Jump to content

MMI Enterprises

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    3,057

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Posts posted by MMI Enterprises

  2. Posted · Report reply

    Jeff, Make sure to watch this guys archives to see if todays little economic debate on cnn shows up: Jeremy Siegel Article Listing Doubt it will show though cause he got thrashed by the other guy. Sorry..missed other guys name, but he spoke the truth of it. It's all inflationary and the stock prices/housing market had to fail cause it valued falsely. Was almost word for word what I saying.

  3. Posted · Report reply

    Election woes defined by prose…..” by Jerry Molen

    We just experienced an over hyped, positively outrageous primary election season that has left me cold and wondering where the heads of our citizens are hiding out. Must be someplace where the sun doesn’t get to very often.

    At one time in my life I was a determined, dedicated and ever loyal registered Democrat. Then something happened (Lyndon Baines Johnson) that turned my life around and gave me much pause as to the veracity of a party that dwelt on and fed off of the most unfortunate among us. Some of those unfortunates were in their positions in life by way of their own choosing and others were there by circumstance. But always, always with a door open to them to reach for new heights, achieve new goals, change their lives for the better. And also, always ever present were the bottom feeders doing everything they could to take advantage of those who had not or have not seen the light of better days and times nor realizing they were in fact the masters of their own destiny. They had come to believe that they were dependent on those in power in Washington and that they would look out for them and take care of their every need. They are still waiting and expecting al those promised freebies.

    Most people aren’t even aware that the Democrats ruled Washington for over 40 years. It wasn’t until 1994 when the so called Gingrich Revolution changed that for a short period of time. Nor do people realize that it was the Dem’s that created the failed policies of the many entitlement programs that are falling apart right before our eyes. Please do not think I find the Republicans blameless in all this. They too, suffer from ego inflation and greed motivators built into the system. It’s just that the past few months I’ve listened to the rantings and railings of the left in America calling for more giveaways and better ways to obtain the proverbial ‘free lunch’.

    I think that to sum up my feelings and why I am so set apart from those within the circles of political power and influence can be illustrated best by a quote by noted basketball legend and talk show co-host Charles Barkley:

    “Poor people have been voting for Democrats for the last fifty years….and they are still poor”.

    And now with the election results comes the promises of “change”. “Change we can believe in.” “Change for the future”. When in fact if you really, I mean REALLY listen to what the new messiah is asking for is not ‘change of policy’ or ‘change for the better’. He is warning all of us that he wants our change all right, ‘loose change’, pocket change’, social change and political change……So people wake up. For if you don’t the change you get may not be the change you were expecting or the change you wanted.

    To close my screed, I want to leave you with some JM predictions in the event the junior Senator from Illinois becomes President and especially if the House and Senate are veto proof.

    1). Strict new gun laws will be enacted even though he promised he would not.

    2). The phrase “In God We Trust” will be removed from all currency.

    3). He will back away from his pledge to Israel and leave them to the wolves of Islam.

    4). Hillary Clinton will be named to the Supreme Court.

    5). Tax rates will return to their highest levels in 30 years.

    6). The capital gains tax will be at least double current levels.

    7). Retired Army General Wesley Clark will be named Secretary of Defense.

    8). The borders will be ‘basically open’ to all comers. Especially those from the Middle East and South America.

    9). Amnesty will be granted to all illegals now in the U.S regardless of status or even gang members (MS-13).

    and

    10). The war in Iraq will be brought to an abrupt end and the results will be tragic and the consequences to our military will be devastating.

    I realize that my predictions may not sit too well with some people and the best we could all hope for is that I am totally wrong. Any bets?

    Jerry Molen

  4. Posted · Edited by MMI Enterprises · Report reply

    Man yer smokin somethin over there aren't you? Anyone can see that yer reading too much into what I have said.

    There goes free market, :lgbugeyesDUH, free market went out the fricking door one of the 1st bailouts Bush & Paulson did and now every other bailout they are doing. McCain wants to bailout everyone. So by the way you say it its OK to throw free market out the door as long as we are bailing out banks, investment companies, insurance companies all big biz or corporations to the tune of over a trillion dollars+? That OK in your eyes obviously? Right?:lgbow::lgbonk:I doubt I conveyed that I believed in or wanted a bailout. I said to effect it was probably necesarry to free up credit markets. I believe the non paying idiots should be accountable and those that make a living in real estate continue their livelyhood too. Hey newsflash, it turns out Obama said something to effect he was calling for the hold to apply on those in good standing or making good faith payments or some such wording. Whatever it was it was dumb talk as it pretty much the default condition that everyone is under at any given time. Most folk are about 3 month from a going into foreclosure so he made no sense. Was like he was affirming general law or something.

    But bailout a single home owner and THERE GOES FREE MARKET, you are so funny:banghead: Your way funnier trying to twist a foreclosure hold into actual success/renegot/bailout. Such is still at expense to tax payers by way of the bank getting screwed. Adjusting/renegotiating has been going on and many, if not the majority, has already reworked their deals or their's have become the bad paper already. How much is expected to still come..I don't know, do you? Where's that subprime failure end..surely not one single home owner. Yea credit markets may be froze pretty good with the stock market volatility but not for every case. Why freeze up the realestate market that much more by allowing the idiots a free pass to hold the banks hostage longer. Trump is on right now talking about foreclosure opportunities..funny eh. So anyways..not everyone deserves or is entitled to be in them houses. They scum bags half of them. Others are just upset that they barilly making it or that they are upside down in their house and can't get out. Folks that have planned or need to move elsewhere have to have the guts to take it in the shorts rather than dumping it on the books.

    Now let me tell you what you don't realize. I live in region where alot of subprime failure went down. I have shopped and browsed the bad paper up close. Probably walked 30 of them a couple month back. They are not sweet HO Joe places. The owners live elsewhere and the banks left to kick out the renters. Some trashed real good too when they left. Others still coming on market have been vacant for monthes and monthes but haven't went through the processes. Market is about dead but still a free market based on the steady inflow and availability. The inflow has been slowing down some and prices someplaces settling while outlying tending to still fall. Mess with inflow now and yer just playing with fire risking a natural balance trying to take place. They need to focus on easing the credit and getting people into them houses at what they truly worth. End the inflow they go up falsely and bamm we back in subprime default problem once again. Maybe where you at the pricing to reasonable value is not so noticable. Here we got ding dongs from expensive bay area that came over steadily for years forcing prices up at astronomical rate that the area's income just couldn't sustain. Sorry, I just don't have $600k to spend on a house that would have been $250k 5 years earlier.Neither did many others but they bought them anyways. Many bought them for that much with an assumption they be worth more a year later. Ding dongs..

    Sounds fancy and complex where all this bailout money is supposedly going but where it is really going is to make up that huge dollar difference between $250k and $600k per house. Where did that money go?. It didn't goto the bank. They made interest income. The false value/inflation of those houses went into pocket of joe and then back into housing market or stock market, etc. The market fall was needed as it based on unreal values. Banks only holding them cause new guy can't afford it cause for one thing the bottom finally fell out as it rightly should have. Yes banks are both inspiration of problem and victim of their own greed but just as much so it was joe that sold and paid too high.

    Now uncle sam is gonna slow the buy frenzi down and do everything it can to get the values back up on something really worth way less.

    So its alright if Bush & Paulson bailout the very businesses that caused this whole economic crisis? But if Obama puts a hold on a foreclosure for a few months...Not even a bailout, its the end of the world & free market in your eyes because why? Oh thats right because Obama did it not GW. I really thought you were smarter to see through the partisanship BS

    Reading way too much partisan/Bsh junk into it. It is valid point that holding up the course of events is a rip off to the free markets. It is valid also that in bailing out your ship you survive. That's to say we the people own them big business by way of our retirements and investments. You'll never admit that point and will go on beating your ownself or peeps.

    I don't like any of it, there is no more free market as we knew it. I don't like bailing out homeowners that made bad moves and sure in hell hate that we will spend over 2 trillion + bailing out big biz. I guess thats the problem liberal Jeff thinks none of this bailout crap should be going on no matter who proposes it, you just dont like bailing out when Obama proposes it:applause::lolsign:. HELLL Obama isnt even saying bail them out, he's saying put the foreclosure on hold I don't like it either..but say Obama enough and you believe he can fix it all..lol..I don't like idea of anyone slowing down the natural evolution of the housing situation and getting other more worthy/responsable people in them.

    Please Kev explain why its OK for Bush & everyone else to bailout these banks , insurance companies etc etc but put a hold on foreclosures to JOE SIX PACKits not OK, Please define and defend this in your right wing ways. can't wait to hear this bulls**t

    Am hardly right wing..just right. You got me pegged for someone else that likes bailouts..The joe sixpack talk is getting old Jeff. Your Joe sixpack is a lazy mofo, he's really got a beer gut and doesn't deserve crap. Put yer money on beer and you come out rich.

    What is it you just don't like JOE SIX PACK average American?:lgwave:

    Joe's not average... he's dumb and a yuppie that buys everything.. yup I'll buy that, and that, and that..(and that obama bs where he fixes everything for me with a wave of his hand and it not cost no one a dime)..

    On other hand average Jeff or Kev pay their bills as well as his bills through the bailouts/renegotiations/keeping him in his $600k house.

    Total joke:lglolly:

    Yup being concernd about slowing commerce/economy that much more is all a big joke Jeff.

  5. Posted · Report reply

    What we got now Obama calling for a 3 mon. hold on foreclosure procedures? how smart is that? Surely there is small biz involved in making money off all that goes with foreclosing and remarketing a house. There goes the free market/low market that relies on letting the chips fall where they may. Yup just let those that aren't paying stay that much longer in ripping off the banks. Look at it this way..nothing in way of some magical income gain is going to befall those folks that are facing their mortgage balloons or interest rate hikes.It's not like all those specialty loans have them just on the edge of being able to afford them. They way out their league. One problem with the call for a hold is that it doesn't recognize your standard everyday foreclosures. Everwhere has a certain avg percentage figure for foreclosures per month.

    So also, what are all these programs Obama is planning to do away with?

  6. Posted · Report reply

    Scott people base their pick on what the candidates say they plan to do perhaps as much as they suspect they will be able to do. Wouldn't be very smart to vote for someone that pretty much promises to be be working on this or that when you would rather have them working on something else..so I really don't get your first point of your last post other than maybe your just trying to minimize folks fears of an even worse bias against those that pay tax.

    Perhaps a good point on the 'more than 100%' that you bring up is that the portion above 100% would be from the earned income credit and is seperate figure in itself enough so that things still show as taxes being paid. Is a sliding scale with the mid point of the qualification range crediting more. Where the candidates are on EIC and how it woud effect savings/amounts paid on the info link Beth provided may be in question.

    Have seen similar example of people wanting work but not being able to be flexible enough to suit. Such schedule usually reflects having to care for children.

  7. Posted · Report reply

    For me it doesn't matter if they gay or they just hoodwinking the system in business partnership, as Dan mentions, for to gain the same advantages offered to certain people(a man and a woman)....NOBODY has right to force down the throat of the majority or the minority a sudden definition change of a historical word. Is a cryin shame to go stealing and making something your own that doesn't belong to you. Theives!! Go get yer own word!, Go get yer own advantage!.

    Looks like we agree eh Jeff?

    YES ON 8!!

  8. Posted · Report reply

    Election thread closed down due to fighting and off topic discussion.

    In case any want to contunue the discussion here is some the last speak presented:

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Double07 viewpost.gif

    When taxes are increased on the "Big Guys" who actually pays? Take a minute and go look in the mirror. Hello! Increase tax on corporations and they just smile and tack it right on our butts. Kind of like the minimum wage being increased all the stupid time. It's not a living wage and can never be one unless you buckle to full blown socialism!! Same people on minimum wage will be screaming about their hamburger or box of chicken costing them 15 bucks. Who pays for that...Go look in the mirror again! It's that simple.

    One post you say the Big Guy pays and then the next post you say the average American will pay....NEWS FLASH...we pay no matter what

    Another NEWS FLASH who's paying for all the corp greed and poor management now, $700,000,000,000 bail out the other Billions of dollars already given away already to big corps. We are bailing them all out Joe Six Pack

    When is enough, enough, we in the past years under Republican prez all the way back to Reagan up to Bush have given big corps, tax breaks, corp welfare, loop holes, less or no regulations and what has it got us? A lot of pain, bailouts, companies going overseas, less benefits, more corp greed, poor management, lay offs we give corp welfare they still go overseas, stagnant or lower wages, the list goes on and on. We have given them and given to them, they have taken & taken more and more and all we get is the shaft and now we get to bailout all kinds of corps. What more should we give them before we say ENOUGH is ENOUGH

    Clamp down on corps, regulate them, tell them if they go overseas they get no tax breaks, better yet tell them if they go they can't sell anything in the USA at all. What you think they will all go, NO. Instead of making $10,000,000,000 of us they only make $9,000,000,000. Poor them I feel sooooo bad for them, I hope they don't go bankrupt, ah that wont happen, we'll just bail them out

    I am not against corps, but it has gotten out of hand and this economy and bailout proves that. We are going to PAY & PAY we just got a big tax its called bailout & the deficit. I don't know why you worry so much about big corps when YOU are paying for their mistakes now after they have made huge profits and CEO's have made millions every year. How much of this bailout & deficit are you and your children going to pay 10's of thousands of dollars is your part. Let them pay their part finally

    I'm not worried about taxing them a little more, they will find a loop hole and work it out and still charge us. Its all part of business and the game they play

    Go Barak Hussien Obama... Lets be for the American people Joe Six Pack and have big corps pay for their own bailout

    Jeff that smells of entitlement. All your saying is you want want want with no recognition whatsoever that we the American people own and are the corps. Fine, you can change the regs for corps to keep them more at home and so they don't fail as they been doing but why double tax yourself both personal and corp?

  10. Posted · Report reply

    Where do you get all your facts about Obama & taxes, from Fox News, Rush or one of those stupid Obama test that the right has put out. will he increase taxes on big biz yes, is it going to hurt them to get less corp welfare and all the loop holes they have. You ask where the facts from but yet you say "yes" he'll increase corp tax/loophole? sounds the pot calling the kettle black. In fact since you want the corps to see his wrath you totally know it to be true the claims of him raising taxes. Just listen to yourself on what you expect of him and that is exactly what others fear of him. It aint being dreamed up, it is his goal and you expect it..We cannot afford another 4-8 years of Republican ideology when it comes to economics. So you mean it wasn't the dems that adjusted the 700bil up like 160 more billion with pork? Fact is the past 30 years the Republicans have spent more than ANY democratic admin and their deregulating has helped cause the free fall we are in now.Note the word "helped" implies others had main hand involved. Will it last forever, NO, did it ever have to get this way or bad NO I already stated I didn't agree with all the spending, but deregulation is something different. One entity being delt a hand that suits them better than your own does not change your hand or end profit unless you have a stake in their hand. Obviousely you will never admit that the corps being able to do business at profit is benneficial directly to our wallet and retirement value. If you did you would have to admit that the major gains in the markets since the old Reagan days mean the opposite of what you say. Yup the markets and growth being so high were a bad thing, average joe being able to retire was a bad thing. America leading the world since Reagan in many aspect and having a high quality of life never happened... that's pretty rich..

    You say you are for less Goobermint & taxes, do you see less goobermint and less taxes and money going out of our goobermint from this past administration NO, The republicans have grown goobermint, raised taxes in these bailouts. neither party immune as it has to be fixed to free the credit market. but why the dem pork? They are out of control and you can't see it, I dont want another 4 years like what I have seen in the past 8. you mean like trying to keep the homeland safe while fullfilling all the responsable things that go with entering a war. I remember the dems that were for the war before they were against it..Or ya just focusing directly on Bush's out of control spending in general? What is so bad for you in the past 8 year?. Taxes costing your company more?How's the man or corp America kept you down?. They've made you rich with customers with money..least I pressume to have heard such about ya.. You should be thankful they got it so good so that you have it so good. If trickle didn't work we'd have no customers beyond the rate of a poor socialistic wage earner. Go ahead and vote in all them taxes and get ready for your customers to make the cuts they will have to. Have already heard of it in the basic janitorial trade, next up the more specalized trades like pressure washing. :)

    We have different opinions thats it brother and you know I guess thats just OK Yea no problem with disagreeing or differing opinion.

    Beth..what no dem blog links for this thread for over an hour, what happened?:)

  11. Posted · Report reply

    If you want the real info get it straight from the party source. Not some trumped up internet BS.

    Beth

    Real info?.. the party is the source of truth as far as Obam's past dealings or inclinations?. It is rediculous to say proven fact is untrue. That said, your welcome to share all disproven things of the ties mentioned in the article. I don't know either way if they true or not..Obviousley the ties mentioned are likely valid. But you Beth seem to know all about Obama's past so let's hear what of it is true and what of it is false. I really want to know the facts of how he's not a socialist by who he's rubbed up against. Usually only spiritual advisors delve into having to be too close too that which soils. They know very well the risks and pray for strength when they have chores of ridding evil by going close to the enemy. I don't see an inkling of such fear involved with Obama. He seems to embrace his past and his need to keep his enemies close smells of going way deeper than the standard reason for keeping your enemies close.

  12. Posted · Report reply

    If you thought corps(which you call big business), that you and I own by way of shares of our retirements or direct investment, was gonna flip bill for the war or what sheik habib is charging than you might just be off yer rocker. It has always been known that America will pay in some shape or form for the huge expendatures. I haven't at all agreed to what Bush has done on spending.. I agree that much can be translated into being a hidden tax. What I don't get is you want to tax yourself coming and going by way of both personal income tax and tax placed upon your own investment growths. What don't you get about leaving corp alone so you can reap the rewards. Why do you think a dividend or a stock sale is low or high? Go ahead and double tax yerself with obama's plan if you care more to actually see your money fly out your wallet. Yes there is problems and dirty dealings that have screwed us all out of investment money but how you get off claiming McCain doesn't have goal to curb the problems more than the other guy. Pure and simple or the KISS mentality should apply with taxation. Who do you think there is some magic money grubbing wizzard running the brick road that steals all our corp money and burries it away never to be seen of again. Screw the main share or corp America and ya screw yerself. Just look to your invest or retire bottom line as of late from the markets going from the 11k to the 8k range. Yea that's taxation if ya twist or broaden the definition enough and you want more of it actually written into law?. Just raise taxes for everyone and the corps too to 55% and cure it all in one swift rape...yea that's the ticket. Hey let's tax this forum..make as much sense as taxing a corp or taxing a high income individual more than their fair share. Jeff if you built your business to point of qualifying for the new up and coming tax brackets by the Obama plan I congratulate you and your happiness at paying half your income to the goobermint as well as loosing a good portion of the corps profit to a further tax.

    But anyways, you got yer mind set and ya got all these fanciful ideas to listen to of how further taxation will fix it all so have fun. I really do hope you enjoy working even more to take home even less.

  13. Posted · Edited by MMI Enterprises · Report reply

    Truest statements the last few posts are there between the lines. They are the ones about worrying about Obama and not being an expert. Sad to repeat McCain but some ya just 'don't understand'. What fits better into the 'being for the average joe' than a tax plan that is fair to all? Nobody owns the average joe figure of speech Jeff so you are welcome to use it even though it really belongs to republican ideals.

    Just cause some you guys are middle class ya think it fair to pay less percentage of tax?. That isn't the America I luv and believe in. A rich person deserves to pay the same rate as you. It is fundamental to our core beliefs as Americans that people are treated equally. What's just as rediculous is this whole dem/lib mentality would have corps paying higher taxes as well. That is just simply retarded and regressive since we the people own the corps. Yes huge profits don't belong in the hands of corp heads as they do. It is obscene, but that is up to the inner workings of the boards and their investors. In the end if people don't like giving up their fair share of corp profit in order that they have a superb performer at the top then they should not invest in that company or get involved more. It is just dumb dumb dumb to double tax yerselves. Where do the candidates stand on double taxing. One is a dang robbinhooded commy socialist wanting his hand in all four pockets. I can live with some socialist ideas such as when it applies to astronomical healthcare flaws. But in general I am for less goobermint. Both republicans and democrats no not what they do when they make more red tape. YUP YUP YUP. make more regs so we can fill the roles so we can service the regs. I see the inner workings of what goobermint produces. Everybody I work for, or relatives work for the state in my capital city. What a total cluster F' waste of money. They sit in their offices making and producing nothing. Lawmakers and their State, local, and fed workers on the take are a bigger drain on American way of life than the poor welfare recips are, or the homeless, or the illegals combined. If it weren't for yup lib attitude thrashing the heck out of the original founding documents we wouldn't be in the mess we are as there would be less ways to steal it from ya...but anyways., enjoy Beths blog spam..as if stuff in blogs are truth or quantity and saying something enough makes it so or more important than core belief.

  15. Posted · Edited by MMI Enterprises · Report reply

    Jeff you are well intentioned...I like ya. Seems ya siding with a change for sake of a change though. Just realize once he gets the bully pulpit he can be the man you talk about here: "You know many liked McCain just back 6-8 years ago, he was known as being middle of the road which most of America is.......I might of voted for him......" Most of what I know of your values have tended to be more conservative in nature than your choice reflects. Maybe run through that abc questionaire I first put up in the Barack Stealthy thread (Abc's match'o matic http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/MatchOMatic...page?id=5542139 ) as well as the one centex just put up and report back to us how you come out.I really want to know how much of obama you are like minded with..

    "Also a lot of it is he's just to old, I want a man on top of his game, not in his declining years." Your saying he not on his game??

    Remember that thing called the surge? Remember him firing his own people when it was needed? Him and Palin will get more done in way of keeping the good on tract and suppressing the bad than the high hopes/messiah candidate could ever dream or fantasize about. Dude he not just older and wiser, he is on. Any of us could only dream to be as active when we his age. Post election things are gonna change but I suspect they gonna change without as much risk, without throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and without high hopes Obama fumbling the ball.

  16. Posted · Report reply

    Then, let's get out there and make an informed decision to vote for the ones that are factual and have a proven track record of service and accomplishment.

    That is how responsible americans vote and that is what a Patriot is to me.

    Rod!~

    Dude..then why you not being responsable in voting for McCain then? I don't get you mang!

  17. Posted · Report reply

    I'm joining this late, but my observations: Obama has actually worked in Senate duties something over 300 days and has voted for 'pork bill' monies to the tune of nearly one million dollars per day. McCain has been in session several thousand days - and his pork bill spending has been exactly zero. Zero! Can we afford to give Obama any voice at all? Obama has no governing experience whatsoever and not long ago couldn't earn enough to pay the rent. A silver spoon Harvard grad with a degree in law. Take it from one who was officed with these guys for years - the very fact that he is an attorney should throw up a red flag. It is not complimentary. He has the least qualification and ability of any candidate for high office I have ever seen - and that is a long, long time - I had a young family with 2 children when Eisenhower was still in office.

    Consider all 4 candidates. In the recent debate Biden spewed lots of 'facts' in a sincere and stern manner. All thinking people everywhere now know that he did not have truth on his side. No one - even Biden himself - can dispute this. He is a political laughing-stock. Even his smarmy manner and smirks did him no good. He is badly afflicted with a psychological quirk, i.e., if you continue to tell yourself something you will believe it - even if it is an untruth. Can you imagine him as President with a bad attitude and one hand on the hot button that would seal our doom? I consider the Obama/Biden ticket the most dangerous team ever - by far.

    I'm not going to convince anyone whose mind is made up, but if these two extreme liberals get in woe be to us. It may not affect me - I won't be around for the next 20-30 years to see the deterioriation - but my 8 grandkids and their kids may find themselves living in a 3rd would country. Don't take this lightly - I have been all over the world a number of times - even Islamic nations - and this has happened elsewhere (Spain, for just one example). If this is what you want then cast your vote for Obama - we may get just what we deserve.

    Richard

    '

    Dude..WELL SAID!!!:lgbow:

  18. Posted · Report reply

    How about Caribou Barbi's first dude's separatist group membership until 2002. Their founder Joe Vogler - "The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government," Vogler said in the interview, in which he talked extensively about his desire for Alaskan secession, the key goal of the AIP. Vogler was found murdered after a plastic explosives sale gone bad.

    I don't know enough about this to comment on it.

    Current facts or known truths of these ties could use a checking into. Tom Sullivans stand in on my local radio kicked a lady off the air today for continueing to spread what he called in so many words as a dirty little lie that has been disproven.

    I don't know myself so..

  20. Posted · Edited by MMI Enterprises · Report reply

    Just sharing what's out there James..no conspiracy intentions implied or stated by posting it. If some of it is untruthful facts you should share it up. I did preface the title with a question mark in order that we get opinions such as you offer. Thanx for sharing your situation abit and God bless you and yours. I hope he finds you all in good health sooner than later...

    My opinion though is that neither candidate is the messiah and neither can be expected to fix it all or take full blaim or credit on how it all goes down the next four year. However, I can respect myself in my voting decission better by realizing or acknowledging that just cause one main issue would be near the top of my list as needing attention it doesn't mean a darn thing if it doesn't really get fixed or other fundamental issues go the wayside. See I too place healthcare very high same as you. I don't think it prudent or smart to go on one or two issue but rather the whole package must make sense to gain my vote. I could sit and order the issues into a prioritzed list but what good that do when I don't truly believe the entangled redtape web I call goobermint can be minimized from our lives and wallets as it needs to be by any of them?

    If both parties are evil and but the choice has to be made, which is best suited to limit the damages already done or do a thing or two in a moderate way? And when I say 'damages' I don't just mean financial. Apply it directly to things like freedoms, world view,economy, healthcare, you name it. Regardless of the actual candidates, one parties fundamentals I lean more towards and haven't seen the other produce a candidate bipartisan or middle grounded enough yet to go with.

    Try this little question based decission maker thing: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/MatchOMatic...page?id=5542139

    My results said enough on how I should not listen to just one issue.

    I came out all McCain on the questions but for the two healthcare ones so perhaps we are not all that different. Shocked me pretty good as I was scared throughout that I may be leaning left...haha.

    Would be interesting to hear how everyone comes out on this and if it at all corresponds with their current candidate choice..

  21. Posted · Report reply

    Today in Investor's Business Daily stock analysis and business news

    Barack Obama's Stealth Socialism

    INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

    Posted 7/28/2008

    Election '08: Before friendly audiences, Barack Obama speaks passionately about something called "economic justice." He uses the term obliquely, though, speaking in code — socialist code.

    During his NAACP speech earlier this month, Sen. Obama repeated the term at least four times. "I've been working my entire adult life to help build an America where economic justice is being served," he said at the group's 99th annual convention in Cincinnati.

    And as president, "we'll ensure that economic justice is served," he asserted. "That's what this election is about." Obama never spelled out the meaning of the term, but he didn't have to. His audience knew what he meant, judging from its thumping approval.

    It's the rest of the public that remains in the dark, which is why we're launching this special educational series (IBD Series: The Audacity Of Socialism).

    "Economic justice" simply means punishing the successful and redistributing their wealth by government fiat. It's a euphemism for socialism.

    In the past, such rhetoric was just that — rhetoric. But Obama's positioning himself with alarming stealth to put that rhetoric into action on a scale not seen since the birth of the welfare state.

    In his latest memoir he shares that he'd like to "recast" the welfare net that FDR and LBJ cast while rolling back what he derisively calls the "winner-take-all" market economy that Ronald Reagan reignited (with record gains in living standards for all).

    Obama also talks about "restoring fairness to the economy, "code for soaking the "rich" — a segment of society he fails to understand that includes mom-and-pop businesses filing individual tax returns.

    It's clear from a close reading of his two books that he's a firm believer in class envy. He assumes the economy is a fixed pie, whereby the successful only get rich at the expense of the poor.

    Following this discredited Marxist model, he believes government must step in and redistribute pieces of the pie. That requires massive transfers of wealth through government taxing and spending, a return to the entitlement days of old.

    Of course, Obama is too smart to try to smuggle such hoary collectivist garbage through the front door. He's disguising the wealth transfers as "investments" — "to make America more competitive," he says, or "that give us a fighting chance," whatever that means.

    Among his proposed "investments":

    • "Universal," "guaranteed" health care.

    • "Free" college tuition.

    • "Universal national service" (a la Havana).

    • "Universal 401(k)s" (in which the government would match contributions made by "low- and moderate-income families").

    • "Free" job training (even for criminals).

    • "Wage insurance" (to supplement dislocated union workers' old income levels).

    • "Free" child care and "universal" preschool.

    • More subsidized public housing.

    • A fatter earned income tax credit for "working poor."

    • And even a Global Poverty Act that amounts to a Marshall Plan for the Third World, first and foremost Africa.

    His new New Deal also guarantees a "living wage," with a $10 minimum wage indexed to inflation; and "fair trade" and "fair labor practices," with breaks for "patriot employers" who cow-tow to unions, and sticks for "nonpatriot" companies that don't.

    That's just for starters — first-term stuff.

    Obama doesn't stop with socialized health care. He wants to socialize your entire human resources department — from payrolls to pensions. His social-microengineering even extends to mandating all employers provide seven paid sick days per year to salary and hourly workers alike.

    You can see why Obama was ranked, hands-down, the most liberal member of the Senate by the National Journal. Some, including colleague and presidential challenger John McCain, think he's the most liberal member in Congress.

    But could he really be "more left," as McCain recently remarked, than self-described socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (for whom Obama has openly campaigned, even making a special trip to Vermont to rally voters)?

    Obama's voting record, going back to his days in the Illinois statehouse, says yes. His career path — and those who guided it — leads to the same unsettling conclusion.

    The seeds of his far-left ideology were planted in his formative years as a teenager in Hawaii — and they were far more radical than any biography or profile in the media has portrayed.

    A careful reading of Obama's first memoir, "Dreams From My Father," reveals that his childhood mentor up to age 18 — a man he cryptically refers to as "Frank" — was none other than the late communist Frank Marshall Davis, who fled Chicago after the FBI and Congress opened investigations into his "subversive," "un-American activities."

    As Obama was preparing to head off to college, he sat at Davis' feet in his Waikiki bungalow for nightly bull sessions. Davis plied his impressionable guest with liberal doses of whiskey and advice, including: Never trust the white establishment.

    "They'll train you so good," he said, "you'll start believing what they tell you about equal opportunity and the American way and all that sh**."

    After college, where he palled around with Marxist professors and took in socialist conferences "for inspiration," Obama followed in Davis' footsteps, becoming a "community organizer" in Chicago.

    His boss there was Gerald Kellman, whose identity Obama also tries to hide in his book. Turns out Kellman's a disciple of the late Saul "The Red" Alinsky, a hard-boiled Chicago socialist who wrote the "Rules for Radicals" and agitated for social revolution in America.

    The Chicago-based Woods Fund provided Kellman with his original $25,000 to hire Obama. In turn, Obama would later serve on the Woods board with terrorist Bill Ayers of the Weather Underground. Ayers was one of Obama's early political supporters.

    After three years agitating with marginal success for more welfare programs in South Side Chicago, Obama decided he would need to study law to "bring about real change" — on a large scale.

    While at Harvard Law School, he still found time to hone his organizing skills. For example, he spent eight days in Los Angeles taking a national training course taught by Alinsky's Industrial Areas Foundation. With his newly minted law degree, he returned to Chicago to reapply — as well as teach — Alinsky's "agitation" tactics.

    (A video-streamed bio on Obama's Web site includes a photo of him teaching in a University of Chicago classroom. If you freeze the frame and look closely at the blackboard Obama is writing on, you can make out the words "Power Analysis" and "Relationships Built on Self Interest" — terms right out of Alinsky's rule book.)

    Amid all this, Obama reunited with his late father's communist tribe in Kenya, the Luo, during trips to Africa.

    As a Nairobi bureaucrat, Barack Hussein Obama Sr., a Harvard-educated economist, grew to challenge the ruling pro-Western government for not being socialist enough. In an eight-page scholarly paper published in 1965, he argued for eliminating private farming and nationalizing businesses "owned by Asians and Europeans."

    His ideas for communist-style expropriation didn't stop there. He also proposed massive taxes on the rich to "redistribute our economic gains to the benefit of all."

    "Theoretically, there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed," Obama Sr. wrote. "I do not see why the government cannot tax those who have more and syphon some of these revenues into savings which can be utilized in investment for future development."

    Taxes and "investment" . . . the fruit truly does not fall far from the vine.

    (Voters might also be interested to know that Obama, the supposed straight shooter, does not once mention his father's communist leanings in an entire book dedicated to his memory.)

    In Kenya's recent civil unrest, Obama privately phoned the leader of the opposition Luo tribe, Raila Odinga, to voice his support. Odinga is so committed to communism he named his oldest son after Fidel Castro.

    With his African identity sewn up, Obama returned to Chicago and fell under the spell of an Afrocentric pastor. It was a natural attraction. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright preaches a Marxist version of Christianity called "black liberation theology" and has supported the communists in Cuba, Nicaragua and elsewhere.

    Obama joined Wright's militant church, pledging allegiance to a system of "black values" that demonizes white "middle classness" and other mainstream pursuits.

    (Obama in his first book, published in 1995, calls such values "sensible." There's no mention of them in his new book.)

    With the large church behind him, Obama decided to run for political office, where he could organize for "change" more effectively. "As an elected official," he said, "I could bring church and community leaders together easier than I could as a community organizer or lawyer."

    He could also exercise real, top-down power, the kind that grass-roots activists lack. Alinsky would be proud.

    Throughout his career, Obama has worked closely with a network of stone-cold socialists and full-blown communists striving for "economic justice."

    He's been traveling in an orbit of collectivism that runs from Nairobi to Honolulu, and on through Chicago to Washington.

    Yet a recent AP poll found that only 6% of Americans would describe Obama as "liberal," let alone socialist.

    Public opinion polls usually reflect media opinion, and the media by and large have portrayed Obama as a moderate "outsider" (the No. 1 term survey respondents associate him with) who will bring a "breath of fresh air" to Washington.

    The few who have drilled down on his radical roots have tended to downplay or pooh-pooh them. Even skeptics have failed to connect the dots for fear of being called the dreaded "r" word.

    But too much is at stake in this election to continue mincing words.

    Both a historic banking crisis and 1970s-style stagflation loom over the economy. Democrats, who already control Congress, now threaten to filibuster-proof the Senate in what could be a watershed election for them — at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.

    A perfect storm of statism is forming, and our economic freedoms are at serious risk.

    Those who care less about looking politically correct than preserving the free-market individualism that's made this country great have to start calling things by their proper name to avert long-term disaster.

  22. Posted · Report reply

    Guess someone did the poll and is why this thread came up again. I'll comment...

    Higher octane adds no power for normal/lower compression engines. If anything the regular has more potential than higher octane. When you get into higher compression ratios the higher octane can result in more torque and horsepower though due to extended burn it offers. Make no mistake the extra power comes really from the higher compression such engines offers. Running as low a octane that your stock/low compression engine will tolerate without knock and ping is ideal to acheive most bang for your buck.

  23. Posted · Report reply

    Old practices have not worked, we need different ideas put into motion.

    McCains experience has not proved to be worth anything more than supporting the legislation that has gotten us here to begin with. I don't want any more of that.

    What kind of old practices you refer to?.. All the ones that McCain claims to be fighting and not apart of or the ones that Obama goes ahead and votes for cause he wanted to seem busy, or didn't know what the reprocussions were from his vote, or just wanted to be different by supporting a change. Change is not always for the better. Obama's hatchet/scalpal comment was hypocracy and all he did was play follow the leader last night. Way I see it McCain's experience and outlook represented plugging the tub, turning off the water, not throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and but using some baby shampoo so as to not burn the eyes. Where Obama's experience and actions represents him as hearing emergency broadcast system telling him to throw kid in cold tub with no water and wash them down with a wet one.Obama goes where the wind blows to try and earn a change buck.

  24. Posted · Edited by MMI Enterprises · Report reply

    So who won or gained from the debate? I think CNN's panel of commentators was abit out of balance. Seemed McCain won by a long shot and knew what he was talking about and Obama was scrambling big time. And wth..did the dems pay cnn to have Biden on right after trying for an extra point when they didn't even score?

    ps- oh and there it is..people are emailing them asking why they had biden and not palin. Time to tune to my regular channel I guess as that is the nature of it all.

×