and it is....
300!!!

So I am making the thread in hopes of a intellectual talk about the current state of American finances. Anyone who has done their homework knows that America can be mnemonic of "teenage girl on a shopping spree with daddy's credit card".

This issue is fairly black and white to those who actually study American politics and look pass the ignorant issues shown in most media.

I am a fiscal conservative and will be voting for Obama. The reason for this is because he is admitting he will be raising taxes. Now I hate taxes simply because I view them as unconstitutional but with the current state of the American government and all of the entitlements that will be soon slapping us in the face, we are in desperate need of more money. This is issue is far from political, it is not even about America it is about people.

So what do we do. There is an obvious need for taxes to below because this generates disposable income. Disposable income buys stuff, blah blah blah basic economics.

My current issue is who do I trust, Democrats, notoriously known for the tax increases as well as their increases to entitlements or Republicans which are the vice versa.

Share your opinions or just fucking bitch about how stupid people are.

P.S. I.O.U.S.A is out tommorow watch for great justice.

A real fiscal conservative would be voting for Ron Paul.  Raising taxes won't help if you won't STOP SPENDING.

Regardless of which major (i.e. media-chosen) candidate you vote for, the next President will be Herbert Hoover and there's nothing you can fucking do to stop it ... except to vote for Ron Paul.

Voting for the same corporate-chosen candidates over and over and then expecting different results is the very definition of INSANE.

Voted for him the primary, but he is done. So why waste my vote.

Ron Paul lol

Ron Paul isn't running.

He endorsed Bob Barr.

The only reason to vote for McCain (beyond wanting to turn the Middle East into glass) is that he won't roll over for Reid and Pelosi to the extent that Obama will.  Obama will be little more than the happy stamper of approval for all things domestic, since he'll lack the courage to say no to Democrats who might then not vote to reelect him.  That's not counting his campaign promises, which could easily amount to over $1 trillion a year and would only increase in size as time passes.

McCain would be much better for the US economy if for no other reason than he might veto something.  His Cold War-style belligerence is a huge turn-off though.  Obama's let's hold hands and be friends foreign policy is incredibly naive, but at least it's cheap.  Unless of course we get stuck in a War on African AIDS/tyranny/poverty/malaria which seems pretty likely given the number of times he's mentioned Sudan. But anyway...

McCain in '08
Because he's not in the same party as Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, and he probably won't make it to a second term.

>>1
Sorry, you can't claim to be fiscal conservative if you plan on voting for either of the two major candidates.

>>6
I don't see it that way.  McCain will roll right over for oil companies (HURRRR GAS TAX HOLIDAY DURRRRRRRRRRRR OFFSHORE DRILLING) and other corporate moguls.  I'm more concerned about Obama because I think he's going to keep "compromising" by mixing radical left- and radical right-wing policies to come off as centrist and universally appealing.

On a side note, I _hate_ that people treat voting for non-media chosen candidates as leeching from a given candidate's votes.  It almost turns the whole thing into a contest of who thinks less.

Look, you turds! --

MCCAIN will start a war with Iran.  It will send gasoline over $6/gal, and will cost another $1 trillion in future tax revenue.

OBAMA will implement outright Socialism in the United States.

Since I'm a SANE PERSON, I can't possibly tolerate either of these options.  So I'm writing in Ron Paul.

Note well that if you vote for EITHER McCain OR Obama, you're just INSANE since you're promoting these intolerable options for the nation.  Don't look left or right -- no, YOU are the problem.  Ron Paul was well in the running until the filthy Jews in the media targeted him for campaign assassination.  AND YOU LET IT HAPPEN!

>>9

Redcream, don't you ever get tired of being wrong all the fucking time? I remember you were last year and the beginning of this one telling EVERYONE about how Hillary was gonna win the deomcratic convention. Now you're crying about Socialist Obama...given your track record of being wrong ALOT...I think you should adopt a more pragmatic 'wait and see' approach.

Sometimes I wonder if RedCream is genuine, one troll, or many trolls that have adopted the same writing style.

At this point it's not worth taking this subhuman scum seriously.

>>10
Hillary kept her delegates, assfag.  Ever wonder why she did that?  Take your time answering.

As for crying about the Socialist Obama ... well, what's really wrong about that?  You didn't example of why that's wrong ... you just mentioned my track record.  Do you have the balls to talk about OBAMA instead of his critics?  Stupid Obamaton!

>>11
You will never know, and will always wonder.

>>8
I've never really understood the logic behind the hatred for oil companies and the people who wish to drill for oil in the US.  It's like saying that American public land is so special that we would rather ship off jobs and money to other countries just so that we won't have to risk spilling any drops of oil or developing on that land (even though said countries probably have lower environmental standards).

A more intelligent position would be to drill for oil here but add a minimum price for oil/gasoline so as to encourage development into renewable and alternative energies and to make people drive less.

>>13
SO I HERD from some guy recently about this very topic.  Honestly, he actually believed that by "using up" the rest of the world's oil FIRST, America's reserves could then be used to control the rest of the world.

I was shocked anyone could be that brainwashed, even in these times.

>>12

What the fuck are you on about? It doesn't matter if she kept her delegates or not. SHE LOST. It's over. It's done. This isn't pro wrestling, you faggot. There ain't gonna be no "SWERVE". You were wrong. Just fucking admit it.

>>15

srsly what the fuck is red cream trying to pull? he said she would win and she lost. joe biden in obama running mate. admit you were wrong red cream.

I hereby admit that my prediction that Hillary would become the democratic candidate for 2008 was wrong.

Why did Hillary keep ahold of her delegates?  She "lost", right?

Why is Obama under suit about his citizenship?  He's the candidate, right?

Unlike you delusional losers, there's something going on with the entire nom thing.  It's not a guarantee that Obama will be on the ballot in November.  If the lawsuit against his Constitutional basis for his candidacy succeeds, he can't run at all.  If Hillary gets that margin of delegates to vote for her, then Obama won't be the candidate.

It ain't over 'til it's over.  And until the nomination actually happens, it's not over.

>>13
An intelligent position is one that doesn't involve government price fixing.

>>13
I agree, which is why I said a "more intelligent position."  I posited that without fulling realizing the breadth of my question, which was little more than why do idiots make such idiotic policies.

>>15
If Hillary walked on stage, feigned to hug Obama and instead gave him a piledriver, then proceeded to walk around the stage with both arms held over her head and some sort of sash that said "Democratic Party Nominee," I think I would have to vote for the bitch.

>>18

You have to be fucking kidding me. There will be no swerve. That's simply not gonna happen. Hillary is in debt. REAL debt. This sounds more to me, like you think this will happen NOT because there is, you know, ACTUALLY precident or proof for it or anything. But because you don't want to be wrong.

Ok, so, if the nomination rolls around and Obama is nominated, then what? Will you admit it then or will you claim that Hillary is still gonna SOMEHOW come out on top out of all this?

>>21
lol RedCram is just a 13 year old in a 38 year olds body

RedCream is obviously resentful about something and wants to conjur up a world where his failure is due to other people and this forms that basis for all his beliefs.

>>21
Once the nomination is official and if Obama gets it, then there's nothing more Hillary can do but try to run as an independent.  I don't see her splitting the Dem vote like that.

I can only continue to point out that Hillary kept her delegates.  She didn't give them up.  She has not endorsed Obama.  Now there's a court case pending about Obama's nativity.  Since we're not going to suddenly run and change the U.S. Constitution if the case succeeds, then if Obama is determined to not qualify, Hillary is sure to step up.

All you assfags have to explain to me is WHY she kept her delegates, going into the Convention.  OK?  If she "lost", then there's no point in holding onto those delegates.  She would have endorsed Obama.  These facts are critical.  They suggest she's still going to try to obtain the nomination, using the superdelegate angle.  The Dems literally told us that the supers can swing the nom to a candidate with FEWER delegates that the other.

BTW, I'm voting for Ron Paul, or Bob Barr in his stead.  So Hillary or Obama doesn't matter SHIT to me.  What matters to me are the FACTS.  The FACTS say that Hillary's still trying for the nom.  And with a week or two, we'll see if that's likely or if that's true.

>>24

That's right, RedCream. "What matters are the FACTS~!"

FACT: You said Hillary would win the Democratic Nomination.

FACT: Obama won the Democratic Nomination.


It DOESN'T MATTER that she kept her delegates. It DOESN'T MATTER that she has not endorsed Obama (no one ever thought she would). It DOESN'T MATTER that there's a court case about Obama's nativity or whatever. It DOESN'T MATTER that Obama and Hillary don't matter "SHIT" to you.

Thus: We DON'T have to explain to you why she kept her delegates. That's a fucking strawman argument meant to distract from the FACT that you were WRONG-WRONG-WRONG~! about the democratic nomination. You said that Obama wouldn't even convincingly get enough delegates in the first place so your Hillary/Degate point is MOOT AS FUCK.

"Still trying for the nomination" =/= "WINNING THE NOMINATION".

Even a greasy-ass faggot, slash, convicted sex offender, whose brain has been replaced by lumpy jizz can understand that! Monday is coming up and Obama is getting the nomination when you came on here and SWORE: "JEW THIS~! CONSPIRACY THAT~! OBAMA WON'T WIN THE NOM. I'M RIGHT." 

Well, the convention is coming up Red Cream. Are you going to own up and admit that you were [i]100% WRONG[/i] like a REAL MAN? Or are you going to continue this tradition of uncanny faggotry that has become your trademark?

>>25

lololololololololololo

the countdown begins.

10
9
8
7
6
5
.....

THE CLOCK IS TICKING FAIL CREAM
ALL YOUR PROPHECIES LOOK LIKE THEY WON'T COME TRUE
YOU ARE FULL OF SHIT
KILL YOURSELF RED RAG CREAM

>>24
So you still think your prediction will come true, obama will be overturned and hillary become the democrat candidate?