If you're a Republican, who would you most like to see on the GOP ticket and in which order (Prez/Veep)?
If you are a Democrat, suspend reality for a minute. If you could replace either Obama or Biden (or both) on the 2012 ticket, who would you choose instead?
Independents, please feel free to weigh in as well!
Votes for Hubbers accepted, as long as the Hubber also meets eligibility requirements for these US offices .
There are eligibility requirements? now that's strange.
Oh yeah...I remember now.....that was like....10 years ago when Democrats paid attention to requirements. No point in askin' 'em to suspend reality now 'cause they already did.
Donald Trump and Greg Gutfeld....donald would get us out of debt and kick arse overseas and greg is just hilarious
The potential for mayhem that would ensue among the ranks of liberals and their press would delight me to no end. The sheer insanity, apoplexy, the shriek mad fits of slobbering madness that would grip the "left" would be comical and amazing to behold.
Palin/Bachmann - how much more fun does it get than that - and if they were to win. OH MY GOODNESS! the fun would never stop. The pharmaceutical and international travel industries would probably trigger a huge rebound in the economy. Suicide would gain new acceptance and I would laugh and laugh.
Maybe Keith Olberman would be first. How hilarious that would be. I can just imagine now the insanity gripping him while his packed phone booth sized audience weeps. How wonderful a thing to behold.
It make me smile just thinking about the reactions. Heck just to the reactions that mentioning a PALIN/BACHMANN ticket will create in this forum. Ouch, my side hurts from laughing.
Herman Cain for President, Allen West as his VP I think would be the best two candidates to come out of the GOP in a long time.
What is it about Ron Paul that makes you like him so much? Convince me he's the right guy for the job.
Here let me help - Wrong Paul believes that Israelis building on their own land are a greater threat to America than Iranians building Nukes. Wrong Paul 2012. the only bright part is the world is going to end on December 21st, 2012 so no Wrong Paul Inaugural.
Israelis building on their own land?
If I'm not mistaken, the European powers after WWII decided to just randomly carve out a country on Muslim Holy Land.
... yeah... about that...
Also, Ron Paul has never said that, so you're lying. Callin' ya out, bub.
Evan, I would like to read your Hub about Ron Paul. Can you please give me the name of it?
If you just search through my account (click on my name) you'll see numerous ones explaining basic Austrian Economics, and ones about Ron Paul.
Why do I love Ron Paul? Three words:
Principled, Liberty, Unwavering.
But is he mentally sound? The day after the famous "assault" by Rick Perry, Paul says he doesn't remember the incident.
OK - you posted something responding to.
He didn't remember the incident as being a big deal.
It wasn't really any sort of strong confrontation, according to Paul, and it wasn't really worth remembering.
His response was that he remembered it, it's just that there was nothing really worth remembering.
Perhaps he was being kind?
Are you a Reagan fan?
If so, this might help ya: (poor video quality, but good message)
Perry/Rubio. With Herman Cain on the economic advisory committee. It would be nice to have a real businessman who has not sent jobs to China on the job. Obviously the Ivy league eggheads are not up to the task. But they have definitely made things worse. Zero growth in August, nuff said.
Do you ever consider that you might be wrong?
"At a private function at a Colorado resort, oil billionaire Charles Koch stood in front of hundreds of conservative millionaires and said the 2012 election will be, in the words of Saddam Hussein -- yes, he decided to quote Saddam Hussein -- "the mother of all wars."
He then read through a list of 32 contributors who gave more than a million dollars each to bankroll the network of corporate special-interest groups that aim to tear down President Obama.
If that offends you, it absolutely should. But it should also motivate you, because you are the only thing that can stop them."
Are you dreaming of a Koch brothers paid for political team?
The founders of Slow Food and Slow Money. I suspect they could bring about the fastest, most honest change.
The only Republican I ever want to see run is Ron Paul... There is talk of Paul /Ventura?
I would take a serious look at that.
If we are going as far as suspending reality for even a minute, would not not be fools to look at third party and independents? and if so we need to read a little to see what they are about... <A HREF = "http://webstation19.8k.com/party.htm> other U S political parties</A>
Point being that as a dream candidate, I think Oprah would have a better chance than most. What about Bill Gates he's got to be getting bored and can pay for his own campaign.
Bringing back just a touch of reality with someone who is running I would vote for me. Ronald Gascon candidate 2012
Romney/Huntsman or vice-versa. My real dream would be McCain/ABP - anyone but Palin. lol
Huntsman will be gone by the New Hampshire primary or very shortly after. He should have offered himself as Barry's new VP. That is the job for which his expressed opinions qualify him.
If Republicans don't get behind a moderate, Obama will be re-elected. Moderates are not going to support a TP candidate. Have you seen today's polls? Head to head, Romney beats Obama, but Obama beats Perry.
Perry doesn't believe in evolution or in climate change. I believe in evolution and in God, and I also know that our climate is changing, I just don't think man is completely responsible for the change.
Romney is intelligent, reasonable, and business-smart. I know you'll say he has two stikes against him - Mormonism and Romneycare. Even so, he's my choice right now.
"Now the POTUS does not love America come on romney"
Is he another one saying Obama hates America?
You all defend this???
Where did Romney say that Obama hates America? I'd like to read the whole article. All I could find is this, where he says the prez is a good guy and Democrats love America:
http://swampland.time.com/2011/09/07/in … distilled/
I don't know if Romney said it or not but I will.
President Barack Hussein Obama hates the United States of America.
Please, say it louder. And make sure to remind people that you vote GOP. (Try to do it often in the swing states)
Longhunter, LL has a point. When you make statements like that, it turns people against the GOP, as a whole.
Maybe he doesn't really want the GOP to win. Maybe he's auditioning for America's Next Fox News Channel Star.
I'd imagine FNC gets much better ratings when it is the sole voice of the opposition during a Democratic administration. My guess is Hannity, O'Reilly, et al are all secretly hoping for an Obama reelection.
I don't put O'Reilly in the same category as Hannity. Bill is much more fair, and I've seen him take up for Obama many times. Bill does, however, have a problem with ego! lol
I know what Livelonger's point was. Just stating what I believe, habee. Last I checked, we're still allowed to do that in this country. He/she apparently thinks I'm the only person in the country who thinks Obama hates it. He/she would be wrong.
Obama wants to fundamentally change this country into a Socialist state. To do that, he would have to shred the U.S. Constitution, something I think Obama would love to physically do if he could get his hands on it.
As a result, that's my dream ticket, whomever is running against Obama. Like I said, I would prefer to vote for someone but I'll definitely be voting against Obama no matter who's on the opposite ticket. I would prefer it not be someone like Bachmann or Paul but they'll get my vote if they're on the ticket.
I vote the person, their values, and their character, LiveLonger, and, yes, I do believe Obama hates this country. Obama has the values of a two-bit Chicago street thug and the character of Karl Marx. Do your best to enlighten me on why you think Obama has the country's best interest at heart and why we should vote for him rather than a the GOP ticket.
There's no convincing someone who believes Obama's grandfather's religion is a problem, and that he sincerely hates this country.
Again, please, try to convince swing voters with a similar line of argument.
I have no idea what Obama's grandfather's religion was and frankly don't care. Obama's grandfather isn't the POTUS and if you're trying to make this into some kind of a Muslim thing, you're heading in the wrong direction, Livelonger. Try again.
Also, I can assure you I'm not the only one who thinks Obama hates this country and it's Constitution but you can keep dreaming if you like.
I'll be voting Republican if for no other reason than to be voting against Obama no matter who's on the ticket. I'd prefer to vote for someone but a vote against Obama is a vote for the country.
Then why the "Hussein"?
Maybe you're right and I'm wrong. Again, please make your pitch to swing state voters early and often.
"Then why the "Hussein"?"
Is it not his middle name?
Assuming you're right and I'm wrong, give me your arguments as to why I should vote for Obama rather than anyone else. What has he done FOR this country?
Funny you don't feel the need to state any other candidate's middle name. Maybe because theirs are not so scary and "furrin"-sounding.
But, really. You're right and I'm wrong. Please, take your Hussein Obama hates America message to Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.
I used his full name in a formal manner, nothing more. But, please, believe as you wish.
As for my belief Obama hates America, I need not "take it" anywhere as it's becoming more and more clear everyday.
Perhaps that's what you fear, Livelonger. You see it as well. You're afraid as the 2012 election draws closer Obama's contempt for this country and her people will come into stark contrast view as he campaigns against whoever is running against him.
So that's it. The Republicans need a strong candidate and running mate but the truth is Obama will be running against his own record and beliefs rather than the opposing team.
Didn't every child learn his middle name in school.
uncorrectedvision, not only that, he used it during his swearing in. What Livelonger doesn't realize is the whole world knows it and frankly doesn't care.
How can you say that? I do not believe for one second that Obama hates America! He just has a different view of how to "fix" our problems than I do. Being POTUS has to be about the toughest job in the world, and I don't think anyone would run for POTUS if he/she didn't truly care about the country. I think Bachmann, for example, loves America, but I wouldn't want her leading me.
I believe Obama hates the Constitution and all it stands for thus hates this country and is trying to change it into his own vision of a Socialist state (redistribution of wealth).
The Republicans need to nominate a true Conservative that believes and will adhere to the Constitution rather than try to change it into a shell of what this country was founded on.
After thinking about it, I'd like to see a Cain/Allen West ticket. Cain is a good business man and West has demonstrated his leadership strength in the military. I think this would be a great ticket.
Today's polls mean nothing. They are ephemera. The only poll that matters is next November. Moderates are the reason we have Obama, awesome thinking that. McCain was Mister Moderate Appeal and he tanked, cratered. You can blame Palin if you like, I blame McCain. No one votes for or against the VP unless they are being silly. I consider anyone moderate, in politics and economics, just that, silly.
Where is the moderation between liberty and tyranny? Where is the moderation on the battlefield? Where were the vaunted moderates when communism marched across the world? When the Fascists marched across Europe? Where were the moderates when black men were held in irons as chattel?
I can tell you where the were, compromising, quaking, declaring peace in our time, kissing Nazis and Communists, betraying Dred Scott, mocking Lincoln or Reagan. The middle of the road is where you get run over. We are in a struggle for the survival of freedom. It is an historical struggle and for the United States, an existential one.
We cannot be what we have been if we are willing to yield and compromise on liberty and that is what moderation does, it compromises and yields. The ground must be held fast or it will no longer be free. There are hills on which it is better to die than be carted away in chains. If this is not the time for a stand than when? If this is not the place than where?
Sorry you think I'm "silly" because I'm a moderate on some issues. On some, I'm conservative, and on the death penalty, I'm liberal. What I think is crazy is for the GOP to nominate someone who doesn't have a chance of being elected. Look how popular Bachmann was for a while. Now it's Perry and his Ponzi-scheme Social Security stance. Hard right-wingers are going to hand the election to Obama. They'd rather have a TP candidate to run and lose than have a non-TP Republican run and win? Kinda like cutting off your nose to spite your face. Of course, I might be wrong. The economy might be bad enough by next November that anyone running against Obama could win.
What does "liberal on the death penalty mean?" There is a dictated position on the death penalty from the commissioner or conservatism? As a Catholic I find my values more clearly served through conservatism not liberalism. This is a personal intellectual position. It is informed by my understanding of natural law. I oppose the death penalty but you will find no one more conservative. How can this be? I only yield on the death penalty in that it is the law. Laws being changed require democratic action not judiciary action. I will not make it the sole issue on which I base a decision but it is a troubling one. It also happens to be a very popular issue in that most Americans are pro-death penalty.
Bachmann's number fell because voters prefer tall men to short women - her numbers tanked on the day Rick Perry got in.
If you think you are a moderate than it is time to think harder. The examination of what he believe and why we believe it is essential for our moral well being.
Social Security is worse than a ponzi scheme and requires major reforms.
http://reason.com/blog/2011/09/07/mr-pe … rity-is-no
Every rational reform of SS has been opposed by liberals and their moderate lap dogs, like John McCain, who just can't take strong talk. You mean hard line conservatives like Ronald Reagan? Surely you don't think GWB was a hard liner.
McCain can't take "strong talk"?? Sure, everybody knows what a wimp he is.
Yes McCain can't take strong talk that is aimed at anyone but a fellow Republican. When running against Barrack Hussein Obama McCain chastised those who used Barry's full name. He shied away from confronting Obama instead confronting members of his own party and supporters thus alienating the core he needed on election day.
McCain shies away from the fight but grumbles like an old man. I am not angry with him about it. He has suffered grievously for his country and I would never question HIS love of country. He is not, however, a stalwart defender of anything conservative. He is a Senator, spoiled by the sycophants that populate Senate staffs, pampered by the press and insulated from the country by D.C. parochialism.
I thought he was a defender of pro-life, the military, and saying NO to earmarks. His votes on 2nd Amendment laws have been consistent, except for gun shows. He was endorsed by the NRA. Aren't these conservative values?
No, conservative is a mind set not a set of issues. There are Democrats who support the 2nd Amendment except, this slice or that slice or the other slice, until the 2nd Amendment has been sliced to pieces.
McCain kept his Pro-life positions on the QT because moderates' sphincters pucker when that appellation is attached to a candidate.
Ear marks are a nice little show but cooperating to increase the size and scope of the state and the rhetoric of "cutting government on the backs of the poor" or "cutting taxes on the backs of the poor" far out weigh what ever little kudos he deserved for resisting the pittance of ear marks while helping to spend trillions and trillions in the spirit of cooperation.
Considering the prevailing mood in 2008 -- ABB (Anybody But Bush) McCain
was in a no-win position from the outset.
He had to effectively distance himself from his own party (especially GWB).
He did not do this effectively.
Nor did he represent his own party effectively.
Which, btw, was and continues to be an impossible task, given that the GOP is so polarized within itself.
You guys have an interesting challenge ahead of you in 2012.
If you give the primary to Perry, you'll send the moderates over to Obama.
If you give the primary to Romney, you'll leave the TP crowd angry.
You've had 4 years to figure out who you really are TODAY.
Infighting amongst yourselves doesn't exactly help your cause or your credibility with undecided voters.
Lol! Infighting? No, its called debate! Trust me, whoever emerges as the republican nominee will have the republican party unified behind them and moderates ate NOT going to pull the lever for Obama no matter who the candidate is! No one wants 4 more years of this ideologue, incompetent, narcissist running this country into the ground!
You are lumping me in with "them" I don't have much love for any of them. I am a conservative not a Republican. Obama is now and was then a seriously flawed person and candidate. McCain was incapable of offering Obama a big challenge. As for 2012, is suspect it will surprise a lot of people. It will not surprise me.
I wish the Democrats had retained control of Congress and I actually wish Obama had an unstoppable majority and was reelected. It is only when liberals finally accomplish their utopia can there be an end put to their insanity. The piece meal assembling of it and the incremental destruction of America is more dangerous and insidious.
When the habit of liberty disappears from the minds of men it will be gone forever and liberals are dismantling that habit every day with little cuts. Some day Americans will be comfortable with being zoo animals kept in cages by liberals. Once they are all in cages those cages will necessarily turn into yokes.
It is only a matter of time. I would just seek its acceleration. If the designs of liberals became obvious the would be destroyed. That is why I want your success. Americans aren't Europeans, yet. But that day is approaching and I hope I don't live to see it.
As for undecided voters - I blame them most. If someone cannot decide between liberty and tyranny than what good is he to anyone. When presented with the yoke or the open cage door what other choice is reasonable? The undecided voter is the foolish voter.
You are really waxing eloquent today, UCV.
Someone above suggested it, but I'll second the motion.
You should be a speechwriter!
And I mean that with sincerity and admiration for your passionate expression.
While I personally remain unmoved, I'm sure there are folks here just waiting for their pom poms to arrive.
The only Republican with a remote chance is Romney (Obama light). Bachmann has disappeared and Perry is self-destructing with his anti-science position as well as his ridiculous assertion that Social Security is a "Ponzi scheme". I would love to suggest that he learn the definition of the term Ponzi scheme, but I'd rather just laugh as he continues to embarrass himself with public displays of his ignorance.
You are right, a Ponzi scheme is a voluntary association in which the participants are not continually required, by law, to pay more for less, but Social Security has all the characteristics of a Ponzi Scheme with the additional force of law. We are all due the justice of digging FDR's dead body up and jailing it a cell right next to a lesser crook, Bernie Madoff.
A Ponzi scheme is a fraudulent investment operation that pays returns to separate investors, not from any actual profit earned by the organization, but from their own money or money paid by subsequent investors
Social Security is already paying out more than it takes in. An increase in taxes will not solve the problem as the number of those supported by Social Security increases and the number paying in decreases.
To continue with these worthless liberal programs is to follow Greece. Greece, Italy, Spain are sinking the rest of Europe.
You should have quit while you were ahead
"We are all due the justice of digging FDR's dead body up and jailing it a cell right next to a lesser crook, Bernie Madoff."
What a brilliant way to make your case. You could write speeches for Perry.
Social Security is more vicious and insidi.ous than a mere Ponzi scheme
Most mainstream historians without an axe to grind credit FDR for being a pragmatist who steered the US away from extreme ideologies like communism by offering hope to the masses during the depression.
FDR was a capitalist from an wealthy established family, and made mo apologies for that.
Today's right wingers should thank their lucky stars for his rational, reassuring, calm, yet empathetic approach to the suffering during the depression.
FDRs manipulations of the economy were disastrous sinking the American economy into a morass in which it wallowed until 1949. The economy started its down turn in 1929 and stayed there until after the post-WWII recession - though the war itself was a distortion of the economy.
FDR was a mess, we traded Fascism for Communism - awesome. Perhaps some more familiarity with the specific policies and events of the FDR administration would help.
I can't agree with you there. A known leant-leftist communist, Ronald Reagan, was a big fan of FDR.
Until? Have you read anything Ronald Reagan wrote in the '60s and '70s?
"As president, Reagan often mentioned his admiration for FDR’s spirit of leadership. On a trip back to his alma mater, Eureka College, in 1984, he reminded his listeners what it was like to experience the Great Depression, and how the Fireside Chats had been so reassuring. “All of us who lived through those years,” he instructed them, “remember the drabness the depression brought. But we remember, too, how people pulled together, that sense of community and shared values, that belief in American enterprise and democracy that saw us through. It was that engrained American optimism, that sense of hope Franklin Roosevelt so brilliantly summoned and mobilized.” In his view, FDR was instrumental in reviving an inherent American optimism that was endangered by the economic crisis.
Twice he spoke at events honoring Roosevelt. The first was in 1982. He had visited the FDR exhibit at the Smithsonian Institution, then returned to the White House for a luncheon that included the Roosevelt family. Naturally, when speaking in front of someone’s family, one avoids comments critical of a loved one. The speech was instead a tribute to FDR’s leadership. Reagan called him “one of history’s truly monumental figures,” “an American giant, a leader who shaped, inspired, and led our people through perilous times,” one who could “reach out to men and women of diverse races and backgrounds and inspire them with new hope and new confidence in war and peace.”
http://www.firstprinciplesjournal.com/a … &loc=r
So he never got down to policy? Still doesn't diminish the tragic results of FDR's stupid economic policies but it does speak to his ability as a demagogue.
I know what you mean. Pulling a country out of depression and leading them to victory in WW2 was pretty stupid.
I'm going to go out for a bit. I'm sure I'll come back to some right-wing nonsense about FDR prolonging the depression blah blah blah...
You may now feel free to parrot the conservative talking points.
Let's take one from my childhood, shall we? I'm feeling nostalgic...
You GD Commie Pinko F*G!
Pulling the country out of depression - the economy did not rebound until 1949 - FDR had been dead for four years by then. The economy from 1939 until 1945 was a distortion based on government spending, wage and price controls and rationing. It was as controlled an economy as that of Nazi Germany or Communist Russia. Only after the war was a normal economy recovered. The loss of value in the Stock Market lasted twenty years. Immediately following the war there was a recession - the last vestiges of the Depression.
A controlled economy is not a normal economy as we are learning now. The distortions in our economy, from the bailouts, stimulus and the quantitative easings, are reflected in stagnant employment and very low economic growth. Government spending is not real growth.
I saw a clip of him on the news once....he had just cut the mentally ill off aide, thrown them out of hospitals to fend for themselves...
He said, and I quote: "We have cut their allowance."
Too dang bad he never cut his OPEC buds off their allowance.
The Social Security Systems problems are inherent of the basic pyramid plan scheme that Social Security is...
I personally believe that Social Security should be allowed to shrivel up and die and be replaced with personal security accounts in banks. It's what they used to call savings. I personally think that forced savings is an insult, but if the people have no will power... However many people think that this would be cruel and unfair to those who paid in so much and would get nothing in return. But hey, are these not the same exact people who stood back and did nothing as the government spent our grand children's future?
What we need is to redefine the game, that is change the rules.
See the big fixx plan
You mean replace Social Security with something like 401ks? Both are needed especially since funded stated benefit pensions are disappearing.
Like 401k's except held by credit unions so all deposits remain locally invested
Ha ha ha ha!
I sure do see the big banks falling right in line behind THAT idea.
Pray tell, which party do you expect will introduce the legislation that creates a life-long savings account for every American and puts their money in credit unions not banks or Wall Street.
If I were a Republican those two would be my picks--Huntsman/Romney. The rest aren't remotely qualified for a variety of reasons ranging from dishonesty (Gingrich) to ignorance and prejudice.
Some very interesting picks here.
I also like the idea of getting someone in with business experience.
Bill Gates would be awesome!!
Here's my dream team: O'Donnell/O'Donnell
UCV, you want laughs? That would get some laughs!
The funniest part is, as things are going, they could beat Barry/Joey in 2012. The thumping of all those fainting liberals will be so fun. Just watching blood shoot our of George Stephanopolous' eyes will be so fun.
I laugh every time there is a Palin story and liberals soil their undies. It is already great fun when she doesn't tell the liberal press where she is off to next and they race after her bus. Or she silences Jake Tapper so she can talk to a heifer, awesome. There is no one nearly as fun as Palin. She calls the tune and her haters dance.
Just mentioning a Palin/Bachmann ticket got and eye roll out of you MM. Oh, yes, Rosie O'Donnel just makes me vomit - there is nothing funny about that monster.
That captures the Party of Resentment's entire mood these days - we'll cut off our nose to spite our face.
Sorry, Obama will earn a second term. We're just having fun here.
We shall see next November. It is unlikely given the current economic conditions. Part of resentment? Seriously, oil companies, doctors, pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, banks, mortgage companies, private jet manufacturers have all been treated like pariahs by this President, what party does he represent? Millionaires and billionaires, the rich, the tea party are constantly attacked and who is the resentment party?
And now the hate being vomited by Democrat House Representatives, including a disgusting reference to lynching, is being aimed at their fellow citizens whose sole crime is objecting to policies coming from Democrats. Isn't that resentment?
I love that one!
How about another all-female ticket:
(Meghan and Bristol)
Oh, wait...they hate each other.
Their campaign slogan could be:
"Cain - certainly not Abel! Koch - cut out the middleman!"
You know Bill Gates doesn't have to run we could draft him.
That is the Americans did it in the beginning,
Wouldn't it be refreshing to not know who was running after the election was over...
Not sure which is a bigger surprise.
Waking up the day after election day to a new president you didn't even know was a candidate, or
waking up the day after election to a new president who is nothing like the candidate you thought you supported/voted for.
Can you imagine how Bill Gates would feel if he won an election he didn't even run in?
I think he would be more annoyed than honored. I don't think that Mr. Gates is of the same caliber as Mr. Washington, who felt honored when asked to be the first President and inadequate. I would love to see our next President who feels both honored and inadequate, that too me is a sign of someone who truly cares about this country.
Washington was also confident in his personal abilities. Though reluctant to assume the office he was the only one who could without angering Jefferson or Adams, plus the growing cadre of malcontents who populated the nascent political factions. Washington, if not universally loved, was universally respected and admired - even by King George III.
We might have found that in Fred Thompson if he'd only campaigned harder. In him we would have had a president more like Washington than the two-bit Chicago thug dictator-wannabe we have now.
I can both honored and inadequate, just not as inadequate as say GB jr.
GWB spent too much, shouldn't have gone into Iraq, and didn't do a damn thing about stopping all the damn illegals. However, inadequate on 9-11 would have been Al Gore.
No, I suspect you would be at least as inadequate. Two term governor of Texas, two term President of the United States. The assumption that the electorate is stupid is demeaning and disgusting. The arrogance of liberals is repulsive.
"Wow truth is out they only care about 1 thing defeat Obama. What about the people GOP"
Defeat Obama and you save the people and the country, LMC.
Then we have a lot of hard work ahead to turn back all Obama did to try to destroy this country.
I'm waiting for somebody to rebuke you for contributing to discord...guess I have a long wait.
If both sides are guilty, why does no one chastise you?
Or Romney for that matter? He's a nasty man.
Where's the rebuking people????
Am I the ONLY one who gets taken to the wood-shed?
Awwwwww, now my feelings are hurt!
Chris needs a Binky...
"I'm waiting for somebody to rebuke you for contributing to discord...guess I have a long wait."
You're joking, right? Discord? What you call discord is the truth but you simply can't handle it. You want me rebuked, you do it.
"Rah! Rah! Barack Hussein Obama, he's our man! When he screws it up, we'll just scream, 'Yes, we can!'"
You seem off your game, LMC. Come on. Put the Binky down and step it up!!!
Excellent idea, Greek! Who would be her running mate?
This stranger she was caught making out with...
he is an American citizen so he is eligible... although he recently failed a physical (poor eye site)
Personally, I'd have to be full on blind to kiss her.
How about Paris Hilton instead? She'd certainly be better than Biden any day.
well, she has already 'poled' most of the electorate
Snookie for President, would be like putting boobs and a dress on George Bush jr, intellectually speaking...
Now we're heading in the right direction, Longhunter.
Paris Hilton and Brittany Spears.
First order of business will be legislation prohibiting underwear!
loose lips sink ships....
(and cause the seaman to leak out of their vessels)
I was thinking the Hilton/Spears ticket would be more for the Dem side.
Picture if you will the promo ad for the TV show Big Sexy and hopefully your mind's eye didn't just burn out.
I will support this legislation as well but I want a clause stating it applies only to women who are height proportionate to weight. There's just some things we don't need to see.
Wow, a lefty site, spread your wings. I am sure you can find something from Fox News.
http://reason.com/blog/2011/09/07/mr-pe … rity-is-no
What would happen if all of your think-alikes just sent their checks back? Might someone deserving appreciate that statement of protect? Kind of like dumping tea over the edge, no?
I want my money returned to me now with the interest it would have accrued if invested in the lowly savings bond and adjusted for inflation. But unlike a legitimate investment, my deposits to Social Security no longer exist because they have been transferred to someone who is not me. It is not insurance, it is not savings, it is not investment, it is not part of a trust fund. It is operating capital for a pyramid scheme and my money is gone on the day it is received. In fact, it is gone before it is received because Social Security is running a deficit this year and that deficit will continue to grow unabated as baby boomers retire.
As I'm sure you know SS is designed to provide more than a basic, bare bones retirement income. It also pays benefits to orphaned children and to widows. And it does have features similar to private insurance--If you live until 90 you'll get back more than you contributed, and if you die the day after you retire all it will pay is a small burial benefit. Your 401k will provide support for your children, your alma mater and anyone you wish to designate as a beneficiary.
With the decline of funded pensions, the 401k law should be revised to permit greater contributions and limits on fees charged for administration and operations. Some of these costs of investing in a 401k are much too high, depending on which investments are allowed by your employer. Vanguard sets the standard for low costs.
What about people who don't have to pay into SS? I have a friend who's a teacher, and in her county, they don't have to pay into SS. Now she wishes she had paid in because she has some serious health problems and would like to retire on disability. My mom never paid into SS, either, but when retirement time rolled around, she sure wished she had paid in.
UCV, do you pay into SS?
I have to pay in to SS but I also have a 401k. I have had a 401k for decades and wish my SS taxes had gone into it where I have the control over the resources that my labor produces rather than being enslaved to a sham system that will never be able to match the productivity of my 401k.
How do you feel about giving workers a choice between SS and other investments?
You can give that idea up now. Democrats refuse to even hear that question. The reform proposed by GWB was exactly that. If you say reform Social Security to Democrat politicians they will say tax the rich. Such a creative solution to a complex problem. The answer to every economic question is "tax the rich." Democrats are a disaster visited on this society by FDR who cemented their political power with Social Security - that was its original intent.
No - I asked how you felt about it. Didn't McCain propose this?
What do I think. I think we are finished as a free people and it is only a matter of time before we are Greece but to where will productive people flee. There never has been another country in the world like this one and we are killing it and have been for decades.
What I think of Social Security is that it is just one of many reasons why our grandchildren will be forced to work without hope of retirement but yearning for the grave instead. It is one of many reasons I see a future where Americans live in gray government housing and wait in line for potatoes never even dreaming of the limited freedom that we have now. An America freed from oppressive Christianity and religious notions of morality. An America where that state is mother, the state is father and our descendants dream of bread or milk not sunny skies and summer friendships.
It is the psychopathology of the pampered American middle that America is an immortal and unalterable adamantine culture rather than something so delicate as a dream or an idea.
If we want there to be an America than we must teach it and fight for it - everyday, at every opportunity. Shirking in that mission will doom it. OOps too late.
I see an America made possible by moderation in the face of liberal utopian restructuring and saying how the destroyers of America surely love their country that is why they seek "hope and change."
To live comfortably in retirement workers need BOTH SS AND other investments, e.g., 401k plus other savings and investments. A funded, defined benefit pension used to be part of the 3-legged retirement stool. Nowadays few people other than government workers have old style pensions. Take Social Security away, and we will be tripping over impoverished old folks.
No more a pyramid than any other kinds of insurance. And your money does earn interest, which is why you get it until you are too old to remember why. The scheme comes when others of dubious intention take the money for inappropriate reasons. Why do many public entities have to put so much money in their retirement accounts and never touch them, when politicians get to take the SS $ as they will? Maybe that's the problem and can be fixed instead of trying to kill the hand that will eventually hand you many checks.
FDR on Social Security...
“We shall make the most lasting progress if we recognize that Social Security can furnish only a base upon which each one of our citizens may build his individual security through his own individual efforts."
Yeah, sounds like a communist to me lol
Versus this: Let the banks handle it, they'll take a huge cut, you'll have to pay more for less care.
Sounds good, huh? yum yum yuuuuum.
One of the difficulties of politics is that the simplistic outspoken "antis" and haters gain most of the publicity. Thoughtful common sense moderates do not gain much publicity.
Both parties have members who are much better than the declared runners. But they won't get nominated.
For the Republicans, the difficulty is that they need a candidate who can beat Obama. The TP wing can probably win the Republican nomination, but their candidate will lose to Obama. Someone like Alan West would be a good candidate against Obama. Maybe Ron Paul for VP?
For the Democrats an Obama/ Hilary slate would enthuse the party activists and convey a political message. All the anti - Obama voters are going to vote anyway, but Obama /Clinton would help to pull out the maximum Democrat vote
This about sums up the GOP Presidential Candidates . . . where the dream is becoming a nightmare . . .
http://www.nbc.com/the-tonight-show/vid … 11/1354164
Part 2 of Bill Maher's "WHo's Who in Who's Craziest" in the GOP Presidential Race . . .
http://www.nbc.com/the-tonight-show/vid … 11/1354165
by Onusonus 21 months ago
When Obama was president he started whipping out a bunch of executive orders. Conservatives screamed that it was unconstitutional to bypass congress on so many issues. Are you liberals more in support of the constitution now that Trump is the one with the pen and the phone?Also are you...
by Evan G Rogers 7 years ago
Ron Paul just came in 2nd place in the Iowa Ames Straw Poll. He was 152 votes behind Bachmann, despite it being her home state. The third place winner was Pawlenty with about half as many votes as either Paul or Bachmann.So, now the question is "how will the media ignore him now?". The...
by American View 7 years ago
What do you think of this ticket:Huntsman/Bachmann 2012I really like this combonation, not sure it will happen. What tickets do you Like?
by Holle Abee 7 years ago
Republican from GA. Conservative. African American businessman. Anyone know much about him?
by icountthetimes 6 years ago
Do you think there's still a chance that someone other than Romney or Gingrich will emerge and become the Republican nominee. Both Romney and Gingrich both have good, but not spectacular levels of support, and there is a sense that neither one of them quite fits the bill, in terms of what the party...
by crankalicious 21 months ago
I find it hard to believe that even people who voted for Donald Trump aren't starting to realize that there is something seriously wrong with him. He is either insane or such a narcissist that he's incapable of rational thought.Let's not even talk about his policies. Let's just discuss his...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|