2008 Presidential Election

[kimnat]

ok, well that explains that.

[NatsAddict]

ok, well that explains that.

I think Huckabee's tax plan is, by far, the best economic plan out there.  But it's kinda like having a great idea supported by Homer Simpson. 

-- Can Homer deliver the plan?  If not, what else of value does he bring to the table besides donuts?

-- Should Homer be the spokesperson?  Can anybody take anything he says, even if its the proverbial blind squirrel finding an acorn equivalent of a Homer supporting a great plan, seriously?  Will the plan be hurt simply by Homer's affiliation with it - just because Homer supports it, will others simply write off the plan as a joke?

[kimnat]

Still better choice than Hillary, Obama or the pretty boy.  I guess.....

[NatsAddict]

Still better choice than Hillary, Obama or the pretty boy.  I guess.....

IMO, unquestionably better than Clinton and Edwards.

[kimnat]

LOL, you knew who I meant. 

[NatsAddict]

Here is an odd one, even the ultra liberal Slate endorses the plan supported by Huckabee.

Also, this is not Huckabee's plan, as it is often quoted.  It's a plan that he supports.  He is a governor, and the bill was introduced in the House of Reps as HR 25, (with the Senate having it as S 1025 if/when passed by the house - the Senate is not permitted to originate any sources of revenue under the Constitution, although that has never stopped the likes of Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton - and it's alarming how many new senators have no clue about the Constitution and are dismayed to find out they cannot raise taxes).  Anyway, the last time I checked, governors were not allowed to introduce or co-sponsor bills in the US Congress.  They can, however, support those bills just as you and I can support those bills.


Back to the ignorance of the Senators, if they had even read Article 1 of the Constitution, they would know they cannot originate taxes.  Unfortunately, most Senators apparent never even made it that far in their efforts to properly govern.  Article 1, Section 7, first line:

All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Of course, Presidents cannot originate, or for that matter, change taxes, either.  Presidents (and governors as private citizens, for that matter) can support tax bills, but that's it.  So, when you have a candidate running for the senate running in your state, and he/she is talking about raising/changing taxes, you know you have a moron on your hands.

[2IPAs]

And this is part of the appeal of McCain to me - he's more faithful to his own convictions than he is to the party line.

He's on my short list right now, though I disagree with him on a number of issues. I do believe McCain would orchestrate the pull-out from Iraq in a more measured way than some of the other candidates would. But Ali's idea of Huckabee going holy roller before the UN is intriguing--it might just scare the crap out of some of our enemies!

[natsfan1a]

Lisa would be the one to go with. She's the president of the future!

I think Huckabee's tax plan is, by far, the best economic plan out there.  But it's kinda like having a great idea supported by Homer Simpson. 

-- Can Homer deliver the plan?  If not, what else of value does he bring to the table besides donuts?

-- Should Homer be the spokesperson?  Can anybody take anything he says, even if its the proverbial blind squirrel finding an acorn equivalent of a Homer supporting a great plan, seriously?  Will the plan be hurt simply by Homer's affiliation with it - just because Homer supports it, will others simply write off the plan as a joke?

[Nat of the Living Dead]

See Ronnynat.  I told you this was a pandora's box/can of worms.  Good discussion, but see.....

If this was directed at me, then I am at a loss as to why.  I merely stated my opinion which everyone here is doing quite well, actually.  Just because I spoke out against those who choose to vote based on religion and those who choose to use religion as a smokescreen to hide their weak platforms does not mean I am disrupting the "balance" of this thread.  It seems those who would like to think so are more at fault for that than I for all I have done is state an opinion.  They fling accusations and that is where the trouble starts.

Voting based on religion is and will always be highly dangerous.  We live in a democracy, not a monarchy or theocracy. These candidates have no divine rights just because they go to church or spew lines from the Bible.  I think the current administration and Republican rule have shown us that it is a load of bollox (the adultery, the "war", the lying, the scandals, etc.)  Why would we even want to try and repeat that by voting on religion and not the issues at hand?

When a candidate carries religion in front of him/her like a torch trying to attract voters like flies and moths, it is just plain insulting to the religion they are attempting to carry. It cheapens the religion.  Religion isn't some money making scheme, get votes quick, get into office plan.  Religion and faith are more than that.  Religion isn't any quick fix to the highest office in the land.  I was once told by someone from the Church that religion and faith was there to serve Him. People voting based on religion are not serving Him.  They are serving a selfish need.

My two cents.

Oh, and Ron Paul is such a lunatic.

[kimnat]

If this was directed at me, then I am at a loss as to why.  I merely stated my opinion which everyone here is doing quite well, actually. 

No no no no.  I, that wasn't directed AT you or anyone.  I had told Ronny earlier on in the thread that this sort of a thread could be a "can of worms/pandora's box".  Didn't you see my comment that the discussion was good?  I wasn't mad at all.  I'm sorry that is how my comment came across and I'm sorry for upseting you w/ it.

[spidernat]

No no no no.  I, that wasn't directed AT you or anyone.  I had told Ronny earlier on in the thread that this sort of a thread could be a "can of worms/pandora's box".  Didn't you see my comment that the discussion was good?  I wasn't mad at all.  I'm sorry that is how my comment came across and I'm sorry for upseting you w/ it.

You have nothing to feel apologetic about kimnat. You did/said nothing wrong.

[Nat of the Living Dead]

No no no no.  I, that wasn't directed AT you or anyone.  I had told Ronny earlier on in the thread that this sort of a thread could be a "can of worms/pandora's box".  Didn't you see my comment that the discussion was good?  I wasn't mad at all.  I'm sorry that is how my comment came across and I'm sorry for upseting you w/ it.

Not upset at all.  I misunderstood.  My apologies.

[kimnat]

But I think you also missed my point about the role religion plays (for me at least) in my voting.  What I have been saying that you seem to be overlooking is that your faith or beliefs (WHATEVER THEY ARE - LIBERAL OR CONSERVATIVE)  SHAPE your core values and beliefs.  And the things you see as important in society are determined by your core values.  While Huckabee may be the one who most closely matches my religious beliefs, he may NOT be the one I vote for (and I don't really care for him that much - quite honestly).  When I look at the issues, he doesn't fully match me (based on my core values).  Just because we share similar religious beliefs, the way we take those beliefs and personalize them and form our innermost values from them vary from person to person.  You are confusing the two things.  While related, they are not the same thing.

[ronnynat]

hug it out!

[kimnat]

Not upset at all.  I misunderstood.  My apologies.

Thanks and I wasn't upset at all.  I hope you don't see that in my above posting. 

[kimnat]

hug it out!

(Image removed from quote.)

That's cute!

[Ali the Baseball Cat]

I was really just being a smartass, or perhaps only an ass...aside from Huckabee's faith and popularity with the "faith bloc," I don't know a whole lot about him.  NatsAddict has presented a very detailed defense of the consumption tax Huckabee advocates, which is something I find hard to argue with...I lived in Canada back when the Goods and Services Tax was imposed (replacing a lot of hidden taxes), and, as unpopular as it was at the time, I think it probably helped keep the Canadian economy afloat during the bad years of the early 90s. 

That said, as soon as I meet another urban, gay-friendly, pro-abortion, atheist who supports Huckabee, I'll reconsider my belief that he's the most dangerous critter to appear on the national stage since Pat Buchanan (or perhaps Barry Goldwater).

But that is my problem, not yours, and I am trying to vent less about this kind of crap here. 



 

One problem w/ that kind of rhetoric.  Huckabee is SOUTHERN Baptist (as "are" Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter).  The kind of "baptist" you are referring to is "Primitive" Baptist.  I'm not sure about their doctrine and theology.  BUT it is NOT the same as Southern Baptists.  In the Southern Baptist denomination, there are two "factions".  One side is the"moderate" side the other is the "conservative" side.  Huckabee falls into the conservative camp, while Clinton and Carter are "moderate".  I can give you the full blown history on this because I grew up in a conservative Southern Baptist Church.  When I was 13, our pastor was called to a church in MO, and we found a new one.  He turned out to be a moderate.  So, I've seen both sides of the SOuthern Baptist Convention and I agree w/ the conservative doctrine.

Interestingly enough, nearly ALL religious denominations have "moderate" and "conservative" camps.  Many of these denoms are dividing.  The Presbyterians did it years ago.  The Southern Baptists have been debating it strongly for years (won't be surprised to see them split).  The US Episcopalians are experiencing it and dividing.  ANd before anyone says "Oh see they're hypocritical.  They're fighting each other , etc...."  The debate is over scriptural authority and the Lordship of Jesus.  When it comes to Christ and scriptural authority, the two sides cannot compromise.  These are fundamental basics to mainstream Protestant faiths.  The big stuff separating the religious denoms is how you are dunked and how and how often you take communion.  The other part I just mentioned is what's internally dividing indiv. denoms.  Religiously now?  I go to a non-denom church. 

[nospinzone1]

ANYONE THAAT WENT THRU FIVE YEARS OF TORTURE DESERVES A LOT OF CONSIDERATION. A LOT OF OUR BRAVE MEN HAVE COMMITTED SUICIDE FOR LESS THAN THAT. I AM NOT SAYING THAT I AM PREPARED TO CHOOSE BUT I HAVE A LOT OF ADMIRATION OF THE MAC

[CALSGR8]

I used to respect McCain and I do respect his war record.  However, from someone who used to disagree with Bush the majority of the time, he has turned into someone who almost seems to Kiss Bush's butt. 

I caught the Republican debate at one point but they all lost me when they thought that people without health insurance make $75,000 a year and could afford it.  Ok, if that's true (and I've met people who can barely afford a roof over their head and food in their stomachs), is that $75,000 a year for a family of 4 where one person makes $25K, and the other may hold down 2 jobs?

Health Savings Plans.  Know how those work?  You have to guess how much money you need for health care in a year.  If you over guess and you have money left at the end of the year, you lose it.  If you under guess, you're up cruds creek.  Especially if you're diabetic or dignosed with cancer, or maybe need an operation to save your life.

Gad, those guys were saying a procedure costs $1000.  Where have these guys been?! My mom was charged $200 once for medicine that the hospital agreed would be supplied by my Mom and not the hospital.  It was given to her by myself and NOT any nurse.  You got it.  An over $200 charge for medicine the hospital did not supply or administer.  I guess the little sticker showing they approved it costs $200!  $1000 for a medical procedure.  Give me a break.  Try over 15,000!  Seems to me that party hasn't been living in the same country as the rest of us!  They made me sick!

[Nat of the Living Dead]

[2k6nats]

Letterman's Mitt Romney Campaign Cliche Counter!

[GburgNatsFan]

That's pretty funny.

Letterman's Mitt Romney Campaign Cliche Counter!

[2IPAs]

That was right, wasn't it?  The British labor leader who was famous generally for sparkling rhetoric, and who's fiery speach was plagiarized by Biden.  I liked the name so it stuck in my brain.  All these years, those few memory bits finally were slightly useful!

I actually heard the "like Nixon without the  competence" from some guy I was talking to at the Dogfish, so the quote was doubly plagarized. I guess I got Biden when I googled  because he was the most recent "borrower."

[2IPAs]

Health Savings Plans.  Know how those work?  You have to guess how much money you need for health care in a year.  If you over guess and you have money left at the end of the year, you lose it.  If you under guess, you're up cruds creek.  Especially if you're diabetic or dignosed with cancer, or maybe need an operation to save your life.

Gad, those guys were saying a procedure costs $1000.  Where have these guys been?! My mom was charged $200 once for medicine that the hospital agreed would be supplied by my Mom and not the hospital.  It was given to her by myself and NOT any nurse.  You got it.  An over $200 charge for medicine the hospital did not supply or administer.  I guess the little sticker showing they approved it costs $200!  $1000 for a medical procedure.  Give me a break.  Try over 15,000!  Seems to me that party hasn't been living in the same country as the rest of us!  They made me sick!

That's why I haven't bitten on HSAs or any of the other money-savers that I've been offered. Definitely reminds me of when folks were sold the idea that giving up their defined pension plans is a good idea, that a 401K would put them in charge of their destiny. But I am fortunate enough to have a Government job that allows me the option of choosing a decent health plan.

[CALSGR8]

Ok, here's an embarrassing question.  WHAT IS A SUPER DELEGATE and what effect can they have on the nominees!