Death Records Now

I just don’t understand why the Americans liked to be lied to, it amazes me.

PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending … and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress ‘thanks but no thanks’ for that Bridge to Nowhere."

THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."

PALIN: "There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it’s easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state senate."

THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.

PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."

THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama’s plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain’s plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.

Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.

He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.
Jay – Ah yes the middle class who Obama is standing for when he talks about cutting taxes. The tax cuts on the rich right now would be dropped because they are being under taxed because of those cuts so we as a government are losing money.

Oh and the number is 37 Bills That Barack Obama Has Written or Co-Sponsored in Just 2 Years in the US Senate.

She couldn’t get the money out of Washington for the bridge so she then said no thanks to it after fighting for it for so long.

FACTS I NEED FACTS, not conservative spin!! PLEASE!!!
polfanatic – yes you are correct but that is the point as those "small" businesses and people making over $250K are getting tax breaks right now from BUSH which means they are paying less then they should be….he is bringing it back to where it was so we are not losing money….So where is the problem?
McCain ’08 – You fail to realize that maybe his benefit is for the citizens to feel good about their country and feel like they are a part of a system that actually cares. Conservatives like to spin this so much that I don’t think they even care anymore, just as long as they get paid.
Tascha – She was put on the ticket to get people talking after Obama’s historic stadium speech. But keep in mind the taxes for people making over $250K, their taxes will go back to where they were before BUSH’s tax cuts. Technically that is not going up for them, it is just going back to where it was. Why don’t people understand that?

Because she was only put on the ticket to be an attack dog. She has no real substance wow she was mayor for 20 months and popped out 5 kids… Every speech Ive viewed her in she’s lied cant wait till the debates Biden is going to put her on blast! The one lie that really bothers me the most is when she says Obama is going to raise taxes that’s not what he said he said anyone that gets paid over 250,000 a year will get their taxes raised. (aka) upper class not lower or middle class.

Here’s a list of what seem to be lies and distortions, what do you think?:

PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending … and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress ‘thanks but no thanks’ for that Bridge to Nowhere."

THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."

PALIN: "There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it’s easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state senate."

THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.

PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."

THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama’s plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain’s plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.

Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.

He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.

http://news.yahoo.com/story//ap/20080904/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_fact_check

In fact, the Tax Policy Institute concluded that everyone making under $250k per year will receive a tax CUT under Obama’s plans.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=411741
Go Broncos: Provide a link for the source of that load you posted or give up.

Yes…she totally lied. Especially about that bridge to nowhere…she was SO behind it until it became an embarrassment. I guess she was for it before she was against it?

Attacks, praise stretch truth at GOP convention

By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer

ST. PAUL, Minn. – Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her Republican supporters held back little Wednesday as they issued dismissive attacks on Barack Obama and flattering praise on her credentials to be vice president. In some cases, the reproach and the praise stretched the truth.

Some examples:
PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending … and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress ‘thanks but no thanks’ for that Bridge to Nowhere."
THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."
PALIN: "There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it’s easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state senate."
THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.
PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."
THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama’s plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain’s plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.
Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.
He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.
MCCAIN: "She’s been governor of our largest state, in charge of 20 percent of America’s energy supply … She’s responsible for 20 percent of the nation’s energy supply. I’m entertained by the comparison and I hope we can keep making that comparison that running a political campaign is somehow comparable to being the executive of the largest state in America," he said in an interview with ABC News’ Charles Gibson.
THE FACTS: McCain’s phrasing exaggerates both claims. Palin is governor of a state that ranks second nationally in crude oil production, but she’s no more "responsible" for that resource than President Bush was when he was governor of Texas, another oil-producing state. In fact, her primary power is the ability to tax oil, which she did in concert with the Alaska Legislature. And where Alaska is the largest state in America, McCain could as easily have called it the 47th largest state — by population.
MCCAIN: "She’s the commander of the Alaska National Guard. … She has been in charge, and she has had national security as one of her primary responsibilities," he said on ABC.
THE FACTS: While governors are in charge of their state guard units, that authority ends whenever those units are called to actual military service. When guard units are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, for example, they assume those duties under "federal status," which means they report to the Defense Department, not their governors. Alaska’s national guard units have a total of about 4,200 personnel, among the smallest of state guard organizations.
FORMER ARKANSAS GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE: Palin "got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska than Joe Biden got running for president of the United States."
THE FACTS: A whopper. Pali

She’s just covering up for the fact that she has fewer qualifications than Urkel:
http://www.bofas.com/stories/UrkelScreech.htm

Interesting article…..

ST. PAUL, Minn. – Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her Republican supporters held back little Wednesday as they issued dismissive attacks on Barack Obama and flattering praise on her credentials to be vice president. In some cases, the reproach and the praise stretched the truth.

Some examples:

PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending … and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress ‘thanks but no thanks’ for that Bridge to Nowhere."

THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."

PALIN: "There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it’s easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state senate."

THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.

PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."

THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama’s plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain’s plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.

Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.

He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.

MCCAIN: "She’s been governor of our largest state, in charge of 20 percent of America’s energy supply … She’s responsible for 20 percent of the nation’s energy supply. I’m entertained by the comparison and I hope we can keep making that comparison that running a political campaign is somehow comparable to being the executive of the largest state in America," he said in an interview with ABC News’ Charles Gibson.

THE FACTS: McCain’s phrasing exaggerates both claims. Palin is governor of a state that ranks second nationally in crude oil production, but she’s no more "responsible" for that resource than President Bush was when he was governor of Texas, another oil-producing state. In fact, her primary power is the ability to tax oil, which she did in concert with the Alaska Legislature. And where Alaska is the largest state in America, McCain could as easily have called it the 47th largest state — by population.

MCCAIN: "She’s the commander of the Alaska National Guard. … She has been in charge, and she has had national security as one of her primary responsibilities," he said on ABC.

THE FACTS: While governors are in charge of their state guard units, that authority ends whenever those units are called to actual military service. When guard units are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, for example, they assume those duties under "federal status," which means they report to the Defense Department, not their governors. Alaska’s national guard units have a total of about 4,200 personnel, among the smallest of state guard organizations.

FORMER ARKANSAS GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE: Palin "got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska than Joe Biden got running for president of the United States."

THE FACTS: A whopper. Palin got 616 votes in the 1996 mayor’s el
Patrick…..I didn’t realize the AP worked for Obama…..thanks for the info.

Huckabee was being humorous, but you Obama sheep know nothing about that.

Still, not one lie you can point out. This article is also full of misleading crap, must be an Obama talking points article. I guess you all were e-mailed it this morning and told to cut and paste it to your blogs.

Bunch of sheep.

NObama 08 or ever

I heard both speeches and then read some news articles and trying to figure out why they seem to blantantly lie..Is this true?

Palin’s speech:

PALIN: “I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending … and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress ‘thanks but no thanks’ for that Bridge to Nowhere.”

THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a “bridge to nowhere.”

PALIN: “There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it’s easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform — not even in the state senate.”

THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.

PALIN: “The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars.”

THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama’s plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain’s plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.

Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.

He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.

MCCAIN: “She’s been governor of our largest state, in charge of 20 percent of America’s energy supply … She’s responsible for 20 percent of the nation’s energy supply. I’m entertained by the comparison and I hope we can keep making that comparison that running a political campaign is somehow comparable to being the executive of the largest state in America,” he said in an interview with ABC News’ Charles Gibson.

THE FACTS: McCain’s phrasing exaggerates both claims. Palin is governor of a state that ranks second nationally in crude oil production, but she’s no more “responsible” for that resource than President Bush was when he was governor of Texas, another oil-producing state. In fact, her primary power is the ability to tax oil, which she did in concert with the Alaska Legislature. And where Alaska is the largest state in America, McCain could as easily have called it the 47th largest state — by population.

MCCAIN: “She’s the commander of the Alaska National Guard. … She has been in charge, and she has had national security as one of her primary responsibilities,” he said on ABC.

THE FACTS: While governors are in charge of their state guard units, that authority ends whenever those units are called to actual military service. When guard units are deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, for example, they assume those duties under “federal status,” which means they report to the Defense Department, not their governors. Alaska’s national guard units have a total of about 4,200 personnel, among the smallest of state guard organizations.

McCain’s speech:

MCCAIN: "We lost their trust when instead of freeing ourselves from a dangerous dependence on foreign oil, both parties and Senator Obama passed another corporate welfare bill for oil companies. We lost their trust, when we valued our power over our principles."

THE FACTS: Yes, Obama voted for a 2005 energy bill backed by Bush that included billions in subsidies for oil and natu
natural gas production. McCain opposed the bill on grounds it included unnecessary tax breaks for the oil industry. But Obama has said he supported the legislation because it provided money for renewable energy. Obama did vote for an effort to strip the legislation of the oil and gas industry tax breaks. When that failed, he voted for the overall measure.

MCCAIN: "When a public school fails to meet its obligations to students, parents deserve a choice in the education of their children. And I intend to give it to them. Some may choose a better public school. Some may choose a private one. Many will choose a charter school. But they will have that choice and their children will have that opportunity."

THE FACTS: Despite his goal of giving parents choice in the schools their children attend, he is not proposing a federal voucher program that would provide public money for private school tuition.

Yes, they did lie. Neither one seems to get it that with the super highway it’s easy to cross-check this stuff. McCain barely knows how to use email so to him the internet is beyond his grasp. I don’t know what her excuse is.

This is a list that I personally have compiled over the course of the last couple of weeks. It is not complete by any means, but I think it does give a sampling of my concerns as well as the concerns of many. Due to the length of the posting, I have not included links but have included the dates if one wanted to look it up.

ABORTION:
1.Voted against partial birth abortion ban- October 2007
2.He voted against requiring medical care for aborted fetuses who survive
3.Voted no on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP- March 2008
4.Voted no on prohibiting minors from crossing state lines for abortions- March 2008
5.Voted no on notifying parents of minors who get out of state abortions- July 2006
6.Voted against restrictions on public funding of abortion.- 2000

ECONOMIC ISSUES
7.Voted no on $40B in reduced overall federal spending- December 2005
8.Sponsored tax credit bill for providing 85% ethanol gas- April 2005
9.Voted no on CAFTA, Central America Free trade- July 2005
10.Mandates health care- February 2008
11.Voted to end $300 million worth of tax breaks for businesses.- 2004 (anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of economics understands that restrictive policy results in a reduction, not increase)
12.Believes that tax cuts on rich does not create jobs- May 2004
13.Voted to raise the minimum wage in Illinois from $5.15 an hour to $6.50 an hour over two years. – 2003 ( again, anyone with the slightest understanding of economics realizes that those adversely affected by such actions, are the individuals this measure is meant to help)
14.Favored single payer health care despite denial- January 2008
15.Successfully sponsored the Health Care Justice Act, a study of ways to implement a universal health care system statewide.- 2004
16.Free public college for any student with B average- July 1998
17.Voted against making permanent the repeal of the state’s 5 percent sales tax on gasoline.- 2000

CRIME/ GUNS
18.Voted against making gang members eligible for the death penalty if they kill someone to help their gang. -2001
19.Deal with street level drug dealing as minimum wage affair- October 2006
20.Death penalty should not discriminate by gang membership- October 2004
21.Questions harsh penalties for drug dealing- October 2007
22.Endorsed Illinois handgun ban- April 2008
23.Respects 2nd amendment, but local gun bans ok- February 2008
24.Voted against letting people argue self-defense in court if charged with violating local weapons bans by using a gun in their home. -2004
25.Voted no on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers- July 2005
26.In 1999, Obama voted against a bill barring early release for (criminal) sex offenders
27.He unsuccessfully sponsored limit of one handgun purchase per month. – 200
28.Unsuccessfully sponsored measure to expunge some criminal records and create an employment grant program for ex-criminals.- 2002

WAR ON TERROR
29.Restore habeas corpus for detainees in War on Terror- June 2007
30.Close Guantanamo and restore habeas corpus- June 2007

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION
31.Supports granting drivers license to illegal immigrants- November 2007
32.Voted yes on continued federal funds for ‘sanctuary cities’- March 2008
33.Extend welfare and Medicaid to immigrants- July 1998
34.Voted yes to allow illegal aliens to participate in social security- May 2008
35.Voted no on terminating legal challenges to English only job rules- March 2008

DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE
36.Opposed 1996 Illinois DOMA bill- March 2007
37.Opposes CA Prop. 8 define marriage as one man one woman- July 2008

MORAL AND COMMON SENSE ISSUES
38.Sponsored resolution rejecting photo ID for voting- September 2005
39.Obama voted “present” on a bill to keep pornographic book and video stores and strip clubs from setting up within 1,000 feet of schools and churches- 2001
40.Obama voted against filtering pornography on school and library computers
41.Obama voted for sex education for kindergarten children through the 5th grade
42.Include class based affirmative action with race based- October 2007
43.Supreme court was wrong on school anti-integration ruling- July 2007
44.Supports affirmative action in colleges and government- July 1998
45.National smoking bans only after trying local bans- September 2007
46.Voted no on declaring English as the official language of US government- June 2007
47.Voted against giving tax credits to parents who send their children to private school. – 1999
48.Jerusalem as joint Palestinian- Israeli capitol ok- July 2008

POLITICS
49.Statement: owes unions who endorse him, that’s why he’s in politics- October 2006
50.No money from lobbyist, but money from bundlers who lobby ok- July 2007
51.No money from lobbyist, but money from spouse of lobbyist ok- April 2007
52.Nearly $200,000,000 in unreported campaign contributions

Regarding numbers 42-44, there have been many studies that have clearly shown quota systems and specifically in the higher educational institutions have created undue hardship on those who are supposed to benefit from such programs.
Richard- I appreciate your openess, thank you. As far as points 11 and 12, research macroeconomic theory and you will find what it is that I am speaking of. There was however an attempt in relatively recent history to implement the same type of policies – commonly called restrictive- the individual at the helm at that point was Pres. Carter. Prior to that, we have another example for which the similarities are striking- we affectionately know this period as ‘The Great Depression’. Though there are some, few, that would argue, it is generally accepted that the depression was prolonged due to the restrictive policies followed by FDR.
Richard- just an additional side note regarding number 13. I have to assume that since you are in disagreement with 11 and 12, 13 would pose a problem as well. To understand the implications of number 13 you would need to look up microeconomic theory.
Richard- your link is in regards to deficit spending. I would argue as would most economists, that there are some inherent benefits in regards to deficit spending, but yes, there are limitations as well. Points 11, 12, and conversely 13 are in respect to restrictive policies. Let’s put it this way; if you as an individual have just found out that your taxes are going to increase lets say 10%- the monies that you take in are going to decrease as well right? OK, so if you have 10% less money coming in, then it would be reasonable to expect that you would reduce the money going out on items not necessary right? Well, business is the same way. If business tax goes up then business is required to reduce costs to maintain profitability. Reducing costs for business may entail; reduced work force, less investment (infrastructure). This reduction results in reduced revenue (tax), higher unemployment.
I have read reports regarding Senator Obama’s tax proposal and barring any unknown disclosures; the top 5% of earners would be taxed at a rate of 49-50%. In economic speak, this incentivizes that these earners would now transfer earnings to localities where penalties are not as great- in English, these people/ businesses would move their operations to countries that would allow them to keep as much of their profits as possible. Look at auto manufacturing as an example, the rustbelt states were taxing at such a high rate, that many manufacturers have moved to states or even countries with lower tax rates.
Richard- I’m not making the claim that these individuals will move residence, but merely the home country of said business entity. Now this may entail a physical move or a paper move. Recently Senator Obama has referred to 1000 corporations having headquarters in one building in the Bahamas- I believe. This example is exactly what I am referring too. If the fed increases the incentive for businesses to move off-shore or even relocate, then tax revenue does in fact decrease. There is an overwhelming amount of historical data supporting this assertion and no, that I am aware of, data that would disprove it. I have been in the business world for twenty years and have watched the ebb and flow of business practice. The one constant has been that a correctly run business will by whatever means possible, try to remain profitable.
One last bit of data, and this being purely anecdotal; During the 80’s Michigan state and local governments began raising taxes. The assumption was increased tax revenue. What actually happened was that many businesses found that even with the loss of existing facilities, it was more beneficial for them to relocate and sell assets in Michigan. Many other businesses didn’t have that opportunity and went into foreclosure. I, like many Michiganders, was forced by taxation and loss of jobs to move from my home. Prior to all of this, many Michigan communities were experiencing revitalization. Policies however quashed this growth. In fact, Michael Moore got his start there because of a film he did called "Me and Roger". Though a purely one sided view, it was the story of the death of Flint Michigan- and yes, I did live there at the time. If memory serves me correctly, Flint held the record for per capita murders during that time. So increased taxes do have affects- but are we ready for them?

Well done. At least you’ve researched it. Many of the items you list are the reasons I do support Obama – so we’ll agree to differ.

However, I will question your assumptions in point 11 and 12.

There’s so much info here on this link – you’ll have a field day – but it’s quite interesting ( for example it has the national debt and inflation recorded year by year by President since 1780 ish on the spreadsheet at the bottom under sources – you need to select the worksheet).

You’ll figure it out – but look at Fig 1 which shows the climb in National Debt. And look at Fig 3 together with the narrative underneath which shows the "change" by President for the last 50 years.

You will see that Democrat policies have been more successful (Clinton, Carter and Johnson) and that tax decreases have not had the anticipated effect.
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

.EDIT: Point 13 – The minimum wage is arguable. First should there be a minm wage? And then what level is it set.
It’s a matter of judgement. I have a view that says it should be set in areas wider than one state.

Generally – I have to say it’s difficult to compare the pre war period with the post war period – because so much has changed. The lessons are different – the balance is different.

I’ll come back and give you a counter argument for Point 12 shortly. I have to attend to something briefly.

OK POINT 12 – I say increasing tax on rich does not affect jobs. The higher the income the more their money is spent outside their domicile country – holidays, overseas property. Taxation takes the money into "federal" control. That is then spent within the US – on infrastructure, on defence – or even as lower tax for low earners who spend on local goods and services. So taxing the rich helps the economy more than not taxing them.
A counter argument to this is that the rich move out – but thats a matter of balance again when compared to other countries. But bear in m ind – most choose to remain in the US and enjoy the benefits it offers . Lower tax countries are low for a reason – they don’t offer the same environment or other benefits.

EDIT: Just read your updates. Regarding business tax. Businesses are in the the US because thats where their market is. It’ not just about tax rates. Businesses also consider the benefits of a legislative framework – what redress they have on unpaid debts for example. One of the central planks of Obamas policy is to tax the many US companies who continiue to do business in the US but have chosen to register their business outside US to avoid paying US taxes. For example, over 12000 US companies are now registered in the Cayman Islands yet 99% of their market is in US. They are simply re-registering their office, tax advisors told them to. They still do the same business in the US -but pay their tax to Cayman Is not US. Obama is going to close that loophole. The money will be taxed from where it is earned – not where it is accounted. All these companies are doing is aviding the tax they should legally pay. That puts them back on equal status with their competitors – often smaller companies – who have been unfairly put at a disadvantage. It doesn’t mean jobs are lost. It actually encourages more investment – because only profits are taxed. If they re-invest – they avoid tax. .

I’ve got to go out soon. I’ll check this page later.

EDIT: Yes – a "paper office " as you call it. Thats whats been happening. You can keep lowering taxes – but if they find a country with a lower tax – they move – or re-register. They can hop from the Bahamas to somehwere else for a 1% difference. Obama plans to change the tax point. If they’ve done the business in the US they’ll pay US taxes. They can keep their paper office – but there will be no point. It’s been done in Europe where they had the same problem. Some of the finace companies still amnage to get round it – because they can "earn" moeny in the paper office. But manufacturing industries, service industries, distributive industries, retail businesses will no longer be able to avoid paying their legal tax contribution.

BTW I also have been in business, corporate and private for 33 years – and points 29 and 30 we could never agree.
Must go. Thanks..