gadgetlady

That's precisely what I was doing. The "idea" I was attacking was the belief that it's acceptable to attack a person for his or her physical differences (even if it's a public figure). No other logical appeals to that "idea" were working. Since the person doing the attacking repeatedly defended his/her right to attack someone for his physical differences, I was using another method to demonstrate that personal attacks are unacceptable. And I think, based on that person's response to my post (saying I was "wrapped too tight" -- which, by the way, I didn't report, respond, or object to), that the point was made.

LOL! Ever feel like you're doing this :tt2: ?

It is a huge issue for me. It'd be like finding a candidate who agrees with you on most of the issues but also supports the KKK -- there's just no way to get past that one position.

Do you understand hyperbole? Did you read what I posted immediately afterwards?

I wasn't talking about large corporations. I was talking about small businesses, which are a huge foundation of the businesses across this nation. If I'm not mistaken, you work for one (I could be wrong, but that' my impression). If you think that having the government tax your employer for your health care will case you to lose your health care (your statement, not mine), then how do you think increasing a whole host of other taxes (capital gains being doubled, etc.) will affect your job, your potential for salary increases, etc.? It's just plain economics. Yes, there are abuses. Yes, golden parachutes are ridiculously incredible. But small businesses are the backbone of this nation, and if you don't think Obama's tax proposals are going to have a huge, huge impact on small businesses you should probably investigate it a bit more. Heck -- ask your employer how much more he can afford to be taxed before it starts affecting your salary!

I do, as well. But a pro-abortion candidate is a deal breaker for me. Someone asked me before if McCain was my first choice for president (it may have been you). Thinking of the primaries, he was actually my last choice, although based on the choice now (McCain or Obama) it's a no brainer for me.

On the issue of taxing businesses again, I just received an email from the Nevada Secretary of State. It was a mass-email, and it said: Businesses across the country are hurting and the current economic climate provides the perfect backdrop to highlight Nevada's proven track record of small business success. WhyNevada.com includes legal analysis, tax advantage information, target market summaries and a new business checklist. Interesting. They get it. It's why California is losing fleeing businesses so quickly -- because when you tax a company to death, it can't survive. States woo businesses with low taxes, and businesses take the bait. Why anyone believes Obama's tax plan won't hurt "the little guy" is beyond me.

If you understand that increasing the health care taxes on a business owner or corporation will trickle down to the employees, why don't you think Obama's wholesale increased taxes on businesses, capital gains, and the like will do the same -- or even worse because they're more comprehensive?

I completely agree. I am 100% in favor of charity. I am 100% against government-enforced charity (aka welfare). Wouldn't it be cool if we could take 20% of what we pay in taxes and give it directly to the charity of our choice -- rather than having it filter through the bureaucracy and come back with cents on the dollar? No, but there is actual truth, and I believe it's important to seek it out. Doesn't mean we always hit it on the head, and doesn't mean sometimes we don't get bamboozled by the lies, but at least seeking it is better than throwing up our hands and saying, "Who knows?" (or "Who cares?").

Try reading this: Today in Investor's Business Daily stock analysis and business news

Here's what I posted earlier about that at http://www.lapbandtalk.com/f7/we-ready-woman-vp-74363/index12.html#post1017169: One GOOD thing that will happen with the debate is that it won't be edited (in contrast to the recent interviews). Everyone laughs at the media's representation of Palin's answer on foreign policy, the representation of which is that she understands it because Russia can be seen from Alaska. Ha ha. What a silly answer. Isn't she stupid. Mock, mock, mock. But how many of you know the REAL question and answer? The FULL question and answer? Here it is (parts in bold are the parts edited out of the broadcast): GIBSON: What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you? PALIN: They’re our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska. GIBSON: What insight does that give you into what they’re doing in Georgia? PALIN: Well, I’m giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries, especially Russia. We will not repeat a Cold War. We must have good relationship with our allies, pressuring, also, helping us to remind Russia that it’s in their benefit, also, a mutually beneficial relationship for us all to be getting along. Big difference when you read the whole thing. Her response is that we must always remember that our world is ever growing smaller and we must take this into consideration in any foreign policy matter. It's a thoughtful and reasonable answer when you read the part that was edited out. The same thing happened with her answer on NATO and war with Russia. When you have edit control, it's amazing what ends up on the cutting room floor -- and how bad you can make someone look.

Kathleen Parker, discussed earlier in this thread for her opposition to Palin, appears to be warming to her. Kathleen Parker :: Townhall.com :: Sarah Palin's Bridge to Somewhere Here's the byline: The Palin who performed so miserably in one-on-one media interviews was nowhere to be seen during Thursday night's debate with Joe Biden. Instead, the affable, tough, determined pit-bull-hockey mom presented to the GOP convention was back with a jaw-jutting, happy-warrior vengeance.

Thanks for that link, Jack. Obama's ties to shady organizations are well documented. They've just not been well publicized, due to the obvious bias of the MSM.

Want a further conundrum? A friend of mine just told me someone (I don't know who) has introduced the idea of breaking the cycle of poverty among families by paying the women $1000 to get their tubes tied. She was livid about it. I'll bet there's a gamut of opinions on it on this board!

Amen. Calling someone names only makes it clear you have no substantive argument to the issue at hand.

The out of line thing I was referring to was the discussion of Putin and his underwear. Also, the already-debunked rumor that she claimed to know foreign policy because you can see Russia from Alaska. You are absolutely entitled to your opinion. You were asking about mine. I have spent a lot of time in my life traveling, and I don't judge people by their manner of speaking. My guess is that while she didn't appeal to you because you didn't think she was "business" enough, she appealed to a lot of people precisely because of that. A lot of people do vote because they like one person better than the other (which astonishes me), but if you look at the YouTube video I posted above, I think you'll find that your response didn't come close to that of Luntz' particular focus group (a group of undecided voters). That's not to say all people reacted the same way, but your not liking her style doesn't translate to the majority of people not liking her style. I don't think Biden came off as slick either. And I'm not gauging her performance positively because I like her politics; I think her approach was refreshing. Virtually every country that has it is moving away from it in increments. We're moving towards it. Philosophically speaking, why should I be forced to pay for another person's medical care? And why don't we then believe the government should also pay for our auto and home insurance? Bureaucracy is terribly inefficient. It scares the wits out of me to have the federal government in control of our health care.

LOL! Sure, there are "forms" of plagiarism, but there's a difference between nuances of calling the sky blue and directly lifting someone else's speech! Furthermore, what I posted above wasn't an example of plagiarism, it was an example of an outright lie. Biden talked about walking into a restaurant to discuss the economy with people -- but the restaurant has been closed for 15 years. He talked about walking into Home Depot (where he claims to spend a lot of time) but no one can seem to find any employees of Home Depot who've ever seen him there. That's not an issue of plagiarism at all. It's an issue of trustworthiness.

Yes, yes, and yes. And I don't think my opinion is far off from the rest of America. From IRIS: Information Regarding Israel's Security (emphasis mine): Popular opinion went to Palin: The four indicators I would use here are: Frank Luntz's undecided focus group, Drudge Report insta-poll and Intrade Market odds. Luntz focus group of undecideds The Luntz polling organization gathers a reasonable sample of undecided voters for every debate and polls them immediately afterward. Palin won this group 20-4. This is unprecedented in their experience. Drudge Report insta-poll After 416,000 votes cast, Palin has a knockout lead of 70%-28%. It is fair to argue that Drudge's readership skews right, but compared to previous Drudge polls, this was extraordinary. Intrade Market odds This is the best single number to see what the general public thinks in terms of who will win the election at any given moment. At the start of yesterday's debate, the odds were heavily in Obama's favor: approximately 69:31 in favor of Obama. In the next 12 hours, the odds dropped sharply, down to 65:35. In the morning trading, Obama has gained some ground, but it is possible that this is due to the mainstream media morning-after effect. I don't find the last two components as compelling as the first. If you listened to the Luntz focus group the night of the debate, it was fascinating to hear what that group of independents had to say. You can (and should) watch it here: [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKrk_6QjcNw]YouTube - Frank Luntz Focus Group: Palin is Ready![/ame].

I don't like either of their health care plans, but I like Obama's a heck of a lot less! Socialized medicine would be a DISASTER! I don't have a problem with it. Just because she was folksy doesn't mean she wasn't intelligent, well spoken, and right on the issues. I prefer folksy to slick, any day of the week. I think that's out of line. Are you suggesting that Palin isn't a professional, accomplished, effective leader? Look at her track record in Alaska; "unprofessionalism" has never been a claim leveled against her (that I've heard). I find her extremely well spoken. She does have a midwestern way about her (accent and speech pattern), but I think she speaks plainly and people can relate to her. You may disagree with her politics, but I think the "folksy" thing is a non-issue.

Just FYI -- I didn't say that -- it was part of the blog post I was quoting.

Interesting information here: Biden's Hangout Closed 15 Years Ago - IRIS Blog The previous entry focused on Biden's gaffes and lies in last night's debate from a Middle East perspective, but this whopper is so big, it deserves its own post: Look, all you have to do is go down Union Street with me in Wilmington or go to Katie’s Restaurant or walk into Home Depot with me where I spend a lot of time and you ask anybody in there whether or not the economic and foreign policy of this administration has made them better off in the last eight years. It turns out that Katie's Restaurant closed down fifteen years ago. Talk radio host Curtis Sliwa of WABC dug this information up (audio here). He also got puzzled reactions from Wilmington Home Depots asking if anyone had ever sighted Biden. Think any mainstream reporter will follow up and ask him which Home Depot he frequents? Think any journalist will go to that Home Depot to confirm? Joe Biden's 1988 presidential campaign shut down due to revelations of egregious plagiarism. He was discovered to have plagiarized in law school. He commits gaffes on a daily basis. Biden succeeded in the debate by covering up who he really is. Palin succeeded in the debate by conveying who she really is.

Very true. Unfortunately, a mother faced with an unplanned pregnancy only has two options: a live baby or a dead baby. It is a very sad, sad thing for all involved (including the fathers).

Do you truly believe that Bush is callous to the loss of our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan?

A newborn can't "independently survive" either. The problem I have with the viability argument is that "viability" has changed over the years as medical technology advances. A baby in the 1970's would have been considered "viable" much later than a baby in 2008. So it's problematic to base whether someone deserves basic human rights on medical technology. Did you know that scientists are working on an artificial placenta? Do you think abortion-minded mothers would be OK with having the baby removed and sustained with an alternate device? I doubt it. Mothers who are seeking abortions don't simply want to be "unpregnant". They want to not have a baby at all, and they think by aborting they are accomplishing that. What they're really accomplishing is having a dead baby. The other problem I have is that abortion is legal through all 9 months of pregnancy (despite what pro-abortionists and those factually challenged or believing in propaganda say all the time). So viability isn't a measure at all, as babies are being killed post-viability every day in this country.

Darn. I just composed a whole response to this and my computer ate it. I'll try again. I will never, ever vote for a candidate who isn't pro-life. I did once, cried while I did it, and have regretted it ever since. A candidate's position on this issue is extremely important to me because if he/she believes in the wholesale murder of innocent human beings, how can I trust him/her on other issues? That being said, McCain was BY FAR not my first choice for a candidate. However, he is dramatically better than the alternative (a pro-abortion socialist). As to the issue of judges, I don't think anyone can accurately predict what a judge will do when presented with a case. We've had so many clearly wrong issues throughout history. I do, however, support his intention to appoint judges who strictly adhere to the constitution. I am absolutely a libertarian in the true sense of the word. I believe 100% that people have the absolute right to do whatever they want with their own bodies, so long as their actions do not impede on the lives or rights of others. My position on abortion doesn't conflict with my liberatarian views one iota. Since the actions of the person seeking the abortion will cause the deliberate and willful death of another human being (with distinct and separate DNA, circulatory system, body parts, etc.), the action of abortion is an assault on the right to life of another person -- and therefore the purvue of the government, just as any other murder or child abuse issue is the purvue of the government. (Ah well, I wrote it better the first time around, but so be it)