A bit late....but did anyone watch the debates on friday night?

Its no secret on NOOL that I'm an Independent that is Republican leaning. Your reasons for not voting for McCain aren't yer own though... yer just reeling off rhetoric... give me something with some substance, something to sink my teeth into. The "Bush for another 8 years" arguement is so paperthin, if you don't reel off rhetoric and actually do some of your OWN research by votes on measures and bills you might be surprised in what you find.

What I find annoying is NOT people that vote for an opposing party, but do so by rhetoric and won't go outside thier comfortzone by ACTUALLY giving the other candidate a chance.

EdelBrock wrote: Its no secret on NOOL that I'm an Independent that is Republican leaning. Your reasons for not voting for McCain aren't yer own though... yer just reeling off rhetoric... give me something with some substance, something to sink my teeth into. The "Bush for another 8 years" arguement is so paperthin, if you don't reel off rhetoric and actually do some of your OWN research by votes on measures and bills you might be surprised in what you find.

What I find annoying is NOT people that vote for an opposing party, but do so by rhetoric and won't go outside thier comfortzone by ACTUALLY giving the other candidate a chance.

I do my research. I watch the news just like you and I listen to what top political analysts say. I have been following the campaign very closely and know where Barack stands on issues and I know where John stands on issues.

Surely you're familiar with McCain's 95% record of voting with Bush....if you are referring to the 5% of the time he opposed Bush it would be far and few in between. And that's not rhetoric...that's fact. McCain agreed with Bush 95% of the time on issues and bills. Look it up.

I agree with Barack Obama's stance on ending the Iraqi war, I disagree with John's.

I agree with Obama's stance on regulating business so we never have to face another financial crisis like this current one again John believes in deregulation....you should know that. He also believes in lowing taxes for big corporations....he admitted it during the debate.....I don't agree with that.

I agree with Obama about the need to make Healthcare affordable for everyone John wants to deregulate the health care system and give families money to decide if they want health care or not...again, don't agree

I have a mind of my own, EdelBrock. Yes I consider myself a liberal democrat, but I agree with Obama on just about all the issues. I only listed some examples. By all means be an Independent, but don't assume i'm just spewing rhetoric. I've done my research and I know who is right for our country.

J

No Holiday wrote:

I do my research. I watch the news just like you and I listen to what top political analysts say. I have been following the campaign very closely and know where Barack stands on issues and I know where John stands on issues.

Surely you're familiar with McCain's 95% record of voting with Bush....if you are referring to the 5% of the time he opposed Bush it would be far and few in between. And that's not rhetoric...that's fact. McCain agreed with Bush 95% of the time on issues and bills. Look it up.

Well that's spin talk. He has voted alongside Republican line 95% of the time, and Obama has voted along Democrate lines 97% of the time. McCain voted has been as low as 77% alongside Bush. http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_it_true_john_mccain_voted_with.html

I agree with Barack Obama's stance on ending the Iraqi war, I disagree with John's.

ummm... this is Obama's biggest farce. He stated he would end the WAR in Iraq, but what he's not telling you is he still plans on having 30,000-50,000 troops still in place there (numbers that were derived from John King from CNN). Ending the war is a play on words... because OFFICIALLY the war in Iraq is already over, we are in an occupation (by UN definitions of war/occupation). He'll end the "war" but not the way he's leading people to believe....

I agree with Obama's stance on regulating business so we never have to face another financial crisis like this current one again John believes in deregulation....you should know that. He also believes in lowing taxes for big corporations....he admitted it during the debate.....I don't agree with that.

Neither candidate has any real world solutions to the current problem and this is stated by almost every unbiased political contributer on CNN or BBC.

Look more into lowering taxes on big corporations. It sounds at first like giving the big guy more breaks and hurting the little guy... but look at cause &effect... if you tax a large corporation more, do you really think they will be the one given the burden? Something tells me they'll pass it on to the little guy, and make even more profits while doing it....

I agree with Obama about the need to make Healthcare affordable for everyone John wants to deregulate the health care system and give families money to decide if they want health care or not...again, don't agree

I think "making it afforable" is the whole problem, Obama's healthcare system isn't affordable to the nation (100 billion a year)... someone needs to pay the ticket... how is it goig to be done? Tax the rich... yeah that's not gonna work...

"Look more into lowering taxes on big corporations. It sounds at first like giving the big guy more breaks and hurting the little guy... but look at cause &effect... if you tax a large corporation more, do you really think they will be the one given the burden? Something tells me they'll pass it on to the little guy, and make even more profits while doing it...."

EdelBrock.....they won't pass the burden on the little guy if there is proper REGULATION, which is what Obama is pressing for, and which is what McCain is generally against. That's the whole point of Business Regulation....to make sure that the "big guy" doesn't screw the "little guy" over for profit. And big corporations make enough profit (well excluding many banks as of recently) do they really need more breaks when middle class workers are struggling month to month to pay the bills and feed their kids.....I respect your opinions but I disagree with many of them....at least when it comes to politics. But I guess that's to be expected since I lean to the left and you tilt towards the right.

J

No Holiday wrote: "Look more into lowering taxes on big corporations. It sounds at first like giving the big guy more breaks and hurting the little guy... but look at cause &effect... if you tax a large corporation more, do you really think they will be the one given the burden? Something tells me they'll pass it on to the little guy, and make even more profits while doing it...."

EdelBrock.....they won't pass the burden on the little guy if there is proper REGULATION, which is what Obama is pressing for, and which is what McCain is generally against. That's the whole point of Business Regulation....to make sure that the "big guy" doesn't screw the "little guy" over for profit. And big corporations make enough profit (well excluding many banks as of recently) do they really need more breaks when middle class workers are struggling month to month to pay the bills and feed their kids.....I respect your opinions but I disagree with many of them....at least when it comes to politics. But I guess that's to be expected since I lean to the left and you tilt towards the right.

J

Again, momentarily it sounds good... but again, cause&effect. Taxes on corporation will increase the costs of making the product. Two bad things happen here:

1. The costs are more so the corporation will show, through legitimate numbers to thier regulator, that they need to raise the price of thier goods, to keep the business running. The regulator will agree. Effectively passing on the taxes to the consumer.

2. Higher taxes on corporations will force them to look further into overseas production, where the taxes are cheaper. There already is a shift overseas, but there are goods where transportation, tax cost and desire to stay in the US will be shifted further. Raise taxes, loose businesses, which looses employment, and ships our money to other countries worsening our economy. Not to mention higher regulation will equate to more costs, further forcing the move.

This isn't rhetoric I'm speaking, but simple economics.

It would be nice to be able to regulate, enforce, and tax the hell out of the rich... I'm not against that part; its the part where it will further degrade our economy... and it won't be the big hurting, rather the little guy.

and don't get me wrog, its not like I'm defending McCains economic policies... both candidates have nothing great in thier economic packages... they both need a huge revamping...

EdelBrock wrote: because OFFICIALLY the war in Iraq is already over

So they officially declared war on Iraq?

EdelBrock wrote:

No Holiday wrote: "Look more into lowering taxes on big corporations. It sounds at first like giving the big guy more breaks and hurting the little guy... but look at cause &effect... if you tax a large corporation more, do you really think they will be the one given the burden? Something tells me they'll pass it on to the little guy, and make even more profits while doing it...."

EdelBrock.....they won't pass the burden on the little guy if there is proper REGULATION, which is what Obama is pressing for, and which is what McCain is generally against. That's the whole point of Business Regulation....to make sure that the "big guy" doesn't screw the "little guy" over for profit. And big corporations make enough profit (well excluding many banks as of recently) do they really need more breaks when middle class workers are struggling month to month to pay the bills and feed their kids.....I respect your opinions but I disagree with many of them....at least when it comes to politics. But I guess that's to be expected since I lean to the left and you tilt towards the right.

J

Again, momentarily it sounds good... but again, cause&effect. Taxes on corporation will increase the costs of making the product. Two bad things happen here:

1. The costs are more so the corporation will show, through legitimate numbers to thier regulator, that they need to raise the price of thier goods, to keep the business running. The regulator will agree. Effectively passing on the taxes to the consumer.

2. Higher taxes on corporations will force them to look further into overseas production, where the taxes are cheaper. There already is a shift overseas, but there are goods where transportation, tax cost and desire to stay in the US will be shifted further. Raise taxes, loose businesses, which looses employment, and ships our money to other countries worsening our economy. Not to mention higher regulation will equate to more costs, further forcing the move.

This isn't rhetoric I'm speaking, but simple economics.

It would be nice to be able to regulate, enforce, and tax the hell out of the rich... I'm not against that part; its the part where it will further degrade our economy... and it won't be the big hurting, rather the little guy.

and don't get me wrog, its not like I'm defending McCains economic policies... both candidates have nothing great in thier economic packages... they both need a huge revamping...

You are right in that INCREASING corporate taxes can lead to those repercussions. I'm not asking for corporate taxes to be increased. I just don't think it's fair to cut corporate taxes and not for the struggling middle-working class. McCain was proposing corporate tax cuts because according to him "US corporate taxes are significantly higher than other countries"....And yes I know about moving headquarters overseas and hiring foreign employees to do the same job Americans would do but for a fraction of the payroll. I'm not saying tax the hell out of corporations, i'm just saying don't give them any more stupid breaks and don't let them move their headquarters to another country so they can avoid more taxes and keep our economy in the shitter.

You sound like you believe in the concept of "Regeanomics"....the trickle down effect....If you provide plenty of opportunity and growth for major corporations and cut their taxes more and regulate them less, all that extra profit they make will go into creating more jobs, lower prices on their product, etc........I think history has taught us that this "Trickle Down Economics" approach does NOT work! Corporations abuse these priveledges more often than not when the government turns their head the other way. Have you seen Michael Moore's first documentary Roger and Me? A perfect example of this. You have to put the money into the common people, for they are the majority of the country, and if they have more money, they will spend more, therefore strengthening the economy.

J