Why should I vote for John McCain?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for bdever32
bdever32

757

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#1 bdever32
Member since 2005 • 757 Posts

I'll have to finish this later, but this should be a good start... But these are my reasons why you shouldn't vote for McCain.

This first category alone is why I would have a very hard time ever voting for him.

John McCain on veterans, from his website:

"John McCain has been a leader in Congress, fighting for all those who serve and their families, improving veterans' health care,
providing veterans with the benefits they have earned, easing their transition to civilian life, and honoring the fallen."

In 2001, McCain voted against increasing the amount of money available for veterans medical care by $650 million

In 2003, McCain urged Senate members to table a vote to provide $1 billion for equipment for National Guard and Reserves in Iraq. The vote never passed.

In 2003, McCain voted to table an amendment for an additional $322 million for safety equipment for soldiers in Iraq.

In 2004, McCain voted against creating a reserve fund to allow for an increase in veterans medical care by $1.8 billion.

In 2006, he voted against increasing veterans medical services funding by $1.5 billion

He also was one of only 13 senators to vote against $430 million for the treatment of veterans by the Dept. of Veterans Affairs.

He also voted against an amendment that would provide $20 million to the VA for health care facilities.

In 2007, McCain voted against the Webb amendment that called for adequate troop rest between deployments.

Energy Policy

From John McCain's website:

"Our nation's future security and prosperity depends on the next President making the hard choices that will break our nation's strategic dependence on foreign sources of energy and will ensure our economic prosperity by meeting tomorrow's demands for a clean portfolio"

He says our dependence on foreign oil is a security threat, but he voted against legistlation calling on the president to submit a plan to reduce foreign imports by 40%

In 2000, McCain called for a end to tax breaks for oil and gas companies. But in 2007, he was the only senator to miss the vote on whether to end the $13 billion in tax breaks for oil companies. That $13 billion would have been used to invest in clean energy technology that he supposedly supports.

McCain missed the vote on "green" tax credits in the stimulus package. He was the only senator to miss the vote.

McCain missed the vote on renewable energy in 2007. The bill would have required electric utilities to produce at least 15% of their electricity from renewable sources.

McCain missed the vote to establish $31 billion in tax incentives for renewable energy and efficiency.

In 2005 he voted against a renewable portfolio standard.

In 2002, he voted against the 20% requirement(to have 20% of electricity from renewable sources)

In 2002, he also voted against a 10% renewable requirement twice.

In 2002, he voted against efficiency standards that would have required a 30% increase in efficiency for air conditioners. This bill would have saved consumers $1 billion on electric bills, reduced energy use enough to avoid the construction of 45 new power plants and reduced greenhouse gases by 2.5 million metric tons.

McCain on the economy

In 2005, McCain stated that Bush's tax cuts were immoral and heavily favored the rich. In an interview with the WSJ on Nov 26, 2005 he said, "I just thought it was too tilted to the wealthy, and I still do". In 2007, he denied saying that(a blatant lie) and now he supports those very same tax cuts.

McCain said, then denied, that he was not well versed on economics. He stated in a 2005 interview with the Wall Street Journal, Nov 26, 2005, "I'm going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated." He then said in an interview with Tim Russert, "Actually, I don't know where you got that quote from. I'm very well-versed in economics."

Alzheimers moment?

On May 12 2008, McCain said, "I can eliminate $100 billion of wasteful and earmark spending immediately--$35 billion in big spending bills in the last two years, and another $65 billion that has already been made a permanent part of the budget."

Sounds nice, but what he probably didn't realize is that most of that money is for foreign aid to countries like Israel, Egypt and Jordan that McCain has already said he won't touch. So basically he just said that because it sounded nice.

McCain said, "It's not the duty of government to bail out and reward those who act irresponsibly, whether they're big banks or small borrowers."

But McCain supported the bail out of Bear Stearns which goes against that philosophy.

McCain supported the estate tax. He said,
"In his 1906 State of the Union Address, President Theodore Roosevelt proposed the creation of a federal inheritance tax . Roosevelt explained: 'The man of great wealth owes a peculiar obligation to the State because he derives special advantages from the mere existence of government.' Additionally, in a 1907 speech he said: 'Most great civilized countries have an income tax and an inheritance tax. In my judgment both should be part of our system of federal taxation.' He noted, however, that such taxation should 'be aimed merely at the inheritance or transmission in their entirety of those fortunes swollen beyond all healthy limits.'

"I agree with President Roosevelt, and I remain opposed to full repeal of the estate tax."

Then after becoming a nominee, he said,
"Another of my disagreements with Senator Obama concerns the estate tax, which he proposes to increase to a top rate of 55 percent. The estate tax is one of the most unfair tax laws on the books, and the first step to reform is to keep it predictable and keep it low. After a lifetime building up a business, and paying taxes on every dollar that business earns, that asset should not be subjected to a confiscatory tax."

So, which is it?

McCain said that, if elected, he would balance the federal budget by the end of his first term. Soon after, he decided that he wouldn't even try. Soon after that, he changed his position back to his first one.

Actually, John McCain has changed his economic view many times.

McCain on national security

McCain said that Bush's warrantless wiretapping program circumvented the law. He said, "There are some areas where the statutes don't apply, such as in the surveillance of overseas communications. Where they do apply, however, I think that presidents have the obligation to obey and enforce laws that are passed by Congress and signed into law by the president, no matter what the situation is."

Now he says exactly the opposite.

McCain opposed the indefinite detention of terrorist suspects. He said that detainees "have rights under various human rights declarations, one of which is the right not to be detained indefinitely."

Then when the supreme court reached the same conclusion, he said it was "one of the worst decisions in the history of this country."

Misc.

McCain missed the vote for the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which was mainly to make sure women are paid equally for equal work.

Edit: added the Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

Avatar image for IMaBIOHAZARD
IMaBIOHAZARD

1464

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#2 IMaBIOHAZARD
Member since 2008 • 1464 Posts
nd, his tax plan will only have us forking over half of what Obama had in mind.
Avatar image for Palax
Palax

2399

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Palax
Member since 2003 • 2399 Posts

Watch this video http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/468-the-real-mccain

This guy has 0 credibility.

Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts
Copycatter!:x Though needs moar sources.
Avatar image for Scarker
Scarker

1433

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Scarker
Member since 2008 • 1433 Posts

nd, his tax plan will only have us forking over half of what Obama had in mind.IMaBIOHAZARD

Obama's tax plans are much better than McCain's.

Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts

In 2001, McCain voted against increasing the amount of money available for veterans medical care by $650 million

bdever32

Wait a minute. . . .according to your own source, he voted "yea" to give veterans the money.:|

McCain (R-AZ), Yea

I smell copy pasta.

Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts

Um, now that I've read them, at least two of your veteran sources explicitly say that McCain voted IN FAVOR of the bills, with a few "nay" votes.

I call bull****. This data was blindly copy/pasted from some Liberal website.

Disgraceful that you don't even do your own research or type your own opinions.

Avatar image for ironcreed
ironcreed

14195

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 46

User Lists: 0

#9 ironcreed
Member since 2005 • 14195 Posts

You guys seen this one yet, lol:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-DD5n_UEgE

Avatar image for Rikusaki
Rikusaki

16641

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#10 Rikusaki
Member since 2006 • 16641 Posts
Best political thread ever.
Avatar image for Rikusaki
Rikusaki

16641

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#11 Rikusaki
Member since 2006 • 16641 Posts

[QUOTE="IMaBIOHAZARD"]nd, his tax plan will only have us forking over half of what Obama had in mind.Scarker

Obama's tax plans are much better than McCain's.

Now that is what I'm talking about.

I don't get why consevatives are against this.

The rich can pay higher taxes, they ARE rich, right?

The middle cl@ss needs these tax cuts. NOT THE RICH.

Avatar image for snakebeater3
snakebeater3

1212

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 snakebeater3
Member since 2005 • 1212 Posts
wow it says he voted IN FAVOR of the veterans bills.. :roll:
Avatar image for Rikusaki
Rikusaki

16641

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#13 Rikusaki
Member since 2006 • 16641 Posts

wow it says he voted IN FAVOR of the veterans bills.. :roll:snakebeater3

Yeah, TC you might want to remove that one. The republicans are just going to keep attacking you on that one little mistake.

Avatar image for Rikusaki
Rikusaki

16641

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#14 Rikusaki
Member since 2006 • 16641 Posts

Um, now that I've read them, at least two of your veteran sources explicitly say that McCain voted IN FAVOR of the bills, with a few "nay" votes.

I call bull****. This data was blindly copy/pasted from some Liberal website.

Disgraceful that you don't even do your own research or type your own opinions.

Theokhoth

Wow that's a lot.

2 out of 20.

Avatar image for ferrari2001
ferrari2001

17772

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#15 ferrari2001
Member since 2008 • 17772 Posts
[QUOTE="Scarker"]

[QUOTE="IMaBIOHAZARD"]nd, his tax plan will only have us forking over half of what Obama had in mind.Rikusaki

Obama's tax plans are much better than McCain's.

Now that is what I'm talking about.

I don't get why consevatives are against this.

The rich can pay higher taxes, they ARE rich, right?

The middle cl@ss needs these tax cuts. NOT THE RICH.

I have a friend that falls in the 1% of America Range, he says his families buisness is already taxed several million a year.. That's rediculous and you want them to fork over more. The Way I see it McCain cuts taxes for everyone, obama cuts taxes for some but not all. And in a Recession it's either all or none.

Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts
[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

Um, now that I've read them, at least two of your veteran sources explicitly say that McCain voted IN FAVOR of the bills, with a few "nay" votes.

I call bull****. This data was blindly copy/pasted from some Liberal website.

Disgraceful that you don't even do your own research or type your own opinions.

Rikusaki

Wow that's a lot.

2 out of 20.

If you keep reading, you'll notice a broken link or two.

This is just copy/pasted garbage.

Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts

wow it says he voted IN FAVOR of the veterans bills.. :roll:snakebeater3

That's what happens when you copy/paste info without checking first.:lol:

Avatar image for ferrari2001
ferrari2001

17772

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#18 ferrari2001
Member since 2008 • 17772 Posts
[QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

Um, now that I've read them, at least two of your veteran sources explicitly say that McCain voted IN FAVOR of the bills, with a few "nay" votes.

I call bull****. This data was blindly copy/pasted from some Liberal website.

Disgraceful that you don't even do your own research or type your own opinions.

Theokhoth

Wow that's a lot.

2 out of 20.

If you keep reading, you'll notice a broken link or two.

This is just copy/pasted garbage.

He's an Obama fan boy, he has no idea why he's voting Obama only that he Speaks good.. So just ignor him.

Avatar image for bdever32
bdever32

757

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#19 bdever32
Member since 2005 • 757 Posts
Nice job in reading. Those "Yea" votes are votes to remove the bill from the floor.
Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts

Nice job in reading. Those "Yea" votes are votes to remove the bill from the floor.bdever32

You STILL copy/pasted this info. One of your links (I'll let you find the one) is broken.

Avatar image for bdever32
bdever32

757

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#21 bdever32
Member since 2005 • 757 Posts
Of course I copied and pasted information. I thought that was fairly obvious. I put my opinion in there a few times, but I figured facts were more important than my opinion. Those vote links are completely accurate though as they come directly from the Senate. Are you going to comment on why he voted against veterans benefits on many occasions or not?
Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts

Of course I copied and pasted information. I thought that was fairly obvious. I put my opinion in there a few times, but I figured facts were more important than my opinion. Those vote links are completely accurate though as they come directly from the Senate. Are you going to comment on why he voted against veterans benefits on many occasions or not?bdever32

Apparently, he's flip-flopped.:| You seem to be under the impression I approve of him.

I disapprove of using someone else's data without first checking it.

Avatar image for Rikusaki
Rikusaki

16641

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#23 Rikusaki
Member since 2006 • 16641 Posts
[QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="Scarker"]

[QUOTE="IMaBIOHAZARD"]nd, his tax plan will only have us forking over half of what Obama had in mind.ferrari2001

Obama's tax plans are much better than McCain's.

Now that is what I'm talking about.

I don't get why consevatives are against this.

The rich can pay higher taxes, they ARE rich, right?

The middle cl@ss needs these tax cuts. NOT THE RICH.

I have a friend that falls in the 1% of America Range, he says his families buisness is already taxed several million a year.. That's rediculous and you want them to fork over more. The Way I see it McCain cuts taxes for everyone, obama cuts taxes for some but not all. And in a Recession it's either all or none.

Obama lowers the taxes for the people who matter most.

Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts

Obama lowers the taxes for the people who matter most.

Rikusaki

"We the people hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal. . . ."

Avatar image for ferrari2001
ferrari2001

17772

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#25 ferrari2001
Member since 2008 • 17772 Posts
[QUOTE="ferrari2001"][QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="Scarker"]

[QUOTE="IMaBIOHAZARD"]nd, his tax plan will only have us forking over half of what Obama had in mind.Rikusaki

Obama's tax plans are much better than McCain's.

Now that is what I'm talking about.

I don't get why consevatives are against this.

The rich can pay higher taxes, they ARE rich, right?

The middle cl@ss needs these tax cuts. NOT THE RICH.

I have a friend that falls in the 1% of America Range, he says his families buisness is already taxed several million a year.. That's rediculous and you want them to fork over more. The Way I see it McCain cuts taxes for everyone, obama cuts taxes for some but not all. And in a Recession it's either all or none.

Obama lowers the taxes for the people who matter most.

I'm pretty sure the People who employ the middle and lower clas are important. How could you say they are any less important than the lower clas The Middle clas and Lower clas are important but there would be NO economy if it wasn't for the upper clas The more they are taxed the lower the lower/middle clas wages. There for taxes have to be lowered more to make up for it. It's a never ending cycle. Besides no matter what clas they are in, you NEVER raise any taxes during a recession like we are in now. NEVER not even on the top 1% category, it will trickle down and be detrimental to our economy.. Economics 101 that obama doesn't seem to understand.

Avatar image for Rikusaki
Rikusaki

16641

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#26 Rikusaki
Member since 2006 • 16641 Posts
[QUOTE="Rikusaki"]

Obama lowers the taxes for the people who matter most.

Theokhoth

"We the people hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal. . . ."

So...

Obama's plan gives the biggest cuts to those who make the least, while McCain would give the largest cuts to the very wealthy.

At least Obama's plan is more fair.

Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts
[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Rikusaki"]

Obama lowers the taxes for the people who matter most.

Rikusaki

"We the people hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal. . . ."

So...

Obama's plan gives the biggest cuts to those who make the least, while McCain would give the largest cuts to the very wealthy.

At least Obama's plan is more fair.

Not to the people getting the bigger cuts. You know, the ones who "matter the least"?

Avatar image for bdever32
bdever32

757

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#28 bdever32
Member since 2005 • 757 Posts

I checked every link and they all work fine for me... And the only reason I copied the voting information is because it provided specific links to actual votes from the senate website which I would assume means it is accurate.

Everything else provides exact quotes from McCain himself.

But since you want my opinion, I will tell you why I am voting against McCain. I'm voting against him because IMO he is one of the worst senators we have had in modern history. He surrounds himself with lobbyists and his position changes based on who is giving him money at the time. I realize this is common practice in the government, but I find him to be far worse than most. The fact is, you and I have no real idea of what to expect from him if he is elected president. He has changed his position so many times that it's impossible to tell. I think George W. Bush is one of the worst presidents we've ever had, but I would honestly rather have 4 more years of Bush than have 4 years of McCain because at least I know what to expect from him. His voting record against veterans is really what gets me pissed off about him. People actually believe he is a strong supporter of the troops that he wants to keep in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the truth is the complete opposite. I could never vote for someone so in favor of war and at the same time so in favor of screwing over our troops whenever he can. They deserve much better than McCain as their commander in chief.

Avatar image for hamstergeddon
hamstergeddon

7188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 hamstergeddon
Member since 2006 • 7188 Posts
[QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Rikusaki"]

Obama lowers the taxes for the people who matter most.

Theokhoth

"We the people hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal. . . ."

So...

Obama's plan gives the biggest cuts to those who make the least, while McCain would give the largest cuts to the very wealthy.

At least Obama's plan is more fair.

Not to the people getting the bigger cuts. You know, the ones who "matter the least"?


I would think people making the most money have a greater obligation to give back to the society than someone who makes half as much.
Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts


I would think people making the most money have a greater obligation to give back to the society than someone who makes half as much. hamstergeddon

I think they have no obligation except what they perceive themselves to have. A federally enforced obligation doesn't seem right.

Avatar image for Nintendo_Ownes7
Nintendo_Ownes7

30973

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#31 Nintendo_Ownes7
Member since 2005 • 30973 Posts
[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

Not to the people getting the bigger cuts. You know, the ones who "matter the least"?

hamstergeddon


I would think people making the most money have a greater obligation to give back to the society than someone who makes half as much.

I don't believe that just because The whole American Dream is to make money and Liberals say that we can't have that American Dream.

Edit* Theokhoth said it better.

Avatar image for Rikusaki
Rikusaki

16641

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#32 Rikusaki
Member since 2006 • 16641 Posts
[QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Rikusaki"]

Obama lowers the taxes for the people who matter most.

Theokhoth

"We the people hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal. . . ."

So...

Obama's plan gives the biggest cuts to those who make the least, while McCain would give the largest cuts to the very wealthy.

At least Obama's plan is more fair.

Not to the people getting the bigger cuts. You know, the ones who "matter the least"?

They make less so they should be taxed less.

Avatar image for hamstergeddon
hamstergeddon

7188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 hamstergeddon
Member since 2006 • 7188 Posts

[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"]
I would think people making the most money have a greater obligation to give back to the society than someone who makes half as much. Theokhoth

I think they have no obligation except what they perceive themselves to have. A federally enforced obligation doesn't seem right.


John Locke's Social Contract, buddy. Thomas Jefferson directly plagiarized from John Locke's Second Treatise of government when writing het Declaration of Indepenence. Our nation, like many other modern ones, are directly based on the ideals set out by John Locke. I suggest you become intimately familiar with his philosophy before engaging anyone in a political debate again.
Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts
[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"]
I would think people making the most money have a greater obligation to give back to the society than someone who makes half as much. hamstergeddon

I think they have no obligation except what they perceive themselves to have. A federally enforced obligation doesn't seem right.


John Locke's Social Contract, buddy. Thomas Jefferson directly plagiarized from John Locke's Second Treatise of government when writing het Declaration of Indepenence. Our nation, like many other modern ones, are directly based on the ideals set out by John Locke. I suggest you become intimately familiar with his philosophy before engaging anyone in a political debate again.

I love John Locke and am aware of his philosophies, at least to an extent. I still don't believe the government should enforce an obligation to give back to society. All men are created equal, not rich men matter less than poor men.

Avatar image for ferrari2001
ferrari2001

17772

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

#35 ferrari2001
Member since 2008 • 17772 Posts
[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Rikusaki"]

Obama lowers the taxes for the people who matter most.

Rikusaki

"We the people hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal. . . ."

So...

Obama's plan gives the biggest cuts to those who make the least, while McCain would give the largest cuts to the very wealthy.

At least Obama's plan is more fair.

Not to the people getting the bigger cuts. You know, the ones who "matter the least"?

They make less so they should be taxed less.

They are taxed less, ALOT less, the Top like 10% pay like 80 percent of the nations taxes, they are taxed plenty I see no reason to tax them more.,

Avatar image for bdever32
bdever32

757

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#36 bdever32
Member since 2005 • 757 Posts

The tax thing is something that I think is an "agree to disagree" kind of issue. Some believe that if you get rich it's because of the opportunities that our society provides and if you benefit more from that then you should give more back. In our glory days in the 50s-70s the rich were taxed very heavily and our economy was in great shape.

Others believe the opposite and that's fine. There's really no right answer, in my opinion, as both sides can be supported very well.

Avatar image for tbone29
tbone29

5552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 tbone29
Member since 2004 • 5552 Posts

I don't believe that just because The whole American Dream is to make money and Liberals say that we can't have that American Dream.

Edit* Theokhoth said it better.

Nintendo_Ownes7

And under John McCain, that "American Dream" will be near impossible to achieve for middle to lower ****s.

Avatar image for hamstergeddon
hamstergeddon

7188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 hamstergeddon
Member since 2006 • 7188 Posts
[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"]
I would think people making the most money have a greater obligation to give back to the society than someone who makes half as much. Theokhoth

I think they have no obligation except what they perceive themselves to have. A federally enforced obligation doesn't seem right.


John Locke's Social Contract, buddy. Thomas Jefferson directly plagiarized from John Locke's Second Treatise of government when writing het Declaration of Indepenence. Our nation, like many other modern ones, are directly based on the ideals set out by John Locke. I suggest you become intimately familiar with his philosophy before engaging anyone in a political debate again.

I love John Locke and am aware of his philosophies, at least to an extent. I still don't believe the government should enforce an obligation to give back to society. All men are created equal, not rich men matter less than poor men.


The government protects us and in turn we are obligated to abide by that government's laws and rules that the government sets in order to make its jobs of protection and utilitarianism possible. (to sum up a complicated philosophy) Even if those rules include a perceived violation of our rights (such as taxation)
Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#39 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts
[QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"]

I don't believe that just because The whole American Dream is to make money and Liberals say that we can't have that American Dream.

Edit* Theokhoth said it better.

tbone29

And under John McCain, that "American Dream" will be near impossible to achieve for middle to lower ****s.

Under Obama, the American Dream won't exist. Those who fulfill the American Dream must give up their money to help others fulfill it. It's a circle that ends with everything being moderate. The American Dream would cease to exist.

Avatar image for Rikusaki
Rikusaki

16641

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#40 Rikusaki
Member since 2006 • 16641 Posts
[QUOTE="tbone29"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"]

I don't believe that just because The whole American Dream is to make money and Liberals say that we can't have that American Dream.

Edit* Theokhoth said it better.

Theokhoth

And under John McCain, that "American Dream" will be near impossible to achieve for middle to lower ****s.

Under Obama, the American Dream won't exist. Those who fulfill the American Dream must give up their money to help others fulfill it. It's a circle that ends with everything being moderate. The American Dream would cease to exist.

Wow you are so wrong.

Just because the rich can't be as powerful doesn't mean everyone can't reach their goals.

WOW... :roll:

Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#41 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts


The government protects us and in turn we are obligated to abide by that government's laws and rules that the government sets in order to make its jobs of protection and utilitarianism possible. (to sum up a complicated philosophy) Even if those rules include a perceived violation of our rights (such as taxation)hamstergeddon

As much as I hate to invoke Godwin's Law, if the government began to rally up and murder Jews like the Nazis, and it was illegal to hold one in your home, would you turn one in if a Nazi knocked on your door?

My philosophy: no man should be subject to a violation of rights to benefit another, whether he is more or less fortunate or more or less successful, and no government has the right to alienate the rights of its people, without whom there would be no government.

Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts

Wow you are so wrong.

Just because the rich can't be as powerful doesn't mean everyone can't reach their goals.

WOW... :roll:

Rikusaki

The rich are paying 80% of America's taxes. You want it raised even higher, so that the less fortunate can have more money. The rich lose money, the poor gain money. Everyone becomes middle class, and the American Dream is rendered impossible.

Avatar image for deactivated-5f72436c301f5
deactivated-5f72436c301f5

237

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 deactivated-5f72436c301f5
Member since 2008 • 237 Posts
Can't find out how to create your own topic about John McCain?
Avatar image for Rikusaki
Rikusaki

16641

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#44 Rikusaki
Member since 2006 • 16641 Posts
[QUOTE="Rikusaki"]

Wow you are so wrong.

Just because the rich can't be as powerful doesn't mean everyone can't reach their goals.

WOW... :roll:

Theokhoth

The rich are paying 80% of America's taxes. You want it raised even higher, so that the less fortunate can have more money. The rich lose money, the poor gain money. Everyone becomes middle class, and the American Dream is rendered impossible.

No. It means that the many can reach their life goals instead of the select few.

Avatar image for Theokhoth
Theokhoth

36799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45 Theokhoth
Member since 2008 • 36799 Posts
[QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Rikusaki"]

Wow you are so wrong.

Just because the rich can't be as powerful doesn't mean everyone can't reach their goals.

WOW... :roll:

Rikusaki

The rich are paying 80% of America's taxes. You want it raised even higher, so that the less fortunate can have more money. The rich lose money, the poor gain money. Everyone becomes middle class, and the American Dream is rendered impossible.

No. It means that the many can reach their life goals instead of the select few.

Unless, of course, their life goals include the American Dream.;) People dream big. How can they achieve their goals if they want to be rich?

Avatar image for hamstergeddon
hamstergeddon

7188

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46 hamstergeddon
Member since 2006 • 7188 Posts

[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"]
The government protects us and in turn we are obligated to abide by that government's laws and rules that the government sets in order to make its jobs of protection and utilitarianism possible. (to sum up a complicated philosophy) Even if those rules include a perceived violation of our rights (such as taxation)Theokhoth

As much as I hate to invoke Godwin's Law, if the government began to rally up and murder Jews like the Nazis, and it was illegal to hold one in your home, would you turn one in if a Nazi knocked on your door?

My philosophy: no man should be subject to a violation of rights to benefit another, whether he is more or less fortunate or more or less successful, and no government has the right to alienate the rights of its people, without whom there would be no government.


Actually there were some rights that John Locke said were undeniable, some of which happen to be the rights to life and liberty. So in this example the government would be violating the Social Contract.
And your philosophy is certianly attractive to someone of financial or social success... but what about everybody else?
Avatar image for deactivated-5a4c1fedbd347
deactivated-5a4c1fedbd347

1523

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47 deactivated-5a4c1fedbd347
Member since 2006 • 1523 Posts
Great job. Put together well.
Avatar image for Egonga
Egonga

18205

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 0

#48 Egonga
Member since 2002 • 18205 Posts

I'd vote for McCain because he's the original maverick. THE ORIGINAL. NRFB!

...I'm actually from England, but for the two weeks I stayed in Florida this year, I just didn't like the cut of his jib. His Jib PR guys really need to get on the ball.

Avatar image for Rikusaki
Rikusaki

16641

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#50 Rikusaki
Member since 2006 • 16641 Posts
[QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="Theokhoth"][QUOTE="Rikusaki"]

Wow you are so wrong.

Just because the rich can't be as powerful doesn't mean everyone can't reach their goals.

WOW... :roll:

Theokhoth

The rich are paying 80% of America's taxes. You want it raised even higher, so that the less fortunate can have more money. The rich lose money, the poor gain money. Everyone becomes middle class, and the American Dream is rendered impossible.

No. It means that the many can reach their life goals instead of the select few.

Unless, of course, their life goals include the American Dream.;) People dream big. How can they achieve their goals if they want to be rich?

They can!

This way everyone has the equal chance to become sucessful.