jerseyhoya wrote:

Rococo4 wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones suffered a massive aneurysm and might be taken off life support.

she died. not reported yet.

Are you her attending physician? That sucks though. RIP Congresswoman.

No. Family doesnt want it out yet.

man im glad i know what your avatar is now.

cleveland plain dealer:

U.S. Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, the first African-American woman to represent Ohio in Congress, has died after suffering a brain aneurysm, said sources familiar with the situation.

She was removed from life support at 12:19 p.m. at Huron Road Hospital, the sources said.

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/08 ... grave.html

dajafi wrote:Yeah, Urban and Brookings are both slightly left of center--my take is that Urban is a bit more liberal. But they're both much less closely linked to the Democrats than, say, Heritage or AEI are to the Republicans--at least these days. During the Nixon years, he and his cronies really detested Brookings as the Kennedys' government-in-exile; at one point in the Watergate planning, there was a proposal within the "Plumbers" unit to firebomb the place.

The DC think tank scene is kind of interesting. The one that fascinates me is Cato, because they seem to have admirable intellectual honesty on the one hand and no real popular constituency on the other...

Cato also is known among the journalist set for the good food available at their press events. At the newsletter company I used to work for, people could get a little competitive over who was going to cover the next Cato presser.

Much as I loathe the discussion of presidential election politics, in terms of the "competition", I would say that what often happens is that a new guy gets hype and has a momentary flare up of excitment, but if you don't capitalize on that excitement quickly, it can erode. Here's an analogy it might be weak -- but I think you will see my meaning --

You plan an event for a ewhile, a big concert, opening, wedding, b-day anniversary -- and there is a momentum and then the event. And then everyone is still buzzing for a bit after -- and then, reality hits. The bills come in, the after-party glow is gone. I think Obama spent so much to get past Hilary and get the young/dis-enfranchised voter... but it peaked too soon.

I'm sure some will say that the convention is all about poising him for the stretch run, but as many have pointed out, the people who are voting Obama either out of genuine like for him, or as a lesser of evils, or holding their nose (like me), that isn't enough -- they are already on-board and no ads neg or pos or a convention speech is going to change them. He has to snag some independents, and others... and the only way to do that, is to demonstrate something about McCain that really bugs them, or come up with something that really appeals to them.

We've seen over n over, that folksy, idiot Bush II was able to garner support more easily than a more sophisticated erudite and articulate politician. McCain isn't folksy, but he doesn't reek of law school -- he fumbles and is idiosyncratic and i'm fearful that he will snag a lot of the undecided. A lot of Americans trust old white haired guys even if the stumble or mis-speak. And as LAx pointed out, the man can work a room of elderly etc... Everything about his demeanor, his age, his what I perceive as disingenous-ness and a total crooked ill-informed and under-qualified politician - is EXACTLY what WILL play well for him with many Americans.

The only way I see Obama winning now, is to either expose something really bad in McCain, have McCain make a major faux pas, especially one that the corporate media runs with big time... or to come up with something that really excites people again and get a new build up of momentum right to election day. Talk about something very specific that will hit pocket books, but Reps use the fear of "new taxes" to win, not lose votes.

I'm also, as most you know, highly suspicious about large-scale corruption in local precincts by Republicans, and issues around not only the machines, but things like voting roles being maniulated, long lines in areas with people of color and a variety of other things. So in my view, a close election like Gore, Kerry and possibly Obama, could easily tip to the other side wiht a little help, steal an Ohio , New Mexico or Florida or all 3 and you're in....

Right now, Obama is doing just what Kerry did and Hilary would ahve done... he's trying to "look tough", show the corporate community that its' "business as usual for most of them", and convince the so-called heartland that he will 'get them jobs and health care' and "bring America's rep back to A+" ... instead, he should really be talking big changes, big departures because it would really really really mobilize the activists and resources of liberal base who would deliver a lot of new voters -- the Dems keep making this mistake and will keep losing imho, until they actually stand for something and not so close to the middle. It's an illusion that being less distinct from Republicans will cause you to lose. Not if you speak in the right fashion. Stand for something or lose as a wimpy fake-republican who isn't the real article.

Right now, I'm not sure most people, including me are very clear on how Obama will be distinct in ways that matter to me?!

TenuredVulture wrote:

FTN wrote:Cato praised the disaster that was the Bush privatization of Social Security plan. That makes me question their sanity, to a degree.

I think Cato probably wouldn't mind seeing social security go away, or become little more than a welfare program for imprudent old people.

forget cato and try

these people

or these...

Rococo4 wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

Rococo4 wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones suffered a massive aneurysm and might be taken off life support.

she died. not reported yet.

Are you her attending physician? That sucks though. RIP Congresswoman.

No. Family doesnt want it out yet.

But, the great "dead-not dead" flame war on Wikipedia continues.

HI, I'm reading through Obama's economic policy plan from his website, and I was wondering if this is new. I haven't heard about this proposal:

Eliminate Income Taxes for Seniors Making Less Than $50,000. Since the New Deal we’ve had a basic understanding in America: If you work hard and pay into the system, you’ve earned the right to a secure retirement. But too many seniors aren’t getting that security, even though they’ve held up their end of the bargain. Lower and middle income seniors are struggling as their expenses on health and energy skyrocket while their incomes do not keep pace. This strain has been greater since 1993, when taxes on social security benefits were raised. Millions of seniors saw their net benefits go down.

Seniors also had to take on the added strain – and sometimes cost – of filing a complicated tax return. And after going through all of these complicated calculations, many seniors find that they owe little or no tax, meaning that all of the hassle was for naught.

Barack Obama will eliminate all income taxation of seniors making less than $50,000 per year. This will provide an immediate tax cut averaging $1,400 to 7 million seniors and relieve millions from the burden of filing tax returns. For millions of seniors, this will eliminate the need to hire a tax preparer, resulting in even larger savings.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/econo ... llPlan.pdf


Edit: Also this:

Create Fund to Help Homeowners Avoid Foreclosures: In addition to taking important steps to prevent mortgage fraud from occurring in the future, Barack Obama will establish policies to help Americans currently facing foreclosure through no fault of their own. For instance, in communities where there are many foreclosures property values of innocent homeowners are often also negatively impacted, driving them toward foreclosure, too.

Obama will create a fund to help people refinance their mortgages and provide comprehensive supports to innocent homeowners. The fund will also assist individuals who purchased homes that are simply too expensive for their income levels by helping to sell their homes. The fund will help offset costs of selling a home, including helping low-income borrowers get additional time and support to pay back any losses from the sale of their home and waiving certain federal, state and local income taxes that result from an individual selling their home to avoid foreclosure. These steps will ensure that individuals who have to sell their homes will be able to quickly regain stable financial footing. The fund will be partially paid for by Obama’s increased penalties on lenders who acted irresponsibly and committed fraud.

But if you're a senior that makes over $200,000 you have to pay 90%

jerseyhoya wrote:In GOP convention news (aka bahaha make dajafi's brain explode news) Lieberman is speaking at the convention. Giuliani is delivering the keynote.

What's the over/under on Rudy's mentioning of 9/11?

Phan In Phlorida wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:In GOP convention news (aka bahaha make dajafi's brain explode news) Lieberman is speaking at the convention. Giuliani is delivering the keynote.

What's the over/under on Rudy's mentioning of 9/11?

22

How does a homeowner "face foreclosure through no fault of their own?"

Polar Bear Phan wrote:

Rococo4 wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

Rococo4 wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones suffered a massive aneurysm and might be taken off life support.

she died. not reported yet.

Are you her attending physician? That sucks though. RIP Congresswoman.

No. Family doesnt want it out yet.

But, the great "dead-not dead" flame war on Wikipedia continues.

News outlets are now retracting that she died. I could have been wrong. We'll see. Hopefully I was wrong obviously.

Rococo4 wrote:

Polar Bear Phan wrote:

Rococo4 wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

Rococo4 wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones suffered a massive aneurysm and might be taken off life support.

she died. not reported yet.

Are you her attending physician? That sucks though. RIP Congresswoman.

No. Family doesnt want it out yet.

But, the great "dead-not dead" flame war on Wikipedia continues.

News outlets are now retracting that she died. I could have been wrong. We'll see. Hopefully I was wrong obviously.

Rest assured, she WILL die.

Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow. But she will. Bank on it.

Rococo4 wrote:

Polar Bear Phan wrote:

Rococo4 wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

Rococo4 wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones suffered a massive aneurysm and might be taken off life support.

she died. not reported yet.

Are you her attending physician? That sucks though. RIP Congresswoman.

No. Family doesnt want it out yet.

But, the great "dead-not dead" flame war on Wikipedia continues.

News outlets are now retracting that she died. I could have been wrong. We'll see. Hopefully I was wrong obviously.

The reason I made the statement had more to do with the fact that I went to her page and saw that she was listed as living. Then, after I hit refresh, she was listed as having died. After another refresh, she was living again. I got a chuckle out of that.

Footage of Obama from 1995 when he was doing press for his first book:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBxUSLCPlmc[/youtube]

As noted here (where you can see other clips), the guy is consistent. He is now who he was then.

(This is also somewhat true of McCain; he just was someone else from 1999-2003 )

In other news, I miss 1995.

dajafi wrote:Footage of Obama from 1995 when he was doing press for his first book:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBxUSLCPlmc[/youtube]

As noted here (where you can see other clips), the guy is consistent. He is now who he was then.

(This is also somewhat true of McCain; he just was someone else from 1999-2003 )

In other news, I miss 1995.

Interesting. How old is he? This is 13 years ago? Hmm. He's qualified and probably a decent person, but the people he will appt to his cabinet and the majority of his policies will be still be far too conservative and pro-corporate for me.

Woody wrote:But if you're a senior that makes over $200,000 you have to pay 90%

If we massively reduced the military spending, and we nationalized a variety of things -- like airlines and began to invest in our own infrastrucutre and good paying skilled jobs here at home. We could probably eliminate most of income tax on most people, and let corporate and the perversely wealthy fund the rest. I'm not anti-profit or innovation -- but we need to move in new directions. Incidentally, SS was meant to be 1/3 of someone's retirement equation, not 100%.

Werthless wrote:Edit: Also this:

Create Fund to Help Homeowners Avoid Foreclosures: In addition to taking important steps to prevent mortgage fraud from occurring in the future, Barack Obama will establish policies to help Americans currently facing foreclosure through no fault of their own. For instance, in communities where there are many foreclosures property values of innocent homeowners are often also negatively impacted, driving them toward foreclosure, too.

Obama will create a fund to help people refinance their mortgages and provide comprehensive supports to innocent homeowners. The fund will also assist individuals who purchased homes that are simply too expensive for their income levels by helping to sell their homes. The fund will help offset costs of selling a home, including helping low-income borrowers get additional time and support to pay back any losses from the sale of their home and waiving certain federal, state and local income taxes that result from an individual selling their home to avoid foreclosure. These steps will ensure that individuals who have to sell their homes will be able to quickly regain stable financial footing. The fund will be partially paid for by Obama’s increased penalties on lenders who acted irresponsibly and committed fraud.

How do you determine whether it's your fault or not? Pretty open ended there.