What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Kepler said:
I hate those kind of criticisms. Do people really think Romney doesn't support the troops or understand the gravity of having them committed to that conflict?
Click to expand...

Yes to the first, no to the second. Dick Cheney "supported the troops" but he had no idea what he was advocating and wouldn't take a dissenting view seriously. I don't get the sense that Romney understands the implications of what he's advocating. The whole START treaty ridiculousness for example. Same with outsourcing middle east foreign policy to Israel and bombing Iran first chance he gets. Or keeping troops in Iraq (which he advocated). Or an undending committment in Afghanistan (which he also supports).

If John McCain or John Kerry forgets to salute the troop, no big deal. They've earned a pass. Romney? Not so much. This is the same guy who equated having his sons serve on his campaign to serving in the armed forces.
 
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Jimjamesak said:
Yeah I don't think anywhere is anyone talking about small business owners paying more.
Click to expand...

Obama sure is! He says anyone with income over $250,000 should pay more. If you own a small business, draw a reasonable salary, and declare business income on your personal tax return, you almost certainly will be hit with a tax increase. If between your salary and your business profits, if your taxable income isn't over $250,000, given all the risk you take on, then there is no point in being in that business in the first place (unless it is a start up or a part-time hobby).

In addition, all of the myriad taxes and rules of PPACA also require owners of small businesses to pay more as well.
 
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

However entertaining (or not) Clint was, I think the people running the convention made a mistake having Clint on the podium during prime-time. They'd have been much better served having the Staples guy on during that time slot; he was very good. Romney's partner from Bain Capital also was very good. That's the story that needed to be told instead of an uneven stand-up routine by someone who seems to have forgotten about 1/3 of his lines.

There also was a very revealing nugget in Romney's speech that has been overlooked, and I think it deserved more attention.

He started out working at a consulting firm (Bain & Company), which gave advice to businesses. Romney then said "if our advice really is so good, why don't we put our own money behind it?"

Not sure how much anyone else has had to deal with consultants; one frustrating part of the experience is that they really aren't accountable for their advice much of the time (I know there are significant exceptions to that statement, so all three of you consultant folk out there, take it easy....). The consultants come in, do their studies, write their report, get paid, and are on their way (yes, I know some consulting firms also then sign a followup implementation contract, but still, they do not suffer direct adverse consequence from giving advice that doesn't work).

If these consultants lose their own money if their advice doesn't work, it makes their advice a lot more credible, no?

It was kind of funny when Romney talked about the Obama campaign buying their supplies from Staples, or Michelle Obama praising the work of Bright Horizons.
 
FreshFish said:
Obama sure is! He says anyone with income over $250,000 should pay more. If you own a small business, draw a reasonable salary, and declare business income on your personal tax return, you almost certainly will be hit with a tax increase. If between your salary and your business profits, if your taxable income isn't over $250,000, given all the risk you take on, then there is no point in being in that business in the first place (unless it is a start up or a part-time hobby).

In addition, all of the myriad taxes and rules of PPACA also require owners of small businesses to pay more as well.
Click to expand...
Ok. So if you really wanted to help small businesses why not change the laws that say they have file their taxes as part of their personal taxes? It might also kind of help close that little loophole of using a money losing "business" to keep taxes down.

I'm sorry, I know putting ideas out there is frowned upon in the current political environment...
 
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Jimjamesak said:
Ok. So if you really wanted to help small businesses why not change the laws that say they have file their taxes as part of their personal taxes? It might also kind of help close that little loophole of using a money losing "business" to keep taxes down.

I'm sorry, I know putting ideas out there is frowned upon in the current political environment...
Click to expand...

why do we want to "help" anyone in particular at all? For many people the idea of government as impartial referee enforcing the same rules equitably for all has a lot of appeal. There's been way too much picking winners and losers or favoring one group over another.

Why do you think the tax code has so many exemptions exclusions deductions etc? The government is playing favorites left and right. Why pick out one group and say they are bad because they are successful? why pick out another group and say we'll help them out?

corporate welfare is a game played equally well by both parties. crop subsidies, guaranteed loans, tax credits, left and right, D and R, .....

If you don't have a lobby working for you you are screwed. there is no taxpayer lobby, there is not much of a small business lobby. big business will do just fine no matter who is in office (notice how many of them donate to both parties, eh?)
 
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Rover said:
Yes to the first, no to the second. Dick Cheney "supported the troops" but he had no idea what he was advocating and wouldn't take a dissenting view seriously. I don't get the sense that Romney understands the implications of what he's advocating. The whole START treaty ridiculousness for example. Same with outsourcing middle east foreign policy to Israel and bombing Iran first chance he gets. Or keeping troops in Iraq (which he advocated). Or an undending committment in Afghanistan (which he also supports).

If John McCain or John Kerry forgets to salute the troop, no big deal. They've earned a pass. Romney? Not so much. This is the same guy who equated having his sons serve on his campaign to serving in the armed forces.
Click to expand...

I don't agree that a civilian has to bend the knee to the military rhetorically in order to demonstrate his support of the troops. I think the Cheney example is actually perfectly indicative of what I'm saying -- that whole cadre of chickenhawks used American blood and treasure to build their personal bank balances, but they were always sure to salute and say the right words, so the rubes bought their act as "patriots." It's the equivalent of the "Christians" who waddle around spreading their love of wealth and their detestation of kindness and altruism, but as long as they throw in a few herpa-derp Amens they're covered.

Judge by deeds, not words. I don't care if a candidate doesn't mention with quivering voice "our brave men and women in uniform" if he's simultaneously feeding them into a woodchipper to fatten his friends' portfolios.
 
Last edited:
FreshFish said:
why do we want to "help" anyone in particular at all? For many people the idea of government as impartial referee enforcing the same rules equitably for all has a lot of appeal. There's been way too much picking winners and losers or favoring one group over another.

Why do you think the tax code has so many exemptions exclusions deductions etc? The government is playing favorites left and right. Why pick out one group and say they are bad because they are successful? why pick out another group and say we'll help them out?

corporate welfare is a game played equally well by both parties. crop subsidies, guaranteed loans, tax credits, left and right, D and R, .....

If you don't have a lobby working for you you are screwed. there is no taxpayer lobby, there is not much of a small business lobby. big business will do just fine no matter who is in office (notice how many of them donate to both parties, eh?)
Click to expand...
And therein lies the problem with politics today. I offer a solution, you ramble.
 
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Jimjamesak said:
Ok. So if you really wanted to help small businesses why not change the laws that say they have file their taxes as part of their personal taxes? It might also kind of help close that little loophole of using a money losing "business" to keep taxes down.

I'm sorry, I know putting ideas out there is frowned upon in the current political environment...
Click to expand...
The country had the will to reform the code back in the mid 80's. I don't think they do now. Now, it seems, many want what government can do for them, not what they can do for themselves.

I posted before -- GAAP for business, then some flat (or semi flat) rate for individuals with minimum (or none) deductions.
 
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Scarlet said:
Romney aides distancing themselves from the decision to put him on stage without a polished script.
Click to expand...

And the Times provides credible analysis here? For Kool aid drinkers, perhaps. As usual, all critical comments are anonymous. Maybe they could run that big expose about McCain's "affair" again. Bollocks.

Here's how the debate on Eastwood shakes out: that latent heterosexual libstain git Paul Begala on one side and the American icon on the other. Game, set, match.
 
Last edited:
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Kepler said:
I don't agree that a civilian has to bend the knee to the military rhetorically in order to demonstrate his support of the troops. I think the Cheney example is actually perfectly indicative of what I'm saying -- that whole cadre of chickenhawks used American blood and treasure to build their personal bank balances, but they were always sure to salute and say the right words, so the rubes bought their act as "patriots." It's the equivalent of the "Christians" who waddle around spreading their love of wealth and their detestation of kindness and altruism, but as long as they throw in a few herpa-derp Amens they're covered.

Judge by deeds, not words. I don't care if a candidate doesn't mention with quivering voice "our brave men and women in uniform" if he's simultaneously feeding them into a woodchipper to fatten his friends' portfolios.
Click to expand...

Have we ever thanked you for being there to point out America's short comings, real and mostly imagined? Those of us who live in Rubistan are grateful you'd take the time to think of us. Just one question: don't you ever get tired of that sh*t? Ever?
 
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Old Pio said:
And the Times provides credible analysis here? For Kool aid drinkers, perhaps. As usual, all critical comments are anonymous. Maybe they could run that big expose about McCain's "affair" again. Bollocks.

Here's how the debate on Eastwood shakes out: that latent heterosexual libstain git Paul Begala on one side and the American icon on the other. Game, set, match.
Click to expand...

Dennis Miller chimed in as well :)

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>DNC Guest Speaker, Sandra Fluke. RNC Guest Speaker, Clint Eastwood. Yeah...that's about right.</p>— Dennis Miller Show (@DennisDMZ) <a href="https://twitter.com/DennisDMZ/status/241278595115393024" data-datetime="2012-08-30T20:57:54+00:00">August 30, 2012</a></blockquote>
<script src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
SteveP said:
Dennis Miller chimed in as well :)

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>DNC Guest Speaker, Sandra Fluke. RNC Guest Speaker, Clint Eastwood. Yeah...that's about right.</p>— Dennis Miller Show (@DennisDMZ) <a href="https://twitter.com/DennisDMZ/status/241278595115393024" data-datetime="2012-08-30T20:57:54+00:00">August 30, 2012</a></blockquote>
<script src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Click to expand...

Dennis Miller definitely knows what he is talking about. I mean, who better to ask about someone ranting nonsensically?

But good for you guys. You got a big movie-star to spit out a few words some could understand. I'm am sure most of the electorate can't see right through it. Seriously.
 
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Some context for the bump numbers that will be tricking in over the next couple days:

6a00d83451c45669e2017c31924a3c970b-550wi
 
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

DNC key note speakers. A list with ups and downs. Ups: Clinton assuming he's still on top of his game (in fact, H Clinton would probably have been a good addition). Question mark is E Warren. I don't know enough about her. Downs: I'm not big on Kerry. And along with Warren on the previous night, that's a bit much to throw at Mass IMO.

Tuesday, September 4 - Michelle Obama and Julián Castro

The speakers for the day include:
Independent Governor Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island
Former President Jimmy Carter via video[18]
First Lady Michelle Obama[19]
Julian Castro, mayor of San Antonio.[19]

[edit] Wednesday, September 5 - Elizabeth Warren and Bill Clinton

The speakers for the day include:
Democratic Senate candidate for Massachusetts Elizabeth Warren[20]
Former President Bill Clinton[20]

[edit] Thursday, September 6 - Joe Biden and Barack Obama

The speakers for the day include:
U.S. Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts
Vice President Joe Biden
President Barack Obama
 
Re: Convention junkies can obsess details here!

Lyawatha is going to speak at the Dem convention? Maybe she tell us about the benefits gained by lying about ones heritage
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top