It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

2001 Obama Redistribution Audio BOGUS (i.e. creative editing)

page: 4
15
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Regarding the snide "cartoon" remark:
Sometimes humor educates; takes the edge off.
What's the matter, don't you think thats funny?
Did that bring it home for you? Wow.




posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ClintK
 


Wow Clint, thats kinda harsh seeing as you don't know me. Perhaps a cup of decaf would help. Just trying to share a little joke with everyone.

I get my info on Obamas economic plan the same place you do, right from his mouth. Lets talk about that $3000. incentive to hire a new employee. I hire employees when I have more work to perform than I can get done with the current staff I have. If I hire someone for $35000 it will really cost me about $47000 to employ them when taking into consideration the health coverage and matching taxes I have to pay. Do you really think I'm going to spend almost $50000 to get $3000. Sorry, I don't see one business hiring someone for that deduction.



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
So here is the real scoop from someone on the front lines in the mortgage industry - send your thanks for our current situation to Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Barney Frank, Harry Reid and Chris Dodd - good going guys!! PS - Last time I checked - these guys were still DEMOCRATS!!


Last time I checked Bill Clinton left office with the country actually in SURPLUS and it's funny how quickly people can forget the $700 billion that your current republican president recently added to the current deficit.



Listen up - if throwing money at a social problem was ever going to solve it that would have happened long ago!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Social problems can only be solved by people - not money.


No one is throwing money at any social problems, first we must acknowledge that there are SERIOUS social problems in this country and they must be ADDRESSED. This is necessary for America to prosper as a whole. The reason we have high crime levels, a drop in education levels, kids not being able to afford college, etc are all rooted in our social issues. Also, we won't just be throwing extra government money at social problems, we need to, however, re-prioritise spending so that the Americans who need it are getting it.

It's ironic how the republicans seem to be more concerned about spending at home than they are abroad on the battle field. I guess it's more disturbing for you to be helping your fellow American than the people in the middle east.

If McCain is elected, I guarantee you will pay for it, might not be through taxes, but it sure as hell will hit you in some way or another. THEY are the big spenders of the 21st century (by record).



The American Dream is available 24/7/365 to those who would get up off their lazy butts and pursue it!!


Yeah, but it sure as hell ain't available to single parents, people working 2 jobs just to make ends meet and those workers whos jobs are being shipped abroad by big corporations trying to boost profits. I guess they are just lazy too huh?



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by makaira1985
 


It's a misconception that most small businesses would be negatively affected by Obama's plans to let the Bush tax cuts expire and revert to Clinton-era tax rates for those with an income of over $200,000 a year (for individuals) or $250,000 a year (for families).

However, you seem to be confusing revenue with income. While many small businesses do earn yearly revenues of $250,000 or more, once business expenses for equipment, goods, and payroll are subtracted, far fewer small business owners actually have a personal income of $250,000 or more each year. And Obama's rollback of the Bush tax cuts for individuals earning over $200,000 a year and families earning over $250,000 per year will only apply to income.

The overwhelming majority of those small-business owners would see no increase, because they earn too little to be affected!!!

If you go to BarackObama.com you will see that the Obama-Biden economic plan is laid out nice and clearly for you, I suggest you read it because you could benefit from it.

Obama has also repeatedly stated that he plans to close tax loopholes that make it cheaper for some large corporations to outsource jobs overseas; theoretically, this would help small and start-up businesses employing American workers and producing products or services on American soil compete with large corporations.



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by makaira1985
reply to post by ClintK
 


Wow Clint, thats kinda harsh seeing as you don't know me. Perhaps a cup of decaf would help. Just trying to share a little joke with everyone.

I get my info on Obamas economic plan the same place you do, right from his mouth.

You should get it from his web site, which gives a comprehensive look at his economic plan. Trying to characterize it the way you did demonstrates an eagerness to distort something to the point of being a ridiculous mischaracterization. Obama certainly isn't talking about splitting tax revenue evenly between each citizen of the USA.


Originally posted by makaira1985
Lets talk about that $3000. incentive to hire a new employee. I hire employees when I have more work to perform than I can get done with the current staff I have. If I hire someone for $35000 it will really cost me about $47000 to employ them when taking into consideration the health coverage and matching taxes I have to pay. Do you really think I'm going to spend almost $50000 to get $3000. Sorry, I don't see one business hiring someone for that deduction.


Yeah, you're typical, aren't you? He's not talking about hiring those kinds of employees. For some employers this would indeed be a good incentive; for others not. So what? Just because you're not one of them doesn't mean NOBODY would want the incentive. And besides, even in your situation, an incentive might be just enough to make you decide to create a new job you were thinking of creating anyway.

[edit on 29-10-2008 by ClintK]



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 01:32 PM
link   
CHANGE from Obama:

1st Amendment (free speech)-GONE (by means of hate speech legislation)

2nd Amendment (Right to Bear Arms) GONE

Capitalism - GONE

Socialism - HELLO

Go ahead vote Obama....Work hard to pay for those that don't



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by FX44rice
CHANGE from Obama:

1st Amendment (free speech)-GONE (by means of hate speech legislation)

2nd Amendment (Right to Bear Arms) GONE

Capitalism - GONE

Socialism - HELLO

Go ahead vote Obama....Work hard to pay for those that don't


Well this made me laugh out loud.

I can't find a single thing you mentioned to be true, this stuff might work around the republican dinner table in the evening whiles you bash Obama with your mantras about the future of America, but unfortunately it won't work here.

Now, allow me to deny your ignorance for a moment and I will be straight to the point as your comment was incredibly simple and I think it warranted a simple response:

Obama supports free speech and human rights and I can't find any evidence on the internet to support what you are saying is true.

Obama has no plan or strategy to restrict your right to bear arms, this is simply fabricated and sensationalist.

Obama embraces capitalism, in fact, it was Adam Smith in his book entitled "Capitalism - The Wealth of Nations" where he AGREES with Obama's point on spreading the wealth...and I quote:

"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. "

Here is a full news article with that reference:

New Yorker Article

*Sigh* Why do the republicans try to scare up votes for McCain... Why can't you talk about what McCain will do different to Bush rather than what Obama will do? I know why... because quite frankly, you know your candidate is Bush III, just like my avatar.



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by IceColdPro

Originally posted by FX44rice
CHANGE from Obama:

1st Amendment (free speech)-GONE (by means of hate speech legislation)

2nd Amendment (Right to Bear Arms) GONE

Capitalism - GONE

Socialism - HELLO

Go ahead vote Obama....Work hard to pay for those that don't


Well this made me laugh out loud.

I can't find a single thing you mentioned to be true, this stuff might work around the republican dinner table in the evening whiles you bash Obama with your mantras about the future of America, but unfortunately it won't work here.

Now, allow me to deny your ignorance for a moment and I will be straight to the point as your comment was incredibly simple and I think it warranted a simple response:

Obama supports free speech and human rights and I can't find any evidence on the internet to support what you are saying is true.

Obama has no plan or strategy to restrict your right to bear arms, this is simply fabricated and sensationalist.

Obama embraces capitalism, in fact, it was Adam Smith in his book entitled "Capitalism - The Wealth of Nations" where he AGREES with Obama's point on spreading the wealth...and I quote:

"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. "

Here is a full news article with that reference:

New Yorker Article

*Sigh* Why do the republicans try to scare up votes for McCain... Why can't you talk about what McCain will do different to Bush rather than what Obama will do? I know why... because quite frankly, you know your candidate is Bush III, just like my avatar.
You are sadly deceived like so many others...

jihadwatch.org...


www.marketwatch.com... dist=hppr


[edit on 29-10-2008 by FX44rice]

[edit on 29-10-2008 by FX44rice]



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by IceColdPro
 
There is plenty, plenty more to support this. You might want to look into the Fairness Doctrine as well. BTW I'm not laughing out loud either Bozo, Obama seriously threatens the USA as we know it, and you're one of the fools casting a vote for him that will negatively alter our lives.



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ClintK

Originally posted by makaira1985
reply to post by ClintK
 


Wow Clint, thats kinda harsh seeing as you don't know me. Perhaps a cup of decaf would help. Just trying to share a little joke with everyone.

I get my info on Obamas economic plan the same place you do, right from his mouth.

"


You should get it from his web site, which gives a comprehensive look at his economic plan. Trying to characterize it the way you did demonstrates an eagerness to distort something to the point of being a ridiculous mischaracterization. Obama certainly isn't talking about splitting tax revenue evenly between each citizen of the USA."


You think what is posted on his website is more accurate than what comes out of his mouth? HA! Evenly distributed does not matter. I work 6 days a week, 10-12 hours a day to make my business successful. What does matter is he wants to take my hard earned money and give it to someone sitting on their sofa all day, period.


Originally posted by makaira1985
Lets talk about that $3000. incentive to hire a new employee. I hire employees when I have more work to perform than I can get done with the current staff I have. If I hire someone for $35000 it will really cost me about $47000 to employ them when taking into consideration the health coverage and matching taxes I have to pay. Do you really think I'm going to spend almost $50000 to get $3000. Sorry, I don't see one business hiring someone for that deduction.


"


Yeah, you're typical, aren't you? He's not talking about hiring those kinds of employees. For some employers this would indeed be a good incentive; for others not. So what? Just because you're not one of them doesn't mean NOBODY would want the incentive. And besides, even in your situation, an incentive might be just enough to make you decide to create a new job you were thinking of creating anyway."

"Typical what? Intelligent businessman? You are correct. And what do you mean "those kind of employees"? You tell me who would spend $50000 to get $3000 in return."

[edit on 29-10-2008 by ClintK]



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by FX44rice
 





There is plenty, plenty more to support this. You might want to look into the Fairness Doctrine as well. BTW I'm not laughing out loud either Bozo, Obama seriously threatens the USA as we know it, and you're one of the fools casting a vote for him that will negatively alter our lives.



Our how about his voting record on gun rights? I guess that is a "Negative right?"

And why hasn't the LA Times released the party video? What is there to hide besides the source? There may be some very damaging material in that video and we aren't seeing it.

I wonder if there are any people out there who voted for Obama already that are questioning there decision?



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by IceColdPro

Originally posted by FX44rice
CHANGE from Obama:

1st Amendment (free speech)-GONE (by means of hate speech legislation)

2nd Amendment (Right to Bear Arms) GONE

Capitalism - GONE

Socialism - HELLO

Go ahead vote Obama....Work hard to pay for those that don't


Well this made me laugh out loud.

I can't find a single thing you mentioned to be true, this stuff might work around the republican dinner table in the evening whiles you bash Obama with your mantras about the future of America, but unfortunately it won't work here.

Now, allow me to deny your ignorance for a moment and I will be straight to the point as your comment was incredibly simple and I think it warranted a simple response:

Obama supports free speech and human rights and I can't find any evidence on the internet to support what you are saying is true.

Obama has no plan or strategy to restrict your right to bear arms, this is simply fabricated and sensationalist.

Obama embraces capitalism, in fact, it was Adam Smith in his book entitled "Capitalism - The Wealth of Nations" where he AGREES with Obama's point on spreading the wealth...and I quote:

"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. "

Here is a full news article with that reference:

New Yorker Article

*Sigh* Why do the republicans try to scare up votes for McCain... Why can't you talk about what McCain will do different to Bush rather than what Obama will do? I know why... because quite frankly, you know your candidate is Bush III, just like my avatar.


That is because you are not looking and paying attention. He is against Free speech as written in the constitution. Look up Political Correctness, Fairness Doctrine, you get the idea, those are all liberal agenda's he supports to control what people can say.

He is against guns, unless it is a single shot. Yes he said that. That is not the 2nd Amendment. The 2nd Amendment insures the American people out gun the Government, so that the Government is afraid of the people and not the other way around. Something Most Liberals and a good part of Republicans are against, unless of course its themselves having a firearm.

Capitalism works. Greed fails. Socialism = Theft = Robin Hood Complex = Lazy Sucking Leeches = More Social Programs = Communism = by by all rights.



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by makaira1985

You think what is posted on his website is more accurate than what comes out of his mouth?


Of course it's more accurate because on his web site everything is there. Anybody can take a quotation out of context. Duh! It's a no-brainer.


Originally posted by makaira1985
HA! Evenly distributed does not matter.

But that was exactly how the cartoon characterized it


Originally posted by makaira1985
I work 6 days a week, 10-12 hours a day to make my business successful. What does matter is he wants to take my hard earned money and give it to someone sitting on their sofa all day, period.


See? Obviously you haven't read his web site. You have absolutely no idea what his policy is.


Originally posted by makaira1985

Yeah, you're typical, aren't you? He's not talking about hiring those kinds of employees. For some employers this would indeed be a good incentive; for others not. So what? Just because you're not one of them doesn't mean NOBODY would want the incentive. And besides, even in your situation, an incentive might be just enough to make you decide to create a new job you were thinking of creating anyway."




Originally posted by makaira1985
"Typical what? Intelligent businessman? You are correct. And what do you mean "those kind of employees"? You tell me who would spend $50000 to get $3000 in return."


Obviously you're not a very intelligent businessman if you actually thought that is what the deal was. In the first place, it was a tax break, they weren't going to pay you outright. In the second place, it was an incentive for businesses that might have been sitting on the fence about making a new hire. It was NEVER thought you were going to get people creating jobs that were just going to be a financial drain. In the third place, this was a tiny, tiny part of his economic package. In the fourth place, if we can send everyone a 600 dollar economic stimulus check, why not a 3 thousand dollar incentive for small businesses to create new jobs? What can it possibly hurt? Nobody would be FORCED to take advantage of it. Maybe it wouldn't do much but every little bit counts.



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ClintK

Originally posted by makaira1985

You think what is posted on his website is more accurate than what comes out of his mouth?


Of course it's more accurate because on his web site everything is there. Anybody can take a quotation out of context. Duh! It's a no-brainer.

How can I take what I hear come out of his own mouth, with my own ears, out of context?

Obviously you're not a very intelligent businessman if you actually thought that is what the deal was. In the first place, it was a tax break, they weren't going to pay you outright. In the second place, it was an incentive for businesses that might have been sitting on the fence about making a new hire. It was NEVER thought you were going to get people creating jobs that were just going to be a financial drain. In the third place, this was a tiny, tiny part of his economic package. In the fourth place, if we can send everyone a 600 dollar economic stimulus check, why not a 3 thousand dollar incentive for small businesses to create new jobs? What can it possibly hurt? Nobody would be FORCED to take advantage of it. Maybe it wouldn't do much but every little bit counts.


Not successful? 30 years in business, 50+ employees with full benefits, yearly payroll over $2.5 million. Plus I set aside 20% of the profits for year end bonus' for employees. You just let me know when I get it right. I know what a tax break is because I understand profit and loss statements, balance sheets and corporate tax filings, which, by the sounds of it, you know nothing about.

Now I know why I have been trying to stay clear of these Obama threads. Good luck to you Clint. However, if Obama wins, you won't need it as you'll obviously be one of the ones getting to spend my money. It'll be a pleasure working for you.



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Leftist, Rightist, Upist, Downist... politics is a very disgusting business. There is not a single politician this year that I would vote for. You can always trust a dishonest man to be dishonest, honestly. That little bit of humor may be out of a comedy but as things are going it has generally been of better policy to invite the worst rather than those you aren't sure of simply because at least you know what the worst are going to do. However, with this election I think everyone has realized there's no cherry in this tree. McCain's old and voting him into office is the same as putting Sarah Palin in the President's seat and that scares and should scare people. Bush is stupid but that woman doesn't even know what the Vice President does!
And then there's Obama. He's clean shaven, articulate, quick to present statistics, sites his cases, and responds relevantly at the time when spoken to. He even speaks with a modern dialect using emotional queues and will call himself out when he is wrong. In all aspects, he is the better politician. Now, here comes the difficulty.
Just who is this guy? Where did he come from? Most of you living today can honestly say that you had nothing to do with the politics we are currently living with. In real truth, this was a problem inherited. Those living today are paying, not for their sins, but many generations of those that came before them who are now and long dead. Obama was right to say that today people do not trust their politicians. Those who have run the Senate have been doing so for as long as most reading this have been alive. Obama is the fruition of years and even centuries of development.
What will he be? Well, the last public speaker to have such potential existed in a trinity. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was one. Prime Minister Winston Churchill was the second, and that public speaker of such charisma... Chancellor Adolf Hitler. And you know what? Germany did love Hitler. Sure he did alot wrong, but even the richest families were selling their daughters as prostitutes just to survive before he came into office. Why? Thanks to US, French, and English politics. Now today it is the US that is going where Germany was. Whenever there is class and you demote a person in their classing, especially to the poverty line, where they survive literally between pay check to pay check (if that), a tyrant is likely to then entirely be acceptable.
And it should be remembered that in the more ancient and longer lived times, the tyrant had no such title. They were the norm and they were the all. Today humanity's culture identities are being stripped away, and though this is well if love and kindness are present, this is not this civilization. There is an abundance of all things but no place wherein any may derive identity from without as it has been in the past. Today people must assign their identity from within but there is greater resistance. McCain and Palin are just a few examples. Legalized and mob supported suppressors but Obama indeed may well be worse in all views.
We're approaching a point where eventually the mob will have to realize that it having a voice does not mean that it has a right, nor that what rights it would like to have will be accepted when extended upon another. Everyone here today may be living, not at the end of times, but at the beginning of an entirely new era and though likely many are going to die for it be born, it is not certain what exactly that new era is going to look like. Obama may be the world's new global tyrant but if anything has proved true, no one is going to stop him either. And that is simple honestly because there is not a single person on this planet that will entirely let another person live nor let be and this must be for there to be all of the things desired. So, this election is just the end of one age and the beginning of another. At this point, those living today are not makers but witnesses. That's this election.

[edit on 29-10-2008 by Old_One]



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 
I'm sure there are plenty of them. CIA officials have stated that "With Obama's past character associations and relationships he would NOT even qualify to become any type of Federal Agent" This should be very sobering for those intoxicated with Obama.

I am not supporting McCain here either. However, McCain is clearly the lesser of 2 evils.



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 04:25 PM
link   
You are getting sleeeepppyyyyy.....
verrryyyy.......veryyy.....sleeeepppyyyy....
you...must....vote....for.....OOOOBBAAAMMMAAAAA....

next hypnotherapy session is on PRIME TIME....tonite
don't miss it
though you may not need the extra lesson to jump around and act like a monkey pulling levers on the 4th



[edit on 09.05.2008 by Anna Kronism]



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by makaira1985

Not successful? 30 years in business, 50+ employees with full benefits, yearly payroll over $2.5 million. Plus I set aside 20% of the profits for year end bonus' for employees. You just let me know when I get it right.


I didn't say not successful. You claimed to be intelligent businessman, and yet it seemed like you had no idea why Obama's idea was worth a try. You only thought in terms of yourself.

Secondly, anyone can claim, on the internet, to be someone they're not. Maybe you have a business with 50 plus employees, maybe you're making it up.


Originally posted by makaira1985
Now I know why I have been trying to stay clear of these Obama threads. Good luck to you Clint. However, if Obama wins, you won't need it as you'll obviously be one of the ones getting to spend my money. It'll be a pleasure working for you.


No, what a foolish statement. Everybody always needs all the luck they can get. However, I will enjoy seeing the middle class get back to paying a smaller percentage of their income to the general fund. They deserve the tax cut they'll get from Obama.



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by ClintK
 
Well Obama and Biden lied and changed their tune TWICE already within weeks. First it was tax relief for those earning under $250k....Then it was for those under $200K........and Now it is for those earning under $150K.

What pieces of work these liars are. What makes you think they won't (and trust me they will) reduce the income number to $42K? Which is what the original tax plan from Obama was.

There's your CHANGE



[edit on 29-10-2008 by FX44rice]



posted on Oct, 29 2008 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by FX44rice
reply to post by ClintK
 
Well Obama and Biden lied and changed their tune TWICE already within weeks. First it was tax relief for those earning under $250k....Then it was for those under $200K........and Now it is for those earning under $150K.

What pieces of work these liars are. What makes you think they won't (and trust me they will) reduce the income number to $42K? Which is what the original tax plan from Obama was.

There's your CHANGE

[edit on 29-10-2008 by FX44rice]


This is the first i've heard of this, can you back any of these figures up?

Anyway, McCain has never changed his tax plan... right? - McCain flip flops on Tax



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join