To all Obama supporters........(long read)

[pacmagic2002]

I don't see why people are getting worked up about the tax thing anyway.........what joe the plumber and mr driller don't understand is that if themiddle class is doing better and getting more money, then their small business will make more money because the under 250k crowd can spend more money withtheir small business....making up for the taxes they are charged.

I don't see many people getting this pissed off at wal mart opening up close to smaller cities and making small family owned corner stores and conveniencestores out of business........but as long as the rich get richer I guess its not a problem

 

[paylessshoes]

America was made great by people who embraced the one-time American culture of self-reliance, self-motivation, self-determination, self-discipline, personal betterment, and hard work, risk taking. A culture built around the concept that success was in reach on every able bodied American who would strive for it.
All the meanwhile owning slaves and convincing themselves that Blacks were in inferior race of people who deserved no rights. Gave them unhumaneworking conditions , worked them from sun up until sun down while they sat on porches fanning themselves drinking mint julips, yet the slaves were called lazy.

Hypocritical? of course not.

 

[td the god]

Originally Posted by pacmagic2002

I don't see why people are getting worked up about the tax thing anyway.........what joe the plumber and mr driller don't understand is that if the middle class is doing better and getting more money, then their small business will make more money because the under 250k crowd can spend more money with their small business....making up for the taxes they are charged.

I don't see many people getting this pissed off at wal mart opening up close to smaller cities and making small family owned corner stores and convenience stores out of business........but as long as the rich get richer I guess its not a problem

Exactly

 

[reigndrop]

All I can say is, the upper class's taxes are going to be raised almost permanently for sure. The middle classes tax break will come in the form ofrebates or credits. They won't be permanent tax CUTS. Once Obama realizes that he can't afford to hand out credits anymore while trying to supplementhis programs, then those credits or rebates disappear.

 

[cparkfresh]

Originally Posted by 718stylez

Do you want to give half of your hard earned money to people who don't work?
No, right?

ignorance.



Thats the sad part about all these discussions

Dude is so blinded he does not even realize he will more than likely be taxed less underObama's plan vs McCains

 

[lazy b]

 

[nnarum]

Originally Posted by CParkFresh

Originally Posted by 718stylez

Do you want to give half of your hard earned money to people who don't work?
No, right?

ignorance.

Thats the sad part about all these discussions

Dude is so blinded he does not even realize he will more than likely be taxed less under Obama's plan vs McCains
Sure it sounds good, but what happens when the business you work for has to pay higher taxes and is forced to give you health care? They can'tafford to pay as many employees. If you aren't working, what's the point of a tax cut?

 

[throwedindagame]

Who cares, in a few years the same people against Obama are going to be enjoying their Obama administration tax cuts.

 

[718stylez]

that guy in that video oversimplifies things. he lost me after talking about having oil to back up our dollars. saying that democrats tripped up W? dude had arepublican controlled house and senate...

...i remember when people used to call Obama out for lack of substance. What does McCain stand for on these issues? I don't mind people criticizing, justhave something constructive to bring to the table and be ready to explain your position.

 

[718stylez]

besides why is not one talking about the fact that john mccain wants to tax businesses for their healthcare benefits that they supply to their employees?

 

[wawaweewa]

Originally Posted by reigndrop

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by early90s

^ Guy, did you even read ONE thing that was posted?
and wawaweewa your not the first person I've heard say that..my instructor for my job who is ex-special forces "something" will occur within the 1st 6 months

That mandate by the Feds for going all digital always bothered me. It was like, "why force businesses to move into all digital"? Why not "encourage" or "provide incentives"?
Ever since the mandate I thought there was something up with that.

Then Biden, Powell, and Chertoff yapped away about "a crisis" soon after Obama takes office and..well.. you know...
I guess it'll be coincidental though.

On a more serious note though, look into how digital is different from analog and there lies the answer.

Oh, btw, JP Morgan and Blackstone Group just raised all the cash to upgrade every Movie Theatre screen in the US to digital.
Why movie theatres too?

Interesting, no?

October 1, 2008 6:00 PM
[h3]JPMorgan and Blackstone Group Help Movie Theaters Go Digital[/h3]
Posted by Rachel Breitman

Movie attendance tripled during the Great Depression. Distribution and exhibitors probably are hoping the trend will reemerge during the current financial crisis. With that in mind, JPMorgan Securities Inc. and The Blackstone Group, Inc., are helping to bankroll a billion-dollar deal to digitize 20,000 movie screens across the U.S.

The deal, announced Wednesday by Digital Cinema Implementation Partners (DCIP) will endow cinemas with digital projection systems. Film studios that have signed on include Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, The Walt Disney Studios, Paramount Pictures Corporation, Universal Studios, Inc., and Lions Gate Entertainment Corporation.

DCIP--a partnership formed in February 2007 between exhibitors AMC Entertainment Inc., Cinemark Holdings, Inc., and Regal Entertainment Group--has been working on the deal for more than a year. DCIP plans to enter into similar agreements with other major studios in the near future.

http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2008/10/jpmorgan-and-bl.htmlhttp://amlawdaily.typepad...8/10/jpmorgan-and-bl.htmlhttp://amlawdaily.typepad...8/10/jpmorgan-and-bl.html

wawa, can you explain the digital thing? I haven't quite heard or read about it yet. Does this mean our currency is going to go digital, which basically means all transactions will be monitored by the government?


Not the currency.
Digital Television. We're on analog signals now when it comes to over the air TV.
All cable is mostly digital now already.

From what I've read digital signals are easier to jam (!!#+ with, if you will: lol) than analog and it's easier to insert subliminal images intopictures.

When TV's first came out (and even in the run up to their widespread use) there were many studies done on flicker rate and subliminal advertising /propaganda.
With TV's in the 120hz range flicker rates don't really show up and even 60 hz flicker rates don't have any meaningful effect on humans. However,subliminal images are easier to insert into Digital pictures.

There's been a lot of research done on subliminal images/advertising i.e. propaganda ever since the 20's ( I think. May have been a bit later).

1 recent study. This study showcased physiological evidence to back up the theoretical assertions (although advertisers knew that this technique worked forsure).

[h1]Subliminal Advertising Leaves Its Mark On The Brain[/h1]
ScienceDaily (Mar. 9, 2007) - University College London researchers have found the first physiological evidence that invisible subliminal images do attract the brain's attention on a subconscious level. The wider implication for the study, published in Current Biology, is that techniques such as subliminal advertising, now banned in the UK but still legal in the USA, certainly do leave their mark on the brain.

Using fMRI, the study looked at whether an image you aren't aware of ¬-- but one that reaches the retina -- has an impact on brain activity in the primary visual cortex, part of the occipital lobe. Subjects' brains did respond to the object even when they were not conscious of having seen it.

Dr Bahador Bahrami, of the UCL Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience and the UCL Department of Psychology, said: "What's interesting here is that your brain does log things that you aren't even aware of and can't ever become aware of. We show that there is a brain response in the primary visual cortex to subliminal images that attract our attention -- without us having the impression of having seen anything. These findings point to the sort of impact that subliminal advertising may have on the brain. What our study doesn't address is whether this would then influence you to go out and buy a product. I believe that it's likely that subliminal advertising may affect our decisions -- but that is just speculation at this point."

Subjects wore red-blue filter glasses that projected faint pictures of everyday objects (such as pliers and an iron) to one eye and a strong flashing image known as 'continuous flash suppression' to the other. This recently developed technique effectively erases subjects' awareness of the faint images so that they were unable to localise the faint images on screen. At the same time, subjects performed either an easy task -- picking out the letter T from a stream of letters, or a task that required more concentration in which subjects had to pick out the white N or blue Z from the same stream.

During the harder task, the subjects' brains blocked out the subliminal image and the fMRI scan did not detect any associated neural activity. This finding -- that the brain does not pick up on subliminal stimuli if it is too busily occupied with other things -- shows that some degree of attention is needed for even the subconscious to pick up on subliminal images.

Dr Bahrami said: "This is exciting research for the scientific community because it challenges previous thinking -- that what is subconscious is also automatic, effortless and unaffected by attention. This research shows that when your brain doesn't have the capacity to pay attention to an image, even images that act on our subconscious simply do not get registered."

The research challenges the theory of the pioneering American psychologist and philosopher, William James, (1842--1910), who said: "We are conscious of what we attend to -- and not conscious of what we do not attend to".

The team's findings show that there are situations where consciousness and attention don't go hand in hand.


http://www.sciencedaily.c.../2007/03/070308121938.htm

 

[cparkfresh]

Originally Posted by nnarum

Originally Posted by CParkFresh

718stylez wrote:

---

Do you want to give half of your hard earned money to people who don't work?


No, right?

ignorance.

Thats the sad part about all these discussions




Dude is so blinded he does not even realize he will more than likely be taxed less under
Obama's plan vs McCains
Sure it sounds good, but what happens when the business you work for has to pay higher taxes and is forced to give you health care? They can't afford to pay as many employees. If you aren't working, what's the point of a tax cut?




Its not that simple. The premise of the higher tax rate is based upon the fact that many business and wealthy have way more deductions than the average taxplayer. I'll let me let McCain explain it to you since you are having a hard time comprehending.

 

[nycknicks105]

Originally Posted by CParkFresh

I have a question for the OP.



How much do you make? How will each candidates tax plans effect you?



We can all sit around and analyze other peoples specific situations. Obama's plan is not for everybody... Just as McCains plan is not for everybody. The difference is McCain believes in trickle down economics (to a certain extent) while Obama supports strengthening the working class individual.



Just because you can find ONE individual and post a long narrative about his SPECIFIC situation that is critical of the opposing candidate does nothing in the grand scheme of things.

The argument of voting for a candidate based upon a a specific set of circumstances while ignoring how the vote will impact you is crazy to me.

But back to my original question to the OP.... How do the Obama/McCain tax plans impact you?

Corey Miller

agreed...

 

[nnarum]

Why do you keep posting the same video?

 

[schrutefarms]

not gonna front
the guy made some good points. but he's gonna have to put up with a president obama

 

[reigndrop]

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by reigndrop

Originally Posted by wawaweewa

Originally Posted by early90s

^ Guy, did you even read ONE thing that was posted?
and wawaweewa your not the first person I've heard say that..my instructor for my job who is ex-special forces "something" will occur within the 1st 6 months

That mandate by the Feds for going all digital always bothered me. It was like, "why force businesses to move into all digital"? Why not "encourage" or "provide incentives"?
Ever since the mandate I thought there was something up with that.

Then Biden, Powell, and Chertoff yapped away about "a crisis" soon after Obama takes office and..well.. you know...
I guess it'll be coincidental though.

On a more serious note though, look into how digital is different from analog and there lies the answer.

Oh, btw, JP Morgan and Blackstone Group just raised all the cash to upgrade every Movie Theatre screen in the US to digital.
Why movie theatres too?

Interesting, no?

October 1, 2008 6:00 PM
[h3]JPMorgan and Blackstone Group Help Movie Theaters Go Digital[/h3]
Posted by Rachel Breitman

Movie attendance tripled during the Great Depression. Distribution and exhibitors probably are hoping the trend will reemerge during the current financial crisis. With that in mind, JPMorgan Securities Inc. and The Blackstone Group, Inc., are helping to bankroll a billion-dollar deal to digitize 20,000 movie screens across the U.S.

The deal, announced Wednesday by Digital Cinema Implementation Partners (DCIP) will endow cinemas with digital projection systems. Film studios that have signed on include Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, The Walt Disney Studios, Paramount Pictures Corporation, Universal Studios, Inc., and Lions Gate Entertainment Corporation.

DCIP--a partnership formed in February 2007 between exhibitors AMC Entertainment Inc., Cinemark Holdings, Inc., and Regal Entertainment Group--has been working on the deal for more than a year. DCIP plans to enter into similar agreements with other major studios in the near future.

http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdaily/2008/10/jpmorgan-and-bl.htmlhttp://amlawdaily.typepad...8/10/jpmorgan-and-bl.htmlhttp://amlawdaily.typepad...8/10/jpmorgan-and-bl.htmlhttp://amlawdaily.typepad...8/10/jpmorgan-and-bl.html

wawa, can you explain the digital thing? I haven't quite heard or read about it yet. Does this mean our currency is going to go digital, which basically means all transactions will be monitored by the government?

Not the currency.
Digital Television. We're on analog signals now when it comes to over the air TV.
All cable is mostly digital now already.

From what I've read digital signals are easier to jam (!!#+ with, if you will: lol) than analog and it's easier to insert subliminal images into pictures.

When TV's first came out (and even in the run up to their widespread use) there were many studies done on flicker rate and subliminal advertising / propaganda.
With TV's in the 120hz range flicker rates don't really show up and even 60 hz flicker rates don't have any meaningful effect on humans. However, subliminal images are easier to insert into Digital pictures.

There's been a lot of research done on subliminal images/advertising i.e. propaganda ever since the 20's ( I think. May have been a bit later).

1 recent study. This study showcased physiological evidence to back up the theoretical assertions (although advertisers knew that this technique worked for sure).

[h1]Subliminal Advertising Leaves Its Mark On The Brain[/h1]
ScienceDaily (Mar. 9, 2007) - University College London researchers have found the first physiological evidence that invisible subliminal images do attract the brain's attention on a subconscious level. The wider implication for the study, published in Current Biology, is that techniques such as subliminal advertising, now banned in the UK but still legal in the USA, certainly do leave their mark on the brain.

Using fMRI, the study looked at whether an image you aren't aware of ¬-- but one that reaches the retina -- has an impact on brain activity in the primary visual cortex, part of the occipital lobe. Subjects' brains did respond to the object even when they were not conscious of having seen it.

Dr Bahador Bahrami, of the UCL Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience and the UCL Department of Psychology, said: "What's interesting here is that your brain does log things that you aren't even aware of and can't ever become aware of. We show that there is a brain response in the primary visual cortex to subliminal images that attract our attention -- without us having the impression of having seen anything. These findings point to the sort of impact that subliminal advertising may have on the brain. What our study doesn't address is whether this would then influence you to go out and buy a product. I believe that it's likely that subliminal advertising may affect our decisions -- but that is just speculation at this point."

Subjects wore red-blue filter glasses that projected faint pictures of everyday objects (such as pliers and an iron) to one eye and a strong flashing image known as 'continuous flash suppression' to the other. This recently developed technique effectively erases subjects' awareness of the faint images so that they were unable to localise the faint images on screen. At the same time, subjects performed either an easy task -- picking out the letter T from a stream of letters, or a task that required more concentration in which subjects had to pick out the white N or blue Z from the same stream.

During the harder task, the subjects' brains blocked out the subliminal image and the fMRI scan did not detect any associated neural activity. This finding -- that the brain does not pick up on subliminal stimuli if it is too busily occupied with other things -- shows that some degree of attention is needed for even the subconscious to pick up on subliminal images.

Dr Bahrami said: "This is exciting research for the scientific community because it challenges previous thinking -- that what is subconscious is also automatic, effortless and unaffected by attention. This research shows that when your brain doesn't have the capacity to pay attention to an image, even images that act on our subconscious simply do not get registered."

The research challenges the theory of the pioneering American psychologist and philosopher, William James, (1842--1910), who said: "We are conscious of what we attend to -- and not conscious of what we do not attend to".

The team's findings show that there are situations where consciousness and attention don't go hand in hand.


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070308121938.htmhttp://www.sciencedaily.c.../2007/03/070308121938.htm





What are you then suggesting then? Government propaganda through television ...

 

[bboy1827]

Here is the problem, first of all we are the scirge of the world. We are the bad guys. Yeah dude got a bit of luck. But He has to understand all thrivingsocieties in the world had strong government reliance, and taxed the people. That is part of governement, without it you would be promoting anarchy, and no onewants that. While you can come out on top not everyone can. I stress you to understand that the richest people in the history, people that make your wealthlook stupid donated millions...billions....and even trillions to the social welfare of this country, because they understood what the cost of the poor is. Liveyour life keep your money, but ask yourself what would Jesus do, what would the founding fathers do? what would any good person do, then I'm appealing Iwas appealing to your morality, next I will appeal to your logic. Plain and simple no one gets rich when panic sets in, when the housing markets and bankscollapse no one wins. Giving handouts to big coporations didn't work, while having them strictly regulated did work(Carter, Clinton, JFK) that is when theeconomy was booming and that is when the rich were legit getting richer. So unless your willing to risk your money and your life(because when people can'teat, people get hungry) on a plan that has already failed so many times in the past, or are you ready to take your chances with a sure thing?

 

[theunderachievers]

ahh i tried so hard to finish reading, but i couldn't get past the 2nd paragraph

 

[cparkfresh]

Originally Posted by rickybadman

Some off you guys on there are ridiculous. Saying Obama will ruin this country by introducing socialist policies. Do you guys even realize how many socialist policies we have in place right now. When the things get bad economically, the government has to step in and put in place socialist programs to right the ship. Social Security is a "socialist" program, this years bailout plan which Bush and McCain where pushing is a "socialist" program. Alan Greenspan himself came out and said that the free market is flawed because the rich don't trickle down the wealth, they keep it for themselves. You want to know the real reason rich people don't support Obama, it is not because he will take there money away, he will make it harder for them to get more easy money that they did not have to work for. You guys need to stop believing the GOP's propaganda and open your eyes. Obama is going to be your President and your country will be better for it.

They conveniently ignore all of this... This is why McCain will lose. His entire argument (against Obama) is based upon fiction and defies reality.

 

[y2kingsfan]

the thing is that Obama has put himself subject to stuff like this because he has said what his plan is. on the other hand, we are still waiting to find outwhat McCain will do.

i'm so glad i voted a week ago

 

[wawaweewa]

Originally Posted by reigndrop


What are you then suggesting then? Government propaganda through television ...

We already have government propaganda through TV.
The question is, why is the current medium not sufficient enough?

When the Feds are providing vouchers for folks to buy digital converter boxes ... I mean they're being awfully generous.

https://www.dtv2009.gov/https://www.dtv2009.gov/

Maybe there's a "national security"/ emergency system reason since digital signals don't lose much data and they can be superseded by outsidesources. idk.
You can bet they're not going to tell us the real reason (s) for the switch over.

idk. I just find this "mandate" by the Feds to be kind of suspicious.

Digital Tv's can communicate.
The possibilities.

From http://www.oregonlive.com/newsflash...news-8/1098045542103601.xml&storylist=orlocalTV set aspired to higher things, emits distress signal

Chris van Rossman's flatscreen Toshiba TV came with a built-in VCR, DVD and CD player.

On the night of Oct. 2, it began emitting the international distress signal

The 121.5 MHz frequency signal was picked up by an orbiting search and rescue satellite, which informed the Air Force Rescue Coordination Center at Langley Air Force Base in Virginia.

Before long, van Rossman heard a knock at his door.

Outside were men in Air Force uniforms, a Corvallis police officer and a Benton County Search and Rescue deputy.

The international distress signals are usually emitted from electronic locator transponders that help search and rescue workers find overturned boats or crashed airplanes.

After checking in with van Rossman, the group continued the search.

They knocked on van Rossman's door again, and the signal abruptly stopped.

"When he answered the door he turned off the TV, and the guy in the hall said, 'It just stopped,'" Bamberger recalled.

An inspection of the television confirmed it was the source of the signal. "Their equipment was just bouncing everywhere as they turned it on and off," van Rossman said.

Van Rossman was instructed to keep his TV turned off or face fines of up to $10,000 per day for emitting a false distress signal.
Archived Article

Guess what's slated to takie the place of the old VHF-UHF frequency's.

Bio-telemetry widgets. aka RFID

 

[denni5themenace]

@ people thinking/implying taxes go straight to the less fortunate.
some of you people need to stop complaining. it's going to happen, deal with it.

 

[tbone95860]

My favorite part...

America was made great by people who embraced the one-time American culture of self-reliance, self-motivation, self-determination, self-discipline, personal betterment, and hard work, risk taking. A culture built around the concept that success was in reach on every able bodied American who would strive for it. Each year that less Americans embrace that culture, we all descend together.

America in many ways has lost its way, it's sad.
Thankfully there is still hope because many people still believe in what he described.

 

[essential1]

I'm so sick of this spreading the wealth argument and taxing the rich will kill the economy and all that bull...


This economy is on the machine ready to be lowered down into its burial plot.. Who benefited from the last 8 years certainly not the MAJORITY of the country.What Obama is trying to do is give people the chance to regain some of the benefit they didn't receive from the country and party who have forgotten aboutthem and focused on giving even more money back to the rich, and giving $300 to the people who can't live with the $300.

How is Obama even spreading the wealth? An extra $1,000 keeps the lights on, or keeps the car running or gets put away for your child's future, there is nowealth to be made from $1,000 it is too keep the families who are in that casket from being buried alive.

Your argument: Why should we get your money for nothing?
Our argument: Why should the people who are living comfortably be allowed to get more benefits which divert the resources of people who are struggling and needthem? We don't just want them, WE NEED THEM.

Which argument is more logical?


1. It will not make the middle class Lazy.. You know what it will make us, it will let us sleep at night a little better. Where we can say hey we won'tlose our house, or hey we can keep the truck running so we won't have to walk everywhere, or hey I have a little bit of extra money to fix the chimney.

2. A progressive tax is what is fair. You make more you should be paying more taxes. Do I think it should be 40% no, but it should be in the 30-39% range. Ifyou are making $250k and being tax let's say $75k and you say you can't survive, then you are living beyond your means and you are just as IDIOTIC ifnot more so as you say us "lazy, poor" people are. If you make $50k a year and are being taxed around $15k it is very easy to live above your means.But we have $35k, you have $175k... Now who is bad with money?

And before you go all willy nilly with your accusations if I was making $250k and they wanted to tax me $75k or even $80k you know what I would say, "Imake more so I should pay more in taxes. The money is going toward people who NEED it, who may have get the same chance I had..

3. Oh taxing us more ruins all incentive of making money...Really? Really? Really? I'd much rather be taxed $100k on $250k then $15k on $35k... Theincentive of being rich is being able to not having to worry about where the rent money will come from, or how will you pay the car not, or how will you willkeep the vehicles running, or being able to actually put your kids through college without loans.

You act like every family is getting $10 grand from you, the extra money you are taxed doesn't just go to the middle classes it goes to programs to benefitthe country...

And by the way how is McCain going to cut taxes for everyone including huge tax cuts for the top 1%??? Oh yeah he won't be able to he will dip the economyin tar, and throw feathers on it and then burn it for the hell of it.

Do any of the republicans actually think that with these tax cuts it is unfair?

Even if the money goes to the middle class, it doesn't mean they make it big, they still have to work just as hard to get to that $250k bracket, and willhave to do the same work you did.


Then you say I don't want to pay for the people who don't have the drive to make it.. Bull all the drive in the world doesn't mean you will make itbig and become rich. For every Jay-Z there are hundreds of other rappers who are just as good but won't make it because they didn't get the rightbreak. The coin didn't flip tails. It flipped heads and Jay-Z had chose heads.


You don't want to pay us poor people? We're lazy? We don't work hard enough?


Well we bust our backs living paycheck to paycheck, working two jobs and the slightest change puts us out of our house and threatens our children'sfuture...


We've been paying for your success the past 20 years with trickle down economics, and your prospered. So you got rich at our expense so under your logicyou are lazy too?


And to finally combat that giving tax cuts to the rich creates jobs. No it doesn't because tax cuts to the rich go to the rich not to anyone else and donot say it doesn't. If you were able to get $20 thou more on tax cuts you will take it. Oh and look at that the economy is tanking and unemployment is up Iguess trickle down didn't work after all.

Trickle down may be sound like a good concept to an extent but it doesn't work when the rich open up their umbrella to prevent that currency from tricklingdown.

We want a chance not a handout.

So before you guess at what the middle class feels, humble yourself first, and try and imagine what it would be like to be broke at this stage of the economy..

Also there are two candidates, one who is sitting there all over the map not knowing what he wants to do (FROM HIS MOUTH "I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THEECONOMY"), then you have the other candidate trying a different approach from one where our economy has been destroyed and the entire country is on thebrink of going under..


So sit back and think how much better you "patriots" are today then where you were in the 1990's. The look at the crap the country has become.

It turns out that giving all the breaks to the rich ruins the economy.

 

[denni5themenace]

Originally Posted by TBONE95860

My favorite part...

America was made great by people who embraced the one-time American culture of self-reliance, self-motivation, self-determination, self-discipline, personal betterment, and hard work, risk taking. A culture built around the concept that success was in reach on every able bodied American who would strive for it. Each year that less Americans embrace that culture, we all descend together.

America in many ways has lost its way, it's sad.
Thankfully there is still hope because many people still believe in what he described.

tbone, you're a cool dude (go lakers

), but i seriously hope you're in no way implying that people who support a
"culture of self-reliance, self-motivation, self-determination, self-discipline, personal betterment, and hard work, risk taking" areonly republicans who support mccain's view of how to handle the economy.