veto.

It's not just NAFTA though, company's outsource to India, China, Taiwan, Vietnam, etc almost entirely in the name of increasing profit with, what seems like, little regard to the people that are losing their jobs. They are driven primarily by greed which is going to be the downfall of this country as we slowly sell ourselves off to the lowest bidder. With how fast the stock market is plummeting, it is almost like a United States "blue light special." The DJI is down almost 370 points today, so much for the so called "rescue" plan.

OMG...Your NOT a little confused

I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight.....

* If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're "exotic, different."

* Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, a quintessential American story.

* If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.

* Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're a maverick.

* Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.

* Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.

* If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the
first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a
voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend
12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State
Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman
of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years
in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people
while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs,
Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't
have any real leadership experience.

* If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city
council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people,
20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then
you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.

* If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2
beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.

* If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your
disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.

* If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the
proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.

* If , while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no
other option in sex education in your state's school system while your
unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant , you're very responsible.

* If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a
prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city
community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values
don't represent America's.

* If you're husband is nicknamed "First Dude",with at least one DWI
conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until
age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of
Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.

OK, much clearer now?

and if you really want to keep jobs in the U.S., you need to be willing to pay for it with a smile. U.S. workers will not work for pennies a day-which is what many 3rd-world workers make--nor should we. People complain about prices, but will turn around & buy a T-shirt made in wherever because it's $5.00 vs one made here on all U.S. goods & labor, but it retails for $15.00. Look at the tags to see country of origin. I know small business owners who strive to stock only U.S. or certified non-sweatshop goods, and shoppers complain. And these small businesses are barely clearing any profit--honestly, a checker at Wal-mart makes more and has less job stress.

Obama reminds me of the old time preachers. He builds you up with hope and promise, collects his fee and leaves town. You feel good until the next day when you find out nothing changed, just that your wallet was a little bit emptier.
Regarding the racist comment:
Does that mean that if Obama wins, we are no longer a racist nation?
If McCain were black and Obama White, would I be a racist for voting for Obama?
This is suppose to be an election based on the candidates policies not race. So, lets throw out these absurb racist comments and talk about the policies and changes they each propose. Then maybe, just maybe people can make an informed decision.

While I do not agree with clouds555 statement about being people who do not vote for Obama being racist, I do agree with his second point. Really, I would like to know what is so appealing about McCain that a person who usually voted for democrats would vote for someone like him? Obama has made me a more outspoken democrat, not one who is willing to vote for the other guy. This is one case where the grass is definitely not greener on the other side (McCain's) of the fence.

and as for outsourcing jobs, it was Clinton who signed NAFTA into law

clouds555: this has got to be one of the most racist statements I have ever read! Do you seriously believe anyone should vote for-or against-any candidate based solely on their skin color?!? Incredible! Good Lord, I certainly hope the majority of voters are weighing the ISSUES and not melanin in anyone's skin!!!

mainstreet - You left out the rest of the story.

Then after the homeless guy works for us for a few years, we'll outsource his work to another person (read: country) and fire the "homeless guy", because we found someone to do the work cheaper. We have to increase our bottom line so while we give the homeless guy the shaft, we lobby the government for less regulation so we can cook the books, increase profits to ourselves and a select few of our major investors. After the whole thing collapses, we'll either get the government to look the other way while we soar off into the distance on our golden parachute or bail us out. Welcome to the Republican party.

You sweep your yard? Interesting.

Mainstreet: I don't know if that is a true story or not, but I love it. I have voted primarily, if not solely, democratic in prior elections. Not this year.

Spinmaster glad you said it. Words of wisdom amen!

Yeah, you probably think Sarah Palin is a good choice for VP, too. Face it: If McCain gets elected, we're all in trouble. It'll only be a matter of time before we have President Palin. Better brush up on your French now for the move north.

Woo hoo Obama is in the lead! Maybe there's hope for Janesville after all.

Q. what do john mccain and george bush have in common?

A. everything including sagging poll numbers!

you obviously are buying the sarah palin BS instead of actually finding out the facts. enjoy your november loss.

Q. What do Osama and Obama have in common?

A. They both have friends who have bombed the Pentagon!

You people confuse me more than the candidates do.

John Mccain's advisor Davis was still receiving money from Freddie Mac up until a month ago.

usaret - misleading, he's doesn't work for the campaign and I wouldn't even call him his "finance guy". According to the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...

Raines had "taken calls from Barack Obama's presidential campaign seeking his advice on mortgage and housing policy matters." Whether he got a "golden parachute" has nothing to do with Obama as according to what I've read, they were barely associated.

Yes, but if you look at the little numbers in blue, you can see which sources are cited in the wikipedia article. Not only that but do you not think that because so many people edit it there are people who would fact check it, especially people who work on either campaign?

Here's some more just in case:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/09/m...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/el...
http://www.newsweek.com/id/137522
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/us/pol...
http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/jul/0...
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=...
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=4...
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/pol...

While you at it, you might want to look and see who Obama's finance guy is. Seems like he was in charge of Freddie or Fannie. Understand he got a nice golden parachute when he departed. Yep he was one of those making sure a lot of people bought homes they couldn't afford. He got the money the home owner got the shaft.

oh, c'mon, citing wikipedia as a reliable source? anyone can post anything on wikipedia

Hey, what about none of the above. I'm going to vote for no one, who voted for that corrupt bail-out of financial corporations. Anyone notice what they're doing in Europe with the same crisis? Their insuring individual savings accounts. Anyone notice that we've done nothing to calm individual fears or to address the underlying problem -- the burst of the real-estate bubble? Corporate welfare is supported by Democrats and Republicans alike, with the exception of those on the supposed "fringe" like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucininch.

While not necessarily "sleaze" McCain's many of campaign advisors are lobbyists. So much for standing up to lobbyists. McCain, bought and paid for by Washington lobbyists.

Among the 177 lobbyists that are or have been on his team are:
Rick Davis - Former Telecom Lobbyist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Davis_...)

Charlie Black - Former Mortgage Lender Lobbyist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_R._....

Randy Scheunemann - Former Big Oil Lobbyist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Scheu...

Nancy Pfotenhauer - Former Energy Lobbyist
http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=N...

Phil Gramm - Former Mortgage Giant UBS Lobbyist
Also was quoted as saying:
"You've heard of mental depression; this is a mental recession," and "We have sort of become a nation of whiners, you just hear this constant whining, complaining about a loss of competitiveness, America in decline."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Gramm

John Green - Former Mortgage Lender Lobbyist
Wayne Berman - Former Insurance Company Lobbyist

Rev. Wright, while he is a highly inflammatory speaker, I really don't think that he is a racist. Obama's mother is white, it doesn't take too much logic to deduce that if Rev. Wright is a racist, he wouldn't have wanted to have much to do with Obama, him being half white himself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Wr...

Tony Rezko:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Rezko
Scroll down to the: "Ties to Barack Obama" section. It seems to me that they were not the really close friends that people paint them to be.

I already went over the William Ayers connection, they live in the same neighborhood, other than that their prior contact was limited and they are, once again, not the great friends that people paint them to be.

By referring to him as Barack "Hussein" Obama, (quotations for emphasis) just shows your ignorance and how you have been captivated by the fear mongering of the right. The first part of my blog:
http://thejasondoctrine.blogspot.com/200... goes into how pathetic it is that people use his middle name the way that they do.

yeah the Dems like this poll...just like Wisconsin no ID (or in this case "cookies") required allows you to vote as often as you like.

Just like the Democrat motto vote early and often

And I suppose Barack Hussein Obama never attended the Church that the Rev. Wright was preaching at either. Spin it anyway you want. The truth is he has a history of surrounding himself with sleazy people (Rev. Wright, Tony Resko, William Ayres). Don't tell me if McCain had relationships with sleaze like this that you lefties wouldn't be all over it like white on rice.

In its broad strokes, McCain's life story is oddly similar to that of the current occupant of the White House. John Sidney McCain III and George Walker Bush both represent the third generation of American dynasties. Both were born into positions of privilege against which they rebelled into mediocrity. Both developed an uncanny social intelligence that allowed them to skate by with a minimum of mental exertion. Both struggled with booze and loutish behavior. At each step, with the aid of their fathers' powerful friends, both failed upward. And both shed their skins as Episcopalian members of the Washington elite to build political careers as self-styled, ranch-inhabiting Westerners who pray to Jesus in their wives' evangelical churches.

In one vital respect, however, the comparison is deeply unfair to the current president: George W. Bush was a much better pilot.

And yes, ignore the pole above. It's taken some wild swings in the last few days.

Bill ayers said no such thing. He said 'I don't regret setting bombs. I feel we didn't do enough.', speaking about his activities in the 1970's. This quote was published in the New York Times on the MORNING of 9/11. His comments were made BEFORE the attacks on the World Trade Center.

Just watch. While Obama and Biden deflect these non-issues and talk about how they will actually govern the country, McCain and Palin will shift to an entirely negative campaign, hoping to scare people away from Obama, instead of trying to convice undecided voters why they should vote McCain. This is the same tactic used in 2000 and 2004. So much for McCain being a "maverick".

Bill Ayers commented on that the people who took down the world trade centers didn't do enough. How old was Obama then?

Yeah the rate 4 obama was 2567 at 9:30 this morning and at 10 o'clock it was at 2986. But, as we all know Obama is for the working person. Even though he will tax us till it hurts it's all just because he cares.

One Hundred forty-five comments---Based on the tone of most of them--Why even bother to vote. No candidate is worthy. No candidate tells the truth. No candidate has the experience. No candidate cares for you. No candidate can solve the problems. No candidate reflects the views of all. The candidates are either too elitist or too old or too dumb. So, why are we wasting our time to bother to go to the polls and vote, after all we know the other side will yell fraud if their candidate doesn't win. None of our comments are productive to an informed public because no one cares as long as we can cut-down, destroy and let our fears and hate shape our views of the almighty perfect candidate. He or she is not out there. So lets get down to the facts, the truth, cut out all the phoney promises that most of had heard in every election and never get filled. Let's find out what they can do as against what is just political jabberwalkky to please the ears and pacify the soul of the voter.

No one should take this poll to seriously. I remember at one point McCain was behind in this poll by a few percent and then miraculously caught up in just a few hours. I don't come here to check the poll numbers, there are much better sources than the Janesville Gazette for poll numbers.

I was waiting for McCain's campaign advisers to give them the go ahead to attack Obama on his supposed connection to Ayers. It's a low blow and highly misleading. It also is just another "scare tactic" as Palin attempts to strike fear into the hearts and minds of the American public by using the word "terrorist." Most people when they think of terrorist, they think of men dressed like Osama bin Laden, or Muslims. So, therefore, in a roundabout way, the McCain campaign is wrongfully attempting to dig deep into our psyche and make us conjure images of Obama being a Muslim extremist. That is just pathetic and is typical of McCain's campaign, if we can't beat them with facts, we'll smear him every opportunity that we get in the lowest ways possible, even if it is a flat out lie. It shows a disrespect even to his voters, because essentially, he is saying it doesn't matter if we tell flat out dirty lies, most people don''t check the facts anyways. That my friends is an insult.

Obama's ties to Ayers:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/05/p...
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/200...

I agree though, when you listen to the debates, and to McCain and Palin speak, all I hear is maverick, energy, maverick, energy, maverick, POW, maverick, maverick, maverick, team of mavericks. It's pathetic, I'm tired of hearing that POW story, if he brings it up at the town hall debate on Tuesday I think my head will explode. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing but the utmost respect for him and it is horrible that he had to go through that. However, does he have to mention it every time that he speaks? Does being a POW make him more qualified? I do understand that he learned some very valuable lessons from the experience. The POW story did it's job as it is a very powerful story, however, I want to know what he is going to do now, not what he did almost 40 years ago.

Of course somebody clicked 1000 times for Obama, they do the same thing in November because of Wisconsin's lax voting laws.

Why would I vote for Senator Obama? I always had leaned towards the candidate with the most experience. However, this year its something else indeed. "Mr. Experience" pulls Sarah out of a hat and expects us to believe she is capable of even writing her own speeches? Her blurb about Senator Obama's support of 60's era radicals is evidence the far right wing is still at it. By the time Mr. Obama was trying to help those in his community, Mr. Ayers was an old man, trying to do the same thing. To have twisted this association as far as Palin did is one too many character flaws for me. She can only recite what she is fed, and she is incapable of understanding what the 60's and the Vietnam War even was. Why Senator McCain went this way, god only knows.

If I wanted a "Hockey Mom" as VP for the United States, I would run myself. I think S. Palin has about the same experience as I do to assist running our country.

Looks like some Obama supporter did not like the fact the poll was too close..sad how someone has to add 1000 clicks to a poll in less than 6 hours.

Cloud555: I know not where you get your idea on military personnel. There is a strong bond between us regardless of race, religion or whether rich or poor. We are there to do a job not bemoan the fact of our status. When you need us we are great but when you don't we are to be shoved aside. Not everyone in the military is perfect, anymore then out in the civilian world to which I assume you belong. But, I have more faith in an individual who has faced the enemy and won then the individual who just talks for talks sake. So if you ask who I'll vote for it will be the man who faced upto adversary and won and who will stand up for a nation rather then a group of special interests. Oh yes, the plane that you say McCain crashed, how about the plane that was shot down? Thanks to a strong belief in America, McCain survived torture along with many others in that prison camp---could or would you have? Well neither of us speak for all, remember, it is the military that guards your right to the freedoms you enjoy regardless of your stand on the issues whether for or against. Your vote will determine whether you want a leader of action or a leader of words.

I’ve got a little bit of an attitude today so this one is a long one.
A percentage of the population are the so called single issue voters, I really don't like that very much because modern politics is way more complicated than one issue. I worked at a union factory for 8 years where in both 2000, and 2004 there were many people who voted for Bush because they were afraid that Gore and Kerry would "take away their guns." The likelihood of that occurring is pretty slim. Hunting contributes $30 billion to the US Economy and nearly 1 million jobs according to: http://www.nssf.org/IndustryResearch/FAQ... Part of it is the revenue that hunting produces, the other even more significant part is the Second Amendment. The NRA has made people paranoid by using scare tactics and false information to lure voters for the Republican party for years. It is one of the larger lobbyist groups in Washington; to think that they do not have an impact on any proposed gun legislation is naive. The NRA, once again has gotten involved in the election, they released an ad citing "Obama's 10 point plan for change." which is full of lies and half truths. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-ch...

The people who vote for a candidate on the basis that they are pro-life, or anti-choice, as I like to say, are nearly as bad. Personally, as a father of two boys, I could never be party to an abortion. This election, we have Obama who is pro-choice, although he did disagree with the supreme court’s decision on the Partial Birth Abortion Act. As to why he disagreed to it, I'm not sure. As the ban was enacted in 2003 and Obama didn't become a senator until 2005, he obviously wouldn't have been able to vote on the bill. Biden is pro-choice as well, but he supports the ban on partial birth abortions. McCain believes in abortion only if the mother's life is in danger or in cases of rape or incest. Sarah Palin believes in abortion only if the mother's life is in danger. In cases of rape or incest, which make up only 1% of abortions, Palin believes that you have to carry to term. That is horrible in my opinion. The woman just scares me. McCain scares me because he, like Bush, does not seem like a very effective diplomat. He even said that he wouldn’t meet with the president Spain because he wasn’t sure they were “with us” I’m sure we all know by now, Spain is a NATO ally. He has sang “bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran.” Which is incredibly juvenile for him to be saying when he is running for the office of president. So, let’s just say that through McCain’s lack of diplomacy, lack of tact, and the fact that he has been around war nearly his entire life, he starts a war with Iran, and it becomes nuclear. What has the single issue got you? Abortion is now illegal but we’re all dead from the fallout.
It's funny that you talk about the government "decide what's good for us" but then you say the government has the right to tell a woman that she has no right to choose. The fact that Palin is on video saying:"Our national leaders are sending our soldiers on a task from God." Is borderline religious fanaticism. And the Republicans haven't felt is has been their obligation for the past 8 years to decide what's best for us? The past 8 years we have our rights and our constitution trampled on. I find it ironic that Palin told Biden Thursday night, "there he goes looking backwards again." McCain and Palin don't want to look backwards as all they see is their own party. Many times, McCain's speeches mirror those given by Bush back in 2000 about bringing change to Washington and his plans for change. The RNC was a joke, both McCain and Palin talking to their own party about bringing change to Washington and everyone cheered. Palin: "I stood up to the good ol' boy network" Sorry but the good ol' boy network made up the majority of the audience.

As Obama is a father of two girls, I seriously doubt that he is soft on child predators, but I can play the "soft on crime game too." Alaska, highest number of rapes per capita, double the national average, makes it one of the most dangerous places for women and children to live.
ABC News - Effort to Tackle Sex Violence Stalled by Palin's Office, Sources Say http://www.abcnews.go.com/print?id=58045...
Not to mention the fact that Wasilla requires a woman who is raped to pay for her own rape kit. That’s absurd. What's next, you have to pay for DNA testing for violent crimes?
As far as gay-marriage goes, are we all not Americans? The last I checked this was The United States of America, not The Religious Rights' States of America. For us to deny them the right to "marital" property, hospital visitations and their "spouses" health insurance, is to say that they are not people, they are not members of our society and that they are less than human. It is the same as how we once treated slaves and women. Here's an idea, it's none of your business. How does it affect you if a gay couple gets married, or joins in a civil union? Not at all. There are people though who say that it will “soil the sanctity of marriage.” These people have been living in a cave. The divorce rate is around 50%, celebrities get married 3, 4, 5+ times, people can get married in a virtually drive through chapel in Las Vegas, and Brittney Spears got married for 55 hours. I think the sanctity of marriage is pretty well soiled already.
As far as worldwide trade goes, there's nothing that can be done about that, it's too late this is a global economy that we live in now and to think that we could somehow reverse that shows ignorance of how our economy and trade really works. We don't need to stop worldwide trade we need to lower our trade deficit by making products here that people want overseas. However, our educational systems are falling apart and we are starting to lag behind other countries in Math and Science.

Were screwed no matter who wins this election. Socialism is creeping into our society.

OBAMA WILL SAVE THE WORLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do any of really know what the "truth" really is? I read all these comments on here as they are written with factual intent, but in reality, no matter how much the media and other vultures did, we will only know what they want us to know. And no a one of us have ever sat personally with any of the canidates and received the truth from their own mouths, so let's not assume that all we think we know is the truth. The only way anyone can know who will be the best canidate is to basically "hope".

gstrube...your gallup poll shows those with limited education support Obama too.

jeez guernsey, I posted that without even reading your post, good post!!!

I wonder if people 100 years ago gave a crap about guns, abortion, or gay marriage. I'm betting they made their choices based on things that actually matter to the country as a whole. You know, things like the economy, and the unemployment rate, and foreign relations, you know, things that will make a difference in day to day life.

Republicans want live babies so they can grow up to be dead soldiers. They only give a crap as long as you're pre-born, if you're preschool, you're completely on your own.

The debates about who is middle class, who paid taxes, how much someone's house is and what someone paid in child support or alimony or whatever, is a distraction from the real issues. People need to focus on who would be the best person to run the country, not who you "would want to have a beer with" or because they may have "small town values." In the years coming up the it is my belief that the most important issues the president will have to deal with will be the economy, foreign relations and the two wars. We all need to consider who would be the best because if any one of these 3 falls anymore than they already have, we as a nation are going to be in a world of hurt, much worse than we already are.

Janesvillemom..."I'm in a lower tax bracket than Palin's and I paid more than 10%. I guess I need to figure out how to take more deductions like them!" If you owned your own business' you could.

janesvillemom...again with misleading/erroneous facts. In McCain's divorce settlement; he gave up his interest in two homes (the decree never declared if the homes were paid for), he relinquished all furnishings, provided 1,325 a month in alimony, $300 a month in child support, and agreed to pay an additional $500 a month if she could not find a job. How is that rich? His Military salary at the time was @ $45,000. So let me get this straight, because he was/did provide alimony, child support, and additional money at a rate of ~45% of his military salary he is rich?

After reading all the comments it's hard to believe anyone knows what is fact or fiction. Most comments against McCain are not because you don't believe he's qualified, it's because you HATE Bush. Those who make comments against OBama are because you don't believe he is experienced enough. Comments against Palin seem to be, IF YOU GET DOWN TO FACTS,IS THAT SHE ISN'T HILLARY.
As for being rich, poor, middle class, why does one try to win the lottery? If your want to be rich, then you become one of those who you rile against. If you don't want to win to become rich, then why try to win the lottery?
No matter what, the candidate of either party will be pilered and what he or she is trying to do will be loss to distortion, falsification and out right lies. IS THIS THE AMERICAN WAY TODAY?

yes, at the same age, Biden might have made less than Palin if looking at a dollar amount only, but one must also factor in what the value of the dollar was at that time to be comparing apples to apples, as well as the number of people living on the household income. Palin has 5 kids, Biden has 3, whether those kids all were still dependent on their parents at that time; they each have 1 spouse. It is not known if Biden's mother was living with him at that time, nor whether she has her own income source.

This Country is coming arart at the seems and nothing is going to help .this bailout is like puting a bandaid on a artery cut .

They must have been the last of the middle class. The middle class no longer exists.

At this time, yes Palin is the only one who is Middle Class, but she's also the youngest. I'm guessing Biden, at her age, made less. And Obama didn't hit the big time until his books took off. So all three of them have lived the Middle Class life.

Janie, Sorry your son's teacher taught him that. My son gave about 1/3 of his birthday money to ECHO. I told him I was writing a check and asked if he'd like to give some of his birthday money and he did. You have to teach them this stuff at HOME, don't rely on the schools.

I apologize and stand corrected. www.delawareareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/... (reached by googling 'Joe Biden house value')cites Biden has a $2.5 M, 7,000 square-foot house on a 4-acre lakefront estate, which includes a smaller carriage house in which his widowed mother lives. That is still one huge honking house--waaaayyy bigger than mine, in all measures, even if we factor in the difference in local housing markets between Javl & Greenville, Del, Delaware's priciest area. As an aside, I am glad to see he is providing for his mother, so he will get a kudos for that. See, I am balanced.

Yes, some people do like to keep their giving secret. However, if one is going to be as in the public eye as a presidential candidate, it behooves one to be open and above reproach, especially in regards to their finances. There are a few celebrities who are examples of public-eye people who are very public about how much they give. With all their $$, I don't think they announce those amounts to impress people. Honestly, if one has been blessed with a huge income, they should be giving more.

(Another aside: when my kids were in middle school, they had a 'life project'. One of my kids drew a lot to be a single guy with a very large income. He wanted to give over 1/2 of it away to his less fortunate class-mates, but the teacher told him he couldn't. See: we not only give, by example we have also taught our kids to practice the same & find it sad to have any teacher tell a student, 'do not give to help those less fortunate than you')

As far as any of our income compared to Palin's, have to sort out the differences between federal and state taxes, the different taxes betweeen each state, and they type of tax: income, property, FICA, sales, usage, whatever. Also, self-employed people pay both the employer's and employee's part on Social Security, even if they have no employees. We certainly can agree that of the 4 candidates, Palin is the only one who is truly 'middle class'

Geez, janie7, I guess the Governor must be paid with whale blubber or something seeing as most middle class pay more than 10%.

Janie7, How do you know that they aren't giving a boat load more? Maybe they just choose not to deduct it all? That's why you can't judge on this because some people don't deduct all of their charitable giving...because it doesn't feel charitable to get something for it. No one knows how much anyone REALLY GIVES, only how much they DEDUCT.

I'm in a lower tax bracket than Palin's and I paid more than 10%. I guess I need to figure out how to take more deductions like them! And to value my thrift store donations a LOT higher! They make ONE donation to the Salvation Army each year and it is valued at like $800 of misc household goods and clothing! They must take a TRUCKLOAD! :)

oh, there is also a limit to how much you can give and declare as a deduction, so if Obama's really want to give because it's the right thing to do-and they most certainly have a significant amount in discretionary income-they could be giving a boat-load more than 5.7%

Janie7, WHERE do you get your info??? Biden's house is NOT worth 6 million, it is worth 2 million and he bought it 12 years ago for $350,000.
http://www.zillowblog.com/joe-bidens-hou...

yes, because the Palin's make a fraction of what the Obama's or Biden's make, they will be in a lower tax bracket, which is why their % is lower. And because they have less income, it should be pretty obvious they will have a much lower discretionary income. Therefore the % they gave to charity is actually higher than Obama's or Biden's.

Retiredairforce, the military must have been paying pretty well back then because in his divorce, he had 2 homes and had to pay $19,500 per year in child support and alimony (the median income in 1980 was $17,710). Sounds like he was rich to me!

Palins paid less than 10% in taxes on their 2007 income! That isn't very patriotic is it? And Alaska has really low state taxes! Plus she got paid $17,000 in per diems for staying at her own house and didn't pay income tax on that money!
*
Obama's paid 28% in income taxes (and IL has high taxes).
*
Biden's paid about 21% income taxes.
*
McCain is really in a totally different realm when it comes to money so there is really no comparing him to the others.

Palin's gave 1.5% of their adjusted gross to charity in 2007. Obama's gave 5.7% in 2007. Some people don't deduct all the money they give away because it doesn't feel like "charity" if you get something for doing it, so it really isn't that relevant.

Oh, please...Biden is most certainly not middle class. He lives is a $6M house and hangs out at Home Depot about as much as Kerry wants to 'get me a huntin' license.' If you google search, you will find that while he & his wife make well into a 6-figure income, their charitable contributions are almost nil. Same with the Obama's.

But wait!!! Biden believes it's patriotic to want to pay even more taxes! After all, we all know the government can manage the public's money so well that we need this huge bail out to save the economy. So maybe Biden & Obama think that paying taxes qualifies as charitable contributions?

jguernsey...how is it misleading to say he lived for 20 years on his military salary. Your own time line shows this.

And Congress (democrat controlled) has a approval rating of 20%. The same people we are trusting with our financial issues.

I agree, given that Congress has somewhere between a 90-95% incumbency rate, I believe that term limits would do wonders to changing the status quo. I agree with the line item veto as well. Earmarks make up at least $10 billion of our money that could often go to better use.

SERIOUSLY, some said Palin did better than expected....was there really anywhere to go but up? The expectations of her speech were not measurable in the first place....so, don't be too sure your expectations had been exceeded. McCain's whole purpose for picking her was solely for the reason that number ONE she is a woman and number two she is from Alaska. Subconciencly we are all thinking oil and the next woman president since Hilary was knocked out of the race. THANK GOD Palin has showed her true colors before NOVEMBER 4TH 2008!!!!

To say that McCain lived on his military pay check for 20 years is a little misleading.

1958-McCain graduates from high school
1960-McCain finished flight school
1965-married a model, Carol Shepp
1967-his combat duty begins
October 1967-was shot down and taken prisoner
March 1973-McCain was released from the POW camp
1973-1974-Attended National War College in Washington D.C.
1976-commanding officer of a training squadron in Florida - not sure how much that pays
1977-began work as the Navy's liaison to the US Senate - not sure how much that pays, if at all
1979-Met Cindy Hensley who's father owned a large beer distribution company
February 1980-divorces Carol, the settlement included two houses
May 1980-McCain marries Cindy Hensley - a prenuptial agreement keeps their finances separate and they file separate tax returns.

Honestly, it really doesn't seem like John McCain spent much time at home after he graduated high school. I've heard from several people that I know that military pay is definitely middle class, perhaps even lower than middle class. This chart, http://www.navycs.com/2008-military-pay-... can give you an idea of what the military gets paid. Ever since he married Cindy in 1980 though, he is definitely not middle class.

This gives a little insight on McCain's mother:
http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/mccain....

from the article:
Though the family lived on Jack's salary, Roberta Wright McCain was born to wealth. Her father struck oil in the Southwest as a young man, made his fortune, and retired at forty, soon after Roberta and her identical twin, Rowena, were born. "I've accomplished more than most men ever accomplish," he told his wife. "I've just had twin daughters, and I'm going to stay home and enjoy my family." He never worked another day in his life.

My guess is it is fair to assume that should John needed anything, his mother would have been there for him, like most mothers would.

jguernsey...as Mayor (an someone not in Washington) the only thing she had the ability to do was request funding. Placing an earmark can only be done by someone at the federal level in the house or senate. I am not a fan of earmarks and believe that besides term limits there needs to be an amendment instituting a line item veto authority over congress until we do have term limits so certain types of "graft" do not get pushed through. That being said, your links still do not show all the funding you previously stated.

lol...i just googled "Obama accuses McCain" of...
...lies
...linking him to radicals
...spin
...dishonest campaign
...loosing his bearings
...phony outrage
...leaving out middle class
...ignoring wall street
...deception
...playing politics
...passing the buck
...indifference
...non-stop attacks against me
...swift boat politics
...endless diatribe and schoolyard taunts
...blocking stem cell research
...flawed economic policies
...hiding behind the surge
...sleaze and smears
...lying about Biden
...top aides ties to Iran
...gambling retirement
...sleaze ads
...dirty tactics
...abandoning US manufactures
...Xenophobic Campaign
...being an opponent of government regulation
There were many more but this is enough. So THE TRUTH is...both sides do the same thing. Not so one sided when you open your mind and look.

RetiredAirForce
If you want to doubt the validity of my information, thats fine. This article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...

I believe pretty much puts the nail in the coffin. She did request earmarks for projects, a law firm was hired to do the lobbying for the town. I didn't cite a specific year, it was $27 million over the last four years that she was mayor of Wasilla. No one can deny that Alaska receives more in earmarks than any other state.

Not to mention the fact that we are talking about a town of 6000-7000 people when she took over as Mayor. We are talking about a town that is about the size of Delevan or Jefferson. For them to request federal funds for projects that the town itself or the state should fund is a total abuse of the system.

I wasn't trying to start a debate on earmarks though. My point was that while people are saying that she is a "Washington outsider" the fact of the matter is she isn't. She engaged in the same practices of earmarks abuse, cronyism, abuse of power, and self-dealings as the rest of the crew in Washington is.

janesvillemom...you seem to have all the facts. How much money did the "high society oil heiress" have while John lived at home. Did she provide any wealth to her son? While John lived on his own military paycheck (for over 20 years) are you saying she gave him money to supplement his income? If so how much? It is so easy to sit back and accuse others of things you have no facts about.

I googled "McCain blames Obama" and found:
1)McCain blames Obama for bail out not passing the House
2)McCain blames Obama for the current economic crisis
3) McCain blames Obama for high gas prices
4) McCain blames Obama for killing immigration reform
5) McCain blames Obama for the negative tenor of the campaign (I heard McCain say this one on the radio, basically he said that because Obama didn't agree to the town hall format, he was punishing him with attack ads...real mature!)
6) McCain blames Obama for the NY Iran protesters dropping Sarah Palin as a speaker
7) McCain blames Obama for sending Michigan jobs overseas
*
WOW! That is one POWERFUL JUNIOR Senator! And or course the SENIOR senator had NOTHING to do with anything bad that has happened!
*
Googled "Obama blames McCain" and got:
1) Obama blames economic crisis on McCain's party's support of deregulation.
That's it.
*
So if blaming others is the type of personal responsibility you are looking for then McCain is your man! Personally, I am sick of the blame game and the partisan politics.

whybesad, Obama has been talking about personal responsibility in his stump speech this entire campaign! Guess you should vote for him!

Are you disputing the fact that his mother was a high society oil heiress? It doesn't matter how much his father made, he grew up with WEALTH. He married WEALTH. If there were a few years in between where he lived on a military salary, I'm sure his mother didn't let him suffer one bit!

Really whoever takes over is going to have to clean up this 8-year mess ole W made!!!

jguernsey...your quoted news sources and your suggested links for finding the earmarks don't match. Of all the earmarks you put in text...the cagw site you provided only found 7% of your total (searching from 1998 to present---not just the year you site). Something does not add up.

oops, one of my links says it is to the New York Times but it is actually The Washington Post. My fault.

RetiredAirForce:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/10/p...

I wasn't referring to current earmarks, I was referring to earmarks under Palin, where $27 million in earmarks were secured for the town.

Quoted text from the CNN link:
But when Palin served as mayor of her hometown of Wasilla, outside Anchorage, she obtained about $27 million in federal "earmarks" during her last four years in office, according to the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense.

Some more sources:
as governor: from the LA Times
"Palin, in fact, requested $198 million in federal earmarks in February, including such expenses as $487,000 to fight obesity in Alaska and $4 million to develop recreational trails."

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition...

New York Times on Palin's earmarks:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/washing...

The search function on http://earmarks.omb.gov/ is limited. http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?page...
is a more complete listing of earmarks going back to 1991.

However in my opinion it is worth noting:
Wasilla - 9780 people $300,000 = $30.67 per person
Janesville - ~63,000 people $1,000,000 = $15.87

That is not just deviation from the norm, that IS the norm. Alaska receives more money per capita in earmarks than any other state. To say that Palin is for earmark reform is like saying and alcoholic would be for prohibition.

I like candidates who have had experience as an executive. That either by being a Gov. or a business owner. Someone who has to make decisions and be accountable for them. Senators use the taxpayers money and aren't accountable for their actions. These two candidates are suppose to be the cream of the crop the best that their parties have. Tat is truly scary. Career politicians should be banned from the Oval Office. We should have term limits on the Senators. Between the candidates and their running mates we have a combined 56 years of service in the Senate. The same Government that has gotten us into this financial mess and now all of a sudden they are going to get us out of this mess. I have to give Sarah Palin some credit for being the ONLY person out of the four to say we need to be personally RESPONSIBLE. AMEN to that!!!

localboy - Yeah that is true that Bush did have fair qualifications. However, Obama graduated magna cum laude from Harvard and was president of the Harvard Law Review, things that do not just happen to anyone. While Bush graduated with C's and his only major pre-presidency accomplishments were several failed business ventures. You can not take credentials at face value, I was just citing the differences between Obama and Palin as so many people say she is "more qualified."

Janesvillemom. Your criticism for McCain not knowing middle class...do you really believe those that are in the military are not middle class? His father (his grandfather also served) was in the military the whole time John lived at home. John served in the Military until he was 45. Please show me where in the pay tables for the American military (that I served for for over 20 years) is there pay above middle class? The fact is he does know middle class and has lived middle class and that is a fact you can't stand or debate accurately.

jguernsey...not sure where the paper you cite got their info on earmarks. A easy search for the Word Wasilla and Janesville on http://earmarks.omb.gov/ shows the city of Wasilla received 300K while the city of Janesville received 1 million.

RetiredAirforce, Obama HAS lived in poverty and at the middle class level until very recently. McCain HAS NEVER lived that lifestyle. Biden is the 2nd poorest senator. Yes, Palin is the most middle class of them all, never said she wasn't. But how much do you really think McCain will listen to her? Did you see them interviewed together? He treats her like a child.

RetiredAirforce, I was responding to another post about the war, but I decided this is not the time to debate the war. We need to be looking forward to see if there is ANY way to prevent the next Great Depression. The wealth distribution has been heading toward pre-Depression levels for awhile now. The top 1% have more wealth than the combined wealth of the bottom 90%! That was a recipe for disaster in 1929 and it seems we didn't learn and are doomed to repeat history. I "hope" the bail out works, but I just don't think it will have a long-term impact and will just hold off the worst until Bush is long gone.

janesvillemom...your diatribe against McCain is because as you state he doesn't know middle class. According to tax returns of the four in the race only Palin currently would receive a tax break with Obama as president...so at least 50% of McCains ticket (as described by Obamas tax plan to only give a break to the middle class) is middle class. The Dem ticket is not.

I honestly don't think that Palin is any different than your "typical politician" she is just as corrupt as the rest of them. First of all, while Mayor of Wasilla, the town hired a lobbyist to secure earmarks for the town. I'm just curious, how many earmarks have been secured for Janesville?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/10/p...

The McCain campaign stated: "As mayor of Wasilla, Gov. Palin was forced to work within the current system to obtain critical funding for a growing city," It's okay that she secured earmarks for a town of now 9000 people, it was growing. Although the Multi-Use Sports complex was voted on by the residents, an almost $14 million, 102,000 square foot sports complex seems excessive for a town that size. People paint Palin to be a fiscal conservative, I really don't think that she is. Having people vote on projects is a way of removing yourself from responsible spending. You can always go back and say, I was against it, it was the people who wanted it. In that aspect, I don't thing Palin is any different than any other politician.

Palin denounced the cronyism that is so prevalent in Washington. She is engaged in cronyism herself. She has appointed at least 5 of her friends to various departments. A few articles:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/opinio...

Irresponsible spending, Cronyism, abuse of earmarks, I think Palin will fit in just fine. She is not the "breath of fresh air" that everyone claims she is. She is no "maverick" she is just like everyone else.

janesvillemom..."Debating the war is pretty useless" You are the one that mentioned the link, and included in the link was the text I provided. For you to say they didn't intend to...then "they" should not have voted in favor of the legislation as written. So again when you say they did not vote for...is not true.

Debating the war is pretty useless at this time though. What's done is done and now we just have to figure out the best way forward.
*
I think Obama is about the future and McCain about the past. I worry about McCain's temperament, judgment (picking Palin!?!), age and health, and "old boy" connections. He has been in the Senate for what? 26 years? He should have been a major force guiding the direction of our country these past 8 years with that much seniority and look where we are!
His mother was an oil heiress and his wife a beer heiress...the man DOES NOT KNOW what it is like to be middle class or poor. His graduation present from his parents (for being 5th from the bottom of his class!) was a new Corvette! He CANNOT understand living paycheck to paycheck.
*
To red-something, I don't buy things I can't afford. Had 20% saved when I bought my house, thanks.

"As for people not voting for Obama because he supposedly voted for partial birth abortion? That is one issue folks!! You would base this whole nations future on one issue?? I don't believe in abortion personally, but I am looking at all the issues not just one. I think I'll vote for Obama, gosh darn, wink, wink..."

Still undecided; I haven't made a final decision. Right now after reading the negatives on Palin I'd lean towards Obama. I am doing more research before I decide.

This section came BEFORE the section you copied and I don't think they thought it would go further than this:
Also Bush didn't give Congress all the intel, only the intel that supported his push to war.
*
The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to--

(a) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions applicable to Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and

(b) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions.

McCain is part of my fathers generation that was just a "good ol' boys network". They talk of change but they have no concept of what change is or how to attempt that change in this day and age. As long as the economy doesn't affect their life styles it just doesn't really matter to them. None of them thought the economy was tanking until it affected their stocks. As far as Palin...McCain picked a woman, so McCain feels like he patted all of us women on the head and we'll all feel better. Palin's whole part in this campaign is nothing but a slap in the face for women-she is an embarrassment and has set us back 20 years. As for people not voting for Obama because he supposedly voted for partial birth abortion? That is one issue folks!! You would base this whole nations future on one issue?? I don't believe in abortion personally, but I am looking at all the issues not just one. I think I'll vote for Obama, gosh darn, wink, wink...

janesvillemom...you cannot possibly believe what you wrote if you actually read your link. In your link " The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq." You can say all you want about what a bad idea/poor decision/misguided judgments by the administration...but to come out and say it was not voted and those in the house and/or senate had no hand in the action is a lie.

No mater who gets in they will have to deal with the SAME power brokers in the house and senate..the same power brokers that refuse term limits for themselves. The system will not change with new people in the White House without new people in the house and senate.

Maybe there are other people out there more qualified again "maybe" but at least as a concerned citizen " I feel" that at least we will get the truth and she won't put up with the typical political "BS" that the current administration passes along to us through the very liberal media. Even they have to admit that this is a very different type of election with very different candidates on both sides. I am glad they see eye to eye on many issues. Maybe (for once) we can get something done and fix this mess that we are all in. Folks this is very serious, don't take it lightly. It does effect us all and will for a very long time. You can debate socialism etc. all you want, but if you can't buy a house or a car without 20-30% down then what will you do. I am sure that the individual that chimed in about socialism has had more than one no money down deal in his/her life. Those days are gone right now. trust me I know this for a fact.

I find it a bit concerning that the media can attempt to "spin" everything into what "it" wants. I give an example of tax cuts for Exon. Does anyone realize that those cuts are tied to exploration, reasearch and yes drilling for our own oil and altenative fuel sources. You could not cover this topic in even an hour let alone a short little debate. Here is another good one, WHY is it that Biden would only talk about/or question on the policies of Mccain. Look he was not there how about we answer questions from your view point not that of John McCain. He is not hear to give his view point or to answer those tough questions. Now Tuesday he will have his chance and we shall see in a forum that he is better at what HIS positions are with the developement of tough times. Sarah on the other hand answered questions from her perspective not that of the candidate. She pointed out what SHE thinks and that I respect.

kiowamohican: I agree with most of your last post, except that congress never voted to go to war. The resolution was mostly about using diplomacy but having the "stick" of military force behind it (that's what they were told and you can read the bill here)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/...
*
I do agree that both candidates should have opposed this bail out. Then they could blame Bush when the economy continues to implode, but now it's on them. Feingold for Pres!
*
And how is it that we have moved more toward socialism under Bush than under any Democrat?

I'm really surprised no one has made the connection between this bailout and the war in Iraq.
.
Hear me out on this one. I was a Bush supporter (voted for him in 00 and 04) but I think the whole Iraq war was one of his big mistakes that was caused by bad advice from people who surrounded him. Remember George Tenent and others sold him this notion of WMD's, and Saddam breaking all the UN sanctions? Then we had to "do something". So you had a big spiel made by Bush to the public, and then to congress to "do something". Congress BI- PARTISANLY rushed to take action, and we got drug into a war that would go on for years, involve insurgency after insurgency, saw many brave soldiers of ours parish, all the while no WMD's were ever found.
Bush would then be ENTIRELY BLAMED for the bad intelligence and rushing into Iraq, despite the fact that congress had the same intelligence, and overwhelmingly voted to go to war (Clinton, Kerry, Edwards just to name a few prominent Democrats). Bush's popularity would drop like a stone, he'd be accused of rushing us into war based on a pack of lies (more accurately bad intell), all the while the Democrats in congress who voted for it pretended they had nothing to do with it.
.
Now we have a bailout, and ONCE AGAIN we are told "SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE". Bush rushes to put together a bailout plan based off his advice from Secretary of Treasury; Hank Paulson. Just like the war, this "urgent plan" is rushed to congress and Bush goes on TV to sell it to the public. And once again congress buys into it, and passes a 450 PAGE, near ONE TRILLION $$ bail out plan.. I guarantee you that most in congress never even read 10 pages, let alone all 450 pages of that bill.
.
Now this is where it gets good. When this thing bombs miserably in a few years, who is going to take the blame? It WON'T be Bush this time. It will be whichever one of these buffoons wins on the 4th of November, as they BOTH FULLY ENDORSED this plan. If it's Obama who wins, this will really be poetic justice. Like all Presidents he will take ALL the heat for the failure, even though he was only partly responsible for it.

McCain is in the lead? Janesville is an embarrassment to Wisconsin, the Midwest and blue states in general! I propose those voting for McCain should move South with their redneck white-trash inbred brethren.

Both Presidential candidates voted for this bill and signed by the President.

jguernsey -
consider:
Bush
BA Yale
MS Harvard Business School
Scull & Bones Society member
First Lt. Air Nat. Guard (5years)
Chairman of a Corporation
Director of a Corporation
Owner of MLB Team & Managing Partner
Governor Texas (6years largest state of the Union)
Presidential campaign advisor
Liaison to the media

You really pick a candidate based on experience? How did the above work out?

It's very funny to hear you people from Wisconsin make fun of how Palin Talks, how do you think you talk, don't yaaaaaa know???

Tough one. John McCain is a liberal republican and Barack Obama is a liberal democrat. This election I will be voting for the lesser of two evils and vote for McCain. I will them grit my teeth and bear the four awful years we have ahead of us and hopefully in 2012 we can actually get a decent candidate. It took 4 years of Carter to get Reagan. This is kind of shaping up to be the same. McCain and Obama aren't that much different.

Janesvillemom:
McCain has many differences then Bush, all of which make him WORSE then Bush. He endorses the sham of Kyoto, which is a world wide wealth redistribution in the name of the junk science of Global warming. He voted against Bush's tax cutting policies (all though he now CLAIMS to support them). He's against oil drilling in places like ANWAR (Bush supports it). He opposes keeping Guantanamo Bay open, and water boarding (Bush is for both). I could keep going, but i don't feel like wasting my time. Mccain is very center-liberal. That's why many Democrats endorse him. Joe Biden was actually a big McCain supporter before this election year began. Leibermann is a big endorser of McCain. Leibermann ran AGAINST Bush (as VP), of course, so that alone tells you the two (MCcain and Bush) are not exactly the same.
.
The left loves to paint them as being the same because Bush is HUGELY unpopular. The reality is McCain is much worse then Bush, and Obama is worse then them all. You will see that in the coming 4 years, with which ever one of these clowns wins.

Whatdidyousay:
yep; that's exactly how I feel to. I personally will be laughing my ass off if Obabma wins, and the hope and change is another Carter regime of double digit everything. Like you, I really don't care to much any more. I am debt free, and have stockpiled large amounts of cash. Hard to be taxed when you when you hold cash (short of the small interest you make on it). I've got my gun, plenty of ammunition, stock piles of food, ext... I'm well prepared for the disaster that will soon be coming with either one of these two buffoons.

I was trying to find Bush's campaign promises from 2000 and I came across this endorsement:

Does America need continuity for the next four years, or does it need to change the tone and direction of our nation's course?
We believe a fundamental shift is needed. True, the last eight years have brought unrivalled peace and prosperity.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/oct...
*
Ha! I guess we got a BIG CHANGE from that miserable PEACE and PROSPERITY!

Can someone tell me one policy difference between McCain and Bush? I can't see anything that McCain is promising that differs from Bush, especially if you look at what Bush was promising in his campaigns (rather than just what he actually did). Is there ANYTHING?
*
And if you are worried about Obama's programs, I think the bail out has pretty much tied the hands of whoever is our next president, we're broke.

Janie7
If McCain didn't know and wasn't associated with any questionable characters, guilt by association might work, but don't throw stones when you live in a glass house.

1) Guilt by association! Rezko did NOT help him buy his house! Rezko bought an adjoining lot from which Obama bought a portion at fair market value.
2) Obama’s Freddie/Fannie contributions account for about 0.03 percent of his total contributions to date. I think he should just return it or donate it to the treasury because it is really a drop in the bucket compared to what he has raised from INDIVIDUALS (which is where most of his money comes).
Individual contributions $426,902,991 94%
PAC contributions $450 0%
Candidate self-financing $0 0%
Federal Funds $0 0%
Other $27,152,882 6%
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summar...
3) Guilt by association again? He was on the board of a foundation with the man, it isn't like they were buddies or planning some kind of attacks together. Good grief, have you heard of the Keating Five? McCain, HIMSELF, acted in a very unethical way, not just his acquaintances!
Stop spreading the lies!
Here is Obama's page countering the smears (and it even has his birth certificate if you heard that it wasn't released).
http://www.fightthesmears.com/

Zoom - I agree, people have cited that Palin "has more executive experience than Obama." Granted she is the governor of Alaska for all of 20 months but here are somethings to condsider:

Obama
BA Columbia University
Harvard Law School
President Harvard Law Review
Professor of Constitutional Law
Community Organizer
Illinois State Sentor 8 years
US Senator ~ 2 years
while a US Senator sat on 13 Committees or Sub-Committees

Palin:
PTA member
City Council Member
Mayor of Wasilla - Population 9000
Governor of Alaska

Really? More experienced? The oath of office for the President of the United States:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

The key is "will do the best of my ability , preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

I question whether Palin has read the Constitution of the United States. Clearly, Obama, while he may have his own flaws, made a well educated, well thought out decision in selecting his running mate. McCain did not.

The most important criteria for picking a Vice President should be their ability to be President. If McCain truly thinks Palin was his best choice to replace him as President, I question his judgment. If McCain chose Palin as a campaign tactic, then he put his campaign before country. I don't see her being a plus for independant voters.

If you haven't dicided at this point you haven't been paying attention.

Honestly, I think that McCain's choice of Palin was tactically a good decison. First of all, Palin appeals to the evangelicals, a percentage of the population that McCain has struggled with. Second of all, it was a poor attempt to appeal to Hillary Clinton's supporters. However, I do question McCain's vetting process if there was any process at all.

I was on the fence until McCain picked Palin. If that choice is any indication of McCain's judgement, then I vote Obama.

bn1967 - I have nothing but the utmost respect for people who are able to maintain their composure and not turn what could be an intelligent conversation into an internet screaming match. I'll be happy to answer your question to the best of my ability. However, I have limited time at the moment as I'm about to watch a movie with my wife, but I did look a little bit for solid evidence on his stance on Partial Birth Abortion. Given my limited time, I was only able to do limited research at this time.

CNN has a list of the candidates positions:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/...

All the CNN issues page states is that he "disagreed with the Supreme Courts decision on the Partial Birth Abortion Act." It also doesn't say why he disagreed with the decision. Obama has been known to vote against legislation that could possibly pose a threat to Roe v. Wade, as Obama is pro-choice. Given that he has selected Senator Biden as his running mate, who is against Partial Birth Abortion, Senator Biden could be the voice of reason, and possibly change his stance on Partial Birth Abortion if he is truly for it. It is worth noting that he was not a US senator in 2003 when the bill was passed as he was still in Illinois, so therefore he was unable to vote for or against Partial Birth Abortion.

I did find this article:
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/tal...
Which gives Obama and McCain's position on abortion in interviews that were conducted.

I hope this helps.

iguernsey, like I said I'm undecided at this time and found your post interesting and will have to check out the links. In response to:

" Complete fact checking of this "10 point plan" reveals that while the NRA "stands by their facts" several of their points are complete fabrications and the rest are half truths. This is just one example of the attacks that Obama has been under this election year, others are his supposed "support" for infanticide,"

what exactlly is his stand on partial birth abortions? I'm not trying to start anything; just trying to find out the truth.

Shameless self-promotion,
http://thejasondoctrine.blogspot.com/

If interested, please read my blog and possibly leave a comment. My teachers in high school, mostly English and in math, always said that you should "show your work." In any type of writing, especially while talking about politics, you should cite your sources. The ability for most people to do that is seriously lacking at this point in time. It is almost as if we have lost our ability to think for ourselves and just take the news as it is, spoon fed to us.

Through my research, the McCain/Palin ticket is not America's best option this election year, it is the Obama/Biden ticket that offers this country the best hope for the future.

I'm not trying to persuade anyone, but it would be really nice if people would read a little bit, and learn some facts before spouting off "gems" of information like the NRA just put out about "Obama's 10 point plan for change." Complete fact checking of this "10 point plan" reveals that while the NRA "stands by their facts" several of their points are complete fabrications and the rest are half truths. This is just one example of the attacks that Obama has been under this election year, others are his supposed "support" for infanticide, his "comprehensive plan to teach sex-ed to kindergarteners" and his supposed Muslim ties are among just a few of them. How bad are the lies from the left" Nowhere near as bad as the garbage that is being spewed by the right. Face it, the right is feeling threatened and they are on attack mode, even if it is a lie. Most people believe everything they read or hear anyways.

some reference links:
http://www.factcheck.org
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com
http://www.huffingtonpost.com
http://www.votesmart.org
http://www.opensecrets.org
http://earmarks.omb.gov - just incase you want to know about earmarks.

My biggest problem with Obama is that he opposes the ban on partial-birth abortions. As a father with 2 young daughters I can't imagine what he is thinking. These types of abortions DO NOT save the lives of the mothers; it's selfish murder of babies; no better than infanticide. I'm disgusted with him for that. However, I need to weigh more pros and cons between the candidates before I make a final decision.

they both are terrible candidates

well if u noticed john mccain switches up his story about what hes goin to do with the country all the time its rediculous, hes a waste of commercial air time and a pick to be president get real obama ftw

It's okay, Whatdidyousay. You'll see the country go down the tubes if McCain wins, so if you actually intend to vote, your wish may come true.
It will definitley come true if he is elected and dies in office, as last nights debate clearly illustrated.

Belisamasana: Of course she did better than expected. There were absolutely no expectations for her going into this debate.

Where is the option in this poll for "none of the above"?. Someone should do what Richard Prior did in the movie Brewsters millions!

I guess if that's the way you interpret his statement, so be it.

Redhawk...I did watch it, twice. His later comments were in regard to Joe's belief that VP Dick was overstepping. But, that does not change the fact the article he stated was for the VP's role in the senate which is legislative. Again his statement "The idea he doesn’t realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that’s the Executive Branch." Article 1 defines the VP's role in the legislate body (Pres of Senate), article 2 describes the VP's role in the executive branch.

RetiredAirForce, why don't you watch the whole answer that Biden gave? He is talking about the fact that Cheney thinks he is part of the Senate, and he is explaining what his role in the Senate is, according to the Constitution.

I think I found the culprit with the voting, check this video:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081013/ho...

Redhawk...this is his quote "Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we’ve had probably in American history. The idea he doesn’t realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that’s the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that."

He was wrong.

as for Obama's associations...follow the money:
1. he's linked with indicted fundrasier Tony Rezko, who helped Obama buy his house.

2. Obama is #2 on the list of who has rec'd the most $$ from Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae lobbyists-and that after only a few years in the senate, when 1/2 of that time he was running for president (or should we say, only 'present')

3. he is connected to Bill Ayers. Don't try to say 'but Barry was only 8 when Ayers was blowing things up.' Ayers himself continues to say he wished he could have blown up more & is completely unrepentent.

Is McCain perfect? No. Is he better than Obama? Yes. Do I vote straight party ticket? No.

Actually, RetiredAirForce, Article 1 of the US Constitution does spell out the role of the Vice-President as the far as being the President of the Senate is concerned, and that's the issue the Biden was talking about at the time.

Looks like a Bush supporter could not stand to see a real poll so they have to fake it to look like McCain is "Da man"!
What do you expect?!

Looks like some one had a lot of time on their hand to keep voting until their candidate was winning.

Palin last night displayed her superficial knowledge base. There is no depth to her governmental knowledge. Her replies where simply memorized lines. I pity this Country if Mc Cain is elected and she is the Vice President. Her folksy approach only proved to me that she lacks substance.

Did everyone see the slam Joe B put on VP Dick? The bad thing was Joe B, who has been in the Senate for over 30 years, doesn't know which article of the constitution contains the executive role of the office of VP. He stated article 1, but this covers the role of VP in relation to the senate...article 2 is the one that covers the executive role.

At this point, most of us are decided. Those who aren't probably won't decide until the last minute. It's going to be a close election. Regardless of the rhetoric from either side's supporters, those undecided voters should spend a little time visiting various sources to get information on where the candidates stand on issues you care about.
*
Janie, I'm sorry, but you're clueless. If you're not going to vote for someone based on guilt by association, refer to the Keating 5 (without McCain, there would be only 4), or Sen. Stevens in Alaska. McCain's advisory group is made up almost entirely of lobbyists. These are the same lobbyists who helped push through the deregulations on financial corporations that have gotten us in this mess. Palin talked in so many circles last night I went to sleep dizzy. Most of the time she offered answers to questions that weren't even asked. She did better than I expected, but the bottom line is that she is ill equipped to hold such an important position.

This mess we are in today is not just the result of one administration or one party. This is a conglomoeration of promises made to get elected and then forgotten until the next election.
Remember when the "Great Society" was established to eliminate proverty? Well, it's 40 yrs later and we still have proverty. Why?
One reason is that if there was no one in proverty, what party would have no case to get elected on? Obama said he will give you back your money, well almost since a lot of it will have to go pay for the programs he's promising to create. Give the government a $1 and you'll get back the bill.
The poor need help, we all need help, but one of these days it would be nice if an administration and a congress would do something about it besides talk and blame each other.
And we, as citizans of this great country, need to stand up and make our elected rep's work for us and not just the party. They should know that they work for us, not us working for them. Nothing will get done until they realize that we no longer will put up with their constant bickering.

the chickens come home to roost, GD America statements were made in 2001...there was plenty of time even in the last 7 years to be well aware. Obama is either a liar or way to gullible to sit in the Oval Office.

He's also deeply connected with ACORN, another kettle of rotting fish.

nah... I haven't shot a gun in over 35 years.

And what has Wright been preaching for the last 20 years? I don't know for sure, just that the last couple of years he has gone over the edge. Maybe he just recently went wacko or desperately needed his 15 min of fame, I agree he is way off kilter, but unless you have proof to show he was this way for 20 years then don't make such blanket statements like that. You sound like Cheney.

1. Biden said: "the most dangerous VP Is Cheney" yeah, I think that would really have to go Aaron Burr

2. Biden mistated the what 1st article of the US Constitution covers

3. As for Obama...he sat in that church for 20 years. He named a book after one of Wright's sermons. Does any one honestly believe Obama did not know the things Wright was preaching? Either Obama is lying through his teeth, or he's very gullible & was seriously decieved-and we don't need those attributes in the Oval Office.

Actually, Bosniaks is the correct term. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosniaks

'palin is the only one who can make bush look smart' thats funny:) but i think the proper phrase is 'palin is the only one who can make bush look not as dumb'

I caught the O'Biden slip, as well as Biden's "Bosniacs" slip ;) I thought she did well...better than expected.

president obama.

raystone, I'm glad you bring this up. The State of Nevada requires a "None of these candidates" ballot option for all state-wide offices. I have personally checked the write-in box and entered "None Above" whenever I've felt that was the best choice. Most folks laugh at the notion but should we really be forced to vote for a 'lesser evil'? A "None Above" vote is the only way to say, "Yes, I am interested and engaged in the democratic process but I don't want any of these folks in power!"

It is simply too easy for politicians to dismiss low voter turn-out as 'voter apathy' or some other reason that suits their agenda. Casting a vote for "None Above" is never ambiguous.

(Incidentally, The Gazette should consider this principle and apply it to every one of its on-line polls. This poll itself is an excellent example. Apparently, Gazette believes that if one isn't for either McCain or Obama then one is obviously indecisive.)

"For a ticket that wants to talk about change and looking into the future, there's just too much finger-pointing backwards to ever make us believe that that's where you're going," Sarah Palin

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." George Santayana

That's because she and John McCain do not want to look back at the train wreck their party caused and pretend that they are some kind of "new" Republican. No change there!

Palin was coached very good in her cliche's and generic political say nothings, but still looked very nervous when asked for specifics. She seemed like she was reading off a teleprompter instead of using free thought. Not who I want to talk to dignitaries and such. You betcha!
I also thought it was funny when she called him Senator O'Biden. Most people probably missed that little slip.

If Palin were V.P. and she met with foreign dignitaries, do you think they would be able to even understand her colloquial-style English? She came from a family of teachers? If you owned a small business, whom would YOU hire? These are truly dangerous times and the danger is clearly not from outside our borders. As the Native Americans once noted, please vote keeping in mind the "7th generation". Vote Obama/Biden!

Obama for president! I am klick and i approve this message.

I can only hope and pray, that after listening to tonights debate.... that all of us true AMERICANS vote for the party who can truly make the difference for us all. And it is NOT the 44yr. old wanna be vice president. I was not at all impressed. Please think!!!!! She truly does not have what it takes to be president if for gods sake that day would come..

don't bet on it clouds...in this case there will be alot of people, especially those older blue collar people who say they will vote what the union tells them to vote and then vote differently at the polls. I have a lot of union workers in my family and not one of them is really voting for Obama. They usually vote democrat btw.

Polls are showing at least 5-7% are voting other than Obama and McCain. If 3rd party candidates can't all be listed, can there be at least a "none of the above" option ?