http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx From Elizabeth Wilner, Mark Murray, and Huma ZaidiHave things finally calmed down? The candidates at the center of this week's political brouhaha, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, appear today in two different liberal strongholds. Clinton headlinesen-USCommunityServer 2.0 (Build: 60608.1)http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66424Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:00:48 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66424AFMCA MDThe entire episode was stupid, but most of the fault must be put on Hillary and her campaign. 99.9% of the voters could care less who is contributing to campaigns at this point and care even less why Geffen showers his money to one candidate or the other. By highlighting the issue, Hillary's campaign made her look petty and vindictive. Again really stupid move.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66428Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:03:10 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66428Carrie, NW IowaIs McCain admitting that intelligent design is no more than creationism in disguise? I wonder if the Discovery Institute people knew this before they decided to co-present his speech. From what I have seen, the intelligent design advocates generally refuse to acknowledge that it is, at its core, creationism. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66481Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:26:52 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66481Hank R., Phoenix, AZHow many mouths does John McCain actually physically have?http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66596Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:05:55 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66596Dave Miller, Miamisburg, OHThis is such a "Who Cares?" issue. Obama and Clinton having a tiff over comments made by their contributors. Ho-hum. This falls into the category of "normal everyday life in the long, drawn-out, road of presidential campaigning." How is this really news? I don't even find it interesting. I'm much more iterested in what Congress is going to do to thwart the recklessness of Mr. Bush's Iraq War Policy, and the short-sighted, self-serving comments that our V.P. Cheney is saying about China. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66657Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:23:14 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66657Iowa MomDave, I sooooo agree with you. Who cares! The pundits on TV. Same goes for Anna Nicole Smith. One might think the Queen of England had died. I think her death is sad but it surely doesn't rate the amount of time wasted covering this. Again, who cares. I want to hear the news, not gossip!http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66658Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:23:27 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66658Bob WittMcCain's stands on both sides of every issue are, in themselves a refutation of"intelligent design". http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66721Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:49:13 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66721Al, Burlington, KSIt's about the money...show me the money. This has nothing to do with votes. The average voter doesn't care about what a Hollywood mogul said because the average voter is listening yet. This story will be over before the voters start paying attention. This is about donations, and what Hollywood has to offer is important. Hillary just needs to keep some of Hollywood in her pocket. Romney is running commercials...do you think its about votes? He needs to get his poll numbers up so the he can get more of the money. McCain and evolution...he wants the right wing money. Talk about the real issues is still a long way off.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66723Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:49:52 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66723GE Seattle, WAObama never stepped off the high road. The Clinton camp & the media just tried to make it look that way. Hillary dropped a few notches lower in my opinion. Selling nights in the Lincoln bedroom? Lying to their friend Geffen? Lying in the press release saying Geffen was Finance Chairman, when he has no official connection to his campaign. As a Democrat, I'd have a hard time voting for Hillary. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66746Fri, 23 Feb 2007 16:58:40 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66746Mark--MD...because it's not science, Mr. McCain. It's faith, and if you want to teach it in a comparative religion course, fine. But keep it out of science class. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66754Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:04:33 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66754OliviaI'm with Dave and Iowa Mom--the Clinton/Obama/Geffen foofaraw is to political news what Anna Nicole Smith is to the news in general--an unwelcome diversion from more important matters.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66794Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:16:33 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66794Deninge S., San Leandro, CAI didn't understand that whole fiasco! I don't remember drama like that being done the last time around. Well, I hope that it done and over with. I do think that its the campaign staff doing this, not Clinton or Obama.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66802Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:20:02 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66802MW, Indianapolis INDemocrats who say they won't vote for Hillary are like those who wouldn't vote for Gore and voted for Nader, thus electing the incompetent incumbent.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66804Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:20:54 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66804Al, Burlington, KSMeanwhile, 4 more Americans were killed in Iraq yesterday...and Hillary voted for the war. Could this be a smoke screen to keep the war issue off the table for awhile? Talk about the high ground...Obama is so much more credible on the war issues.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66807Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:23:31 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66807Dave, TnYou liberals better be careful you might end up on the Clinton's enemies list. To heck with all the media picked front runners. I'm hoping Duncan Hunter rises to the top for our side, or brace yourselves. Condi decides to run :-)http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66811Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:24:36 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66811Steve Turner Cedar Falls IowaOne man's Intelligent Design, is another man's Edsel. The Northwestern Indians had a belief that people came fully designed, out of a clamshell at the edge of the Giant Turtle. Will we teach that? I'd guess, no. What the "Intelligent Design" crowd wants to teach, is the Christian Religious Right view. Not the Islamic, Wiccan, Buddhist, Hindi, Confucian, Cheyenne, Siouian, Caddo, or Pele God of Fire versions, they aren't what these guys want mandated, in fact, they'd like to make them all illegal, especially the Native Americans (which actually Were Illegal, in the past). I once asked my Dad where I came from. He said a Crow pooped me on a fencepost, and the Sun hatched me. I've dogmatically believed that from then on. No one will ever convince me, otherwise. Why? Because it makes sense, if you do the Science.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66817Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:26:49 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66817Bob, OrlandoActually the Clinton campaign should be glad to separate itself from Geffen, etal. Kind of like a Queen Latifah moment that Bill took advantage of 1n '92. I think they missed the oppurtunity.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66820Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:28:13 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66820JIrby, Colorado Springs, CoIntelligent Design is not an opposing point of view. It is re-badged creationism, in an attempt to sneak it in the door, hopefully while nobody is looking. Otherwise, it's the same old dog squat, where the universe was created five thousand years ago. It only appeals to the more clueless members of the population. If McCain believes that, he should be guaranteed the bottom forty percent of the Bush voter base. What happened to all the high-school dropouts who were posting yesterday?http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66824Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:29:06 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66824DMA, New York, NYMy $.02 cents: I just hope that Hillary doesn't get the nomination. I simply don't like the woman. I have nothing against a woman running for president (I'm a woman myself); I would rather it be not Hillary. The reason I think she's all wrong for the Democrats is because I see her as an conniving opportunist. When she ran for the Senate in my home state, it bothered me because she wasn't from New York nor was she living there at the time she announced her candicy. Then she got elected, she said that she was in this (the Senate) for the long haul. Cut to six or seven years and one re-election later, she's now running for President. On top of that, she hasn't done anything for us New Yorkers. At least, nothing that comes to my mind. Also, do we really want ANOTHER family dynasty in the White House again? Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton, etc. Enough already!!! That's why I hope Obama gets the nomination. He's a fresh face, a breath of fresh air, comes across as smart and likable with some great ideas, no excess baggage. We need new blood, not the same old political soap opera. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66833Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:32:52 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66833bobf Ryan, If you are out there, this is a response to youe article yesterday about wealth distribution. You said democrats beleive and promote wealth distribution. I believe democracy is what distribute wealth. Just for your information the republican party also beleives in wealth distribution. They just want all the wealth in the hands of few people. As the republicans gained power,they deregulated industries and they consolidate the money among the few wealthy people. If capitalism is run out to it's end, then only one person will own everything. Correct? Isn't capitalism all about consolidation and only the strong will survive. Then the end result of a truly capitalistic society would be like old England where the king owns everything and everybody. When we wrote the constitution it was to give all people rights and freedoms. A direct response from they way they were governed in Europe. The constitution states we are all equal. We adopted democracy as our finance machine and not capitalism. Democracy prevents one entity from contolling a whole market with our anti-corporation law. Ryan, you know which law I am talking about. Major League baseball has waiver for this law because of congress. So basically it breaks up companies to promote competition. This flies in the face of capitalism. If we were a capitalistic society then AT&T would absolutely have owned the phone business. Our government broke up AT&T , not the other way around. So basically democracy is wealth distribution. When industries were regulated then all profits went back into the company. As we deregulate all the industries, then the profits go into the hands of a few individuals. When profit is factored into an industry the pricing will change to acheive max profit. No where is their any incentive to help the consumer. The companies loyalties are with stock holders not the customer. Funny, it is the customer that keeps that business going. So capitalism or democracy, they both distribute wealth. Capitalism in the hands of few individuals or democracy which keeps the playing field level and insures good pricing to all consumers. Ryan, can you give me your thoughts on this. I could be missing something.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66840Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:37:09 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66840Patrick, Minneapolis"But why can’t people who fundamentally believe in their hearts in creation at least have that view exposed?" Because religion doesn't belong in public schools. Because the First Amendment prohibits it. Because it's ridiculous. Because the U.S. is just going to keep taking steps backwards in education if we keep junk subjects alive. Because that would be nothing more than pandering to a political base. Because you and several other Republicans can't do what a majority of Americans can do: think with sound reason and common sense over political positioning.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66862Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:45:26 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66862Carrie, NW IowaGE - So Hillary is to be held responsible for the press releases issued by her campaign, but Obama is not? Explain that contradiction, please. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66863Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:46:54 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66863Chris, Abilene, TXEveryone with a brain understands that intelligent design is a restyled version of creationism. I had a very religious roommate in college, and I can remember him telling me that studying geology and evolution was a sin...my simple question to him was "why couldn't have God invented the process of evolution?". No answer on that one. Some people seem to think in one dimension...evolution/science = no God.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66875Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:51:00 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66875Mark ThiemeDiffering views, well said, sometimes detailed, sometimes passionate, sometimes funny, make the posts on this board worth reading. It is refreshing to read new names with thoughtful comments this morning. Many of the best posters here have dropped off or post rarely here since trolls and hacks with talking points from Karl Rove have burst through the doors smelling of arrogance and taking crude pleasure in appropriating the discussion. I hope these new folks we see here today will stay and that their presence reflects a change in editorial policy. Perhaps this will be a fun board again where free speech is more than loud talk, rude and dismissive behavior, and chest beating. There are plenty of boards catering to the socially challenged, but this one was once better than that.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66935Fri, 23 Feb 2007 18:11:35 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66935Al, Burlington, KSLet the creationist go on and on. It's self defeating. Here in this big square red state, we have had the on again off again intelligent design debate for several years...and become the laughing stock of the world. Meanwhile, we now have a Democratic Governor, 2 out of 3 Democratic Congressmen, and Brownback's seat up in 2 years. And the intelligent design language has been added and removed from the classroom several times. We have taken to printing textbooks with removable pages. The rantings of the far right lead to losses and the polls...not gains, as McCain will discover.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#66959Fri, 23 Feb 2007 18:21:03 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:66959hiphopdirectory.comIndeed the Obama and Clinton issue was so petty. Honestly, I like both...both. But the reason I feel this way is simply because I feel that the Clinton era was overly fair to the people and we continued to be the movers of freedom and democracy, regardless of Bill's woes. Nobody is perfect, nobody. But we have to extract that which was rendered by Bill Clinton, which to me was the best that our generation has seen prior to JFK, which was experienced prior to my birth. But what I like about Obama, is the fact that he wants to represent that masses of Americans who are migrants from other cultures, creeds, nationalities and colors who seek to envision an American that makes of the best from around the world. To make a nation unlike any nation on earth and to bring us all together and say "ok, where do we go from here?" For once we can drop our egos, humble our mindsets, and accept each other regardless of our cultural differences, we can come together and extract the best of all that the world has to offer (i.e scientists, visionists, doctors, etc.). I love America, I have been here all my life since my migration as a very young child from England. My family is here, my son was born here, and although I've been here for such time, I have become a part of American culture even though I have not as of yet pursued my venture to become an American Citizen. Some ask me, "why don't you become an American citizen?" Upon hearing such questions, I can only look up to them and express my feelings about the experience of the once Indian nation that once roamed this land and the waves of injustices that have withered within their society by once settlers to a new land. I look, knowing that I am a person of mixed-brown descent and over my years experienced the remnants of a country that once institutionalized an era of slavery that saw the lynching of of a people who like the first settlers were a people to a new land. I saw this, but I could only observe and come to wonder. So after seeing all this and upon hearing such a question, I usually respond by saying, "once America becomes the America that we as a society want and becomes, then will I submit my sovereignty and jump aboard with a movement that seeks to enable us to become better and more brilliant people with a mindstate that can take us beyond the oceans, beyond the earths crusts and beyond the boundaries of our orbit and our solar system in an effort to find what it is that the Creator of not only all the things of which we do know, but also the acceptance of even those things that we don't know. This is what makes America such a great nation. Until we do this, we as a people will never open our minds to potential, innovation, and the ability to show the world just what it is that makes American culture one of the greatest countries that history has come to know. I look sooo forward to this, and look forward to the near future when this happens so that we can move forward as a society. Through this process we can do this, and if Barack Obama was elected as the next president of the United States, this would be the Redemption of America. A new vision filled with abundant opportunities and the remake of a new society.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67092Fri, 23 Feb 2007 18:51:28 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67092Ryan, Michiganbobf - Yeah, I'm out here. Some parts of your post were confusing to me so I'll just respond with comments about capitalism and democracy. Capitalism as an economic system is a great partner with a democratic or republic form of government. As with most "isms" there are different variations of them (i.e. socialism). In my opinion someone who is a 100% pure capitalist would argue that as companies consolidate there will always be entrepenuers (sp?) that will step up and produce new goods and better ways of doing things. Democracy is a form of government not an economic system. Many Americans forget that we are actually a Republic not a Democracy. The word "democracy" has been skewed over the years but there are distinct differences between a Democracy and a Republic. America has chosen to have a "anti-trust rule" which pure capitalists would probably be against but if the "rule" is interpreted loosely as it has been in recent past then I personally don't really have a problem with it. Democracy doesn't require an anti-trust law as you posted but America has chosen to have one. Companies always have an incentive to help the customer. They want to sell their product to the customer. If the customer feels they are getting ripped off or is getting poor customer service or whatever the case may be they can go to a different company to do business. The fact that customers have choices spurs customer service and lower prices. I for one am not opposed to companies making money on their products and if I think a product is overpriced I'll go to a different company. It's that simple. The much hated Wal-Mart is often referenced by "anti-capitalists" as an example of what is wrong with capitalism. However it has been estimated by economists that Wal-Mart saves every American family $1,600 a year. You don't even have to shop there to save money. Just their presence and their unique business model creates lower prices for every American. By the way $1,600 a year means a lot more for the family making $40,000 then it does for the family making $200,000 a year. I'm not sure how else to approach your post. You are comparing an economic system to a form of government. It's like comparing an apple to a lawn mower. I appreciate your desire to discuss. I look forward to reading your response.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67117Fri, 23 Feb 2007 18:58:08 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67117scott, winona mnIntelligent design has NO place in our schools. Or government. And by the way, using the phrase "intelligent design" is like calling bush and cheney people who care about america. It's just another misleading fact being used to obscure the ulterior goal.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67190Fri, 23 Feb 2007 19:22:09 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67190Carrie, NW IowaDave - What makes Obama so much more credible on Iraq? Has he even had to vote for anything related to it yet? It's easy to talk the talk - has he walked the walk? I am asking because I don't know. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67192Fri, 23 Feb 2007 19:22:35 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67192MMSteve-I agree completely. I am an Indian Art teacher in Montana. We are implementing Native American studies into ALL of our subjects even the core ones. We still have to abide by separation of church and state, but we can teach about what some of them believed. My most recent project is about Pow Wows, we have learned that in the late 1800's most missionaries and the federal government actually banned Indian dancing. (They thought all of the dancing was war dancing.) In the same step they took these people cut off their hair and tried to Christianize them. Seems to me that not many things have changed in 200 years. It wasn't until 1920 that the native people were again allowed to DANCE. There are many beautiful religions and I think that it is very ignorant for anyone to think that Christianity is the only true religion. I also think that it is very ignorant for intelligent design to be implemented into ANY public school. If you want your child to learn about Christianity then you need to send them to a private school. We need to grasp the concept that we have a freedom of religion in this country and that not everyone HAS to believe in any one.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67254Fri, 23 Feb 2007 19:45:07 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67254Mel, IllinoisA parent of one of my pre-school students insisted we not do our dinosaur unit because she believes they never existed and that God made fossils to confuse us. We teachers suggested she take her child out of school that week. She did. She took him to Disney to keep him happy.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67260Fri, 23 Feb 2007 19:46:01 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67260amadeus, newport riSince when has freedom of religon become the freedom to impose religon.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67325Fri, 23 Feb 2007 20:08:21 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67325Nick, OhioNo one can be responsible for what a donor says. You can strongly request that comments be kept "above board" and appropriate, but you cannot reign in someone who just plopped down money for you to have a chance of winning such a horserace. I don't like the comments made by the mogul from the West Coast, but Obama should not have to give the money back. It is silly for Clinton to demand that Obama return the money. We all know that the Clinton years in the 1990s were better for this country than the first 8 of the new century, as that is a no-brainer. The Dems always seem to have some strong opinions, which is all a part of being a Democrat. That's almost the best part about being a Democrat. As for McCain, which McCain is speaking these days? Has he really sold his soul to the Devil, er, the Christian Right? Is the photo of McCain and Bush hugging actually a sign of the future (the current King handing off the baton to his annointed one)? Politics are such fun to watch, prior to the primaries. Once the primaries begin, all of the logjams break loose and the people usually quickly determine their candidate. Either Obama or Clinton can win the primaries, but we also thought in 2004 (before the primaries) that Dean had the race wrapped-up. I suspect someone will come out on top, but it is folly to suggest or comment on a winner at this early stage. It could even be Edwards, with either Clinton or Obama as his Veep. For the GOP, people are rallying around McCain as if he were a Golden Child. He has the best chance, as all the rest of the GOP runners do not have the ability to get the backing of the Religious Right on their side. Giulliani (sp?) is not serious, is he? Romney is a fool to open his campaign in Michigan and not where he was Gov. Everyone else is cannon fodder in any candidate debates before the primaries. Who will win? If Bush gets out of Iraq... the GOP. If not, it will be any Dem who is angry, articulate and can speak to the masses with conviction and respect. Happy Days are yet to be seen.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67332Fri, 23 Feb 2007 20:10:02 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67332Jim, Santa CruzWhich came first? the intelligence or the designer?http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67337Fri, 23 Feb 2007 20:10:48 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67337C of R"A parent of one of my pre-school students insisted we not do our dinosaur unit because she believes they never existed and that God made fossils to confuse us." It's possible. What with His close association to George Bush and the GOP in general sort of signals to me that He's pretty bad-tempered. If we'd just agree to make George Bush our Divine Leader descended from God, we could just ask......Please run that incompetent, pooch-screwing cartoon of a diplopmat, Kindalousy Rice, for Prez. She has a whole lot of unanswered questions.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67354Fri, 23 Feb 2007 20:17:49 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67354OliviaMore about the Clinton/Obama/Geffen foofaraw--No one could be more grateful for it then BushCo. They're happy to see Democrats fighting among themselves about trivia instead of standing up to Bush on things that really need to be taken care of, such as Katrina recovery.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67361Fri, 23 Feb 2007 20:20:13 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67361Russell in MarylandCarrie asks - "What makes Obama so much more credible on Iraq?" This is Obama speaking in October 2002, while Clinton, Edwards, Kerry and Biden were voting for the war: "Now let me be clear -- I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars." For Obama to say this in 2002 took intelligent, foresight, knowledge and incredible bravery with no calculating regard to the political consequences -- merely the desire to do what is right for the country and to save lives -- that is why he is qualified to speak on Iraq. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67460Fri, 23 Feb 2007 20:50:46 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67460bobf Ryan, thank you for your response. I guess what I was getting at is we use a form of controlled capitalism. What I was trying to get across is that democrats like to use the bottom up method for priming the economy. The republicans like the trickle down theory. Clinton used the bottom up theory during his years and jobs and profits were plenty. When we switched to trickle down theory we lost jobs and went into a recession. Now granted 9-11 had some affect, but all republican presidents since the turn of the century that proposed trickle down theory have all had recession or worse depression's during their tenure. Bush's tax cut is in itself a redistribution of money. His tax cuts are definately skewed to the upper income brackets. What I would say to those tax cuts, are these people paying their fair share of taxes. Now Ryan, this is the tricky part, I want to use percentage of your income as a base. Any tax taken out of your paycheck is worked as a percentage against their income. I am also speaking of all taxes. Gas, Food, Interstate commerce,Excise,Shipping, income and so on. This is hypothetical, if someone makes 30,000 a year and pays total amount of taxes at about 6,000 that is 20 percent of their income. Take the same amount and transpose over someone making 300,000 then that only equals 2%. Thus the rich pay a lesser percent in taxes then his maid or gardener, if they are not illegal aliens. Just a joke here Ryan, but my point is by taxing the rich with income taxes ,then they pay the same percent of taxes as the average american citizen. Bush's tax cut gave 70% of the tax cut to the top 30%. In fact if you did not pay any income tax you did not get a refund check. So Bush's taxcut was not evenly divided up among american's. 30% of Bush's tax cut went to the lower 70% of the population. With 50% getting no refund or tax cut because they were to poor to pay in income taxes. One last thought about Wal-Mart. They do save us lots of money, and we use it all the time. The only problem I have is the displacing of local businesses when Walmart moves into a new area. Walmart has a tendency to take over whole towns and area's. I know they target rural area's and yes they save you ton's of money, but can we do it without wiping out other business's in that town. I am just looking for balance for the local businesses. This is where I was going with deregulation. A big player can move into a market, set up pricing that wipes out the competition, then revert back to their old pricing scheme. A deregulated industry will eventually have fewer players after more mergers. Mergers help stock holders a lot, but is bad for employee's and competition. If Walmart runs all competitors out, who is going to push Walmart to reduce it's prices? In a regulated industry most prices are fix and we are not using profits to pay stock holders but use it to make your product better or reduce prices for your customers. I would like Ryan or anyone's thoughts on these items. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67500Fri, 23 Feb 2007 21:10:06 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67500Mark Y; Westlake Village, CARyan and bobf, mind if I add to your discussion? Ryan, I think your description of the US economy is accurate. I would add that some monopolies benefit the consumer, primarily utilities. I believe this has to do with infrastructure and that utilities tend to be government regulated. My case in point is the CA power shortage a few years back. Deregulation as passed by our CA legislature was bad law and we were taken advantage of by Enron et al. If CA were still regulated at the time, the power shortage would have had a far less likelihood of happening. This govt regulation is where bobf possibly crossed over. Theoretically, deregulation should have worked as Ryan's Walmart example. However, there is something called a cartel, which we may want to save for future blogs. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67524Fri, 23 Feb 2007 21:20:31 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67524Steve Turner Cedar Falls IowaMM. I hope Heamiwihhio hears both of us.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67553Fri, 23 Feb 2007 21:32:07 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67553Carrie, NW IowaRussell - I think you missed the point, which is this - has he actually DONE anything re: Iraq? Other than make eloquent speeches, that is. Has he voted on it? Proposed legislation? Like I said, anyone can talk the talk but has he actually put any of his admittedly great rhetoric in action?http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67556Fri, 23 Feb 2007 21:34:03 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67556MMC of R-Love your post...I needed a laugh today.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67581Fri, 23 Feb 2007 21:49:35 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67581bobf Thanks Ryan and Mark for your responses. I am heading out for the weekend. We are gearing up for a major snow storm this weekend in Minnesota. I will see ya'll on monday. If you guys want to keep the debate going, I am all for it. I am done for today, but I will be back monday with baited breath. I am not sure what this phrase means but it sounded good. I will check back to this blog on Monday before I go to the new ones. I really want to hear what you guys and gals have to say. Economics has always intreged me, but I must admit my knowledge is limited. That is why I need "input". Hell now I sound like Johnny 5. Anyone name that movie. Have a great weekend everybody.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67613Fri, 23 Feb 2007 21:58:46 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67613Seattle SueBush=Intelligent design. Blows that theory out of the water.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#67687Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:33:22 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:67687susan, NebraskaCarrie, you know I very rarely disagree with you, but Obama's wasn't from his camp it was words from an independent supporter. He can't control the voice of everyone who backs him.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#68090Sat, 24 Feb 2007 07:27:05 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:68090Steve Turner Cedar Falls IowaChris. Your angle still puts you in the "God" groups, as in 'Divine Intelligence', or Anthropomorphic "Man in God's Image". I believe we are all entitled to our own take on subjects of spirit. What I don't believe is one should be chosen for Legislation. Religion should be a private thing. The more public it gets, the more arrogantly self-serving it looks.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#68237Sat, 24 Feb 2007 15:55:59 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:68237Robert Catalano, Salem, ORThere was a reason the Founding Fathers wanted a separation of Church and State. The intermingling of the two caused massive persecution of people and injustice throughout Europe during and up to the 18th century. Although most of these men believed in God, many of them, including Jefferson (who wrote most of the Constitution) were Deists; they believed in God but not in any specific organized religion. "Intelligent design" is a religious and not a scientific belief. To believe in it you must acknowledge the existence of a higher power. No matter what that higher power is, it is still a God, and thus the basis for a religion. Although some scientists acknowledge a higher power exists, science itself does not accept this premise. As with our Founding Fathers, many acknowledged the existence of God, but to them government, like science, was better off without its influence.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#68518Sun, 25 Feb 2007 01:51:00 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:68518James D. Langworthy Frenchbburg, Ky.neither Clinton or Barak has any type of qualifications for being President,a governor or a military general would be better, they at least have experience at running different departments and bossing large numbers of people, other govts they would have to deal with would have more respect for them than they would with either of the senatorshttp://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/02/23/66359.aspx#69346Mon, 26 Feb 2007 14:01:12 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:69346OliviaLOL about Seattle Sue's "Bush = Intelligent Design..." How true!