Craig Crawford's Trail Mix

Hello?

Hello, hello!

Just testing....haven't been able to post the last few days....

" It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife"

Ask any woman who is the sole support of herself and children, and she will probably tell you that the one thing that would solve most of her problems would be a wife. :--)

Unfortunately for society and children particularly is that almost no one gets to stay home any more.

Craig,

It would be a good, if almost impossible thing to do, if the Wrangle proposal could be explained to people. As I uderstand, it is revenue neutral.

One thing they really need to be doing is hitting hard on the idea that if a nation loses it's middle class, it loses it's freedom. Our middle class is slipping. They have moved the women into the market. Now the college age young are staying home. It is taking at least two but sometimes three or four incomes just to stay even with their parents standard of living, not to mention the "sandwich" generation juggling the elderly and the young.

Jamie, good one. I used to think it'd be great to have a wife around----to do the wifely things----like cook & clean. :-) And prior to that I used to fantasize about being in jail with 3 hots & a cot and NO crying 24/7 new borns around . I did live to tell about it all, though.

Craig, all the Dems have to do is say, not explain, that taxes will SAVE this country...from the ravages of BushCo. The sound byte has to be short and positive. Ah, but that won't happen in my lifetime.

tt

Come Nov 2008 this country is going to be in a full fledged recession with gasoline prices hovering at the 4 dollar mark. The repugs can spout their mantra of "no new taxes" all they want, the public ain't going to buy it. Poll after poll shows that the public is willing to accept tax increases as long as they get more services and the tax code is balanced and fair. But what the hell, it's not like the repugs have any other msg to run on! Craig you might fear that tax issue could deal a near fatal flow to the Dems but in all candor I think that makes you a party of one. Is there one if any polls show that taxes are top issue with that public at large?

Jamie maybe when and if Hillary gets elected she can order that Austin be rewritten to accommodate the feminist Sense and Sensibilities of our time!

(Oh look Brian made a pun, clever puss)

I think a lot of people would find it patriotic to pay a war tax. And so what if the goopers say Democratis are going to raise taxes...it doesn't mean people will care.

I guess lying about taxes is better than promoting racial hatred.

“All of the Democrats are promising to raise taxes and I can guarantee you this much -- that it is one promise they will keep,”

I don't want more taxes. Like Warren Buffett, I want the burden redistributed to the wealthy.

And it is far, far less expensive to pay as you go, rather than putting on the credit card for our children to pay off. Plus when you remove available M1 to pay for untaxed spending, you make it harder for business, especially small business to grow.

Do the republicans think we're stupid?

"this GOP retread of the tax-and-spend mantra that Ronald Reagan popularized against them nearly 30 years ago"

Oh, never mind. I answered my own question. Cheney got his "deficits don't matter" philosophy from Reagan. If it wasn't for Paul Volker, the '80s would have been an economic disaster.

Just more the same old repug doom and gloom scenario. It's pathetic.

"Do the republicans think we're stupid?" dnd

Sadly yes.

"Giuliani and Romney Warm Up Tax Dish in New Hampshire"

kind of like the fourth time you try to reheat Thanksgiving leftovers...not very appetizing

They''re counting on it! LOL

Taxes should be paid in relation to the percentage of wealth owned or controlled. That pretty well lets all of us off the hook except for the top 1%. lol

If Oprah Winfrey married Deepak Chopra, she'd be Oprah Chopra.

tt

And Gail would be really pissed off!

look at how many (30%) think they actually got a tax cut from the republicans.....ponderous......

"Like Warren Buffett, I want the burden redistributed to the wealthy."

Agreed, dnd!

tt

gail could marry jerry vale......

and the wealthy dont really care for all that burden shifting.....

"...And if the Iraq War continues to recede from the front burner, mainstream voters might again hunger for domestic staples such as Reagan’s tax-cut left overs."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I thought the dumbing-down of the coverage and horror of the Iraq War wouldn't begin so soon.
I expect even less and less coverage of bodies in the Tigris and blown-up civilians and wanton murders by private US security companies in the months to come.
The only news out of Iraq we get is "good news", numbers, echoed in sync with precision on all MSM outlets.
We are told the war is going splendidly, that Bush and Petraeous were right all along...that Gen. Sanchez is a cuckholded crybaby, even that Cheney and the neocons were right all along, God Bless America.
And this takes the heat off all the candidates, the hawks like Obama and Hillary and all the repuggs , save Ron Paul, who has vowed to end the "policeman of the world philosophy.
All the other very important issues, aliens, taxes, Social Security...all that stuff , which I do not minimize one iota, should still be put on the back burner until we get the nominees squarely in place. We should , before that, pick candidates based on how they plan to end the madness and slaughter in Iraq.
You'd think Johnny Come Marching Home is alive instead of in a flag draped coffin in the dead secrecy of night.
And he ain't.

BRAVO !!! TO dnd's 3:08 p.m. post.

Jamie: T Y for the JFKennedy speech on secret societies last thread. Awesome, and very much applicable today.

you type it in and then she says it and her eyes can follow the mouse......

http://www.oddcast.com/home/demos/tts/tts_example.php?sitepal

you can cause her to say the darndest things.....

the complete "Popeye Song"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UjM9UI40jk

She had no trouble whatsoever with "Cheney is an ass"

Pretty interesting, sturge.

tt

I'd go off on my reasons for why it's actually beneficial for the rich to pay more taxes than the less-than-rich, rather than being miserly, but it's da Bears v. da Broncos.

As to Jamie's point of who should pay, that fits well with history:

http://www.treasury.gov/education/fact-sheets/taxes/ustax.shtml

I found these 2 articles not only funny, but they also show what an odd turn of events things have taken for both party's.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/thompson-charges-fox-news-is-biased-against-his-campaign-2007-11-25.html

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071125/NEWS09/711250327/1001/RSS01

It's amazing what that woman says she'll do for me! I got a new best friend! Thanks for introducing us, sturgee! (I go with 'Catherine from the UK)

On that Des Moines Register article. None of her opponents had better ask straight out: "Do you really want Bill Clinton back in the White House?"

Edwards is right to tie both the bad and good to Hillary, but he will have to tread carefully.

The highlight of my time with her was when I had her answer my wife down the stairs......

but watch out....they get you hooked and then cut you off.....

Taxes are funny things. You don't want them so high that they discourage the most talented from raking in the funds and at the same time you want them high enough to provide funds for the common good. Kennedy was right to do a hefty tax cut. The biggest earners had footted the bill for WWII and the aftermath. Reagan was wrong to take it down farther not to mention what GWB did while raiding social security and dumping the cost of unfunded mandates back on the states and increasing taxes and fees for the middle class and small business.

"Taxes should be paid in relation to the percentage of wealth owned or controlled. That pretty well lets all of us off the hook except for the top 1%. lol"

First you would have to define "rich", who and what is, where and when. Are we speaking, individuals, families, corporations. Revenues generated where, here in the US or foreign? I really dislike these "one word" catch all phrases, rich or poor, most of the time they can not be defined with any clarity, and are only used by politicos to incite the masses. If asked the question, would you rather be rich than poor, I would guess 99% would say rich. Can't imagine anyone striving to be poor, not to say that isn't where you'll end-up, but was that your original intent to end-up poor? I rather doubt that. So downing the rich and expecting them to pay all the taxes for achieving wealth, is similar to rewarding yourself for remaining poor. But think back, you never wanted to be poor. Now if we take this to the next step, one world order rule, the poor here in the US would considered rich when measured against the poor in many nations, and may have to pay more taxes then they do now. Now that bit of good news won't make the poor here in the US feel any better or elevate their financial standings. Consumer tax is the only way to go. The so-called rich will pay a larger share, the so- called poor a smaller share, and the middleclass the will just keep on buying and paying.

Consumer tax my ass, looks good at first glance, has an emotional appeal but when you look at the numbers and facts it's one of the most unfair taxes there is.

The real issue is not about taxes at all, it's about the repugs pathetic attempt to scare the population into voting for them. Look at the at their rhetoric. The only thing the repugs have to offer is fear, nothing positive about moving forward. Here's the repug msg, if you vote for the Dems they will let the towel heads kill you, they'll take away your guns, and raise your taxes, not to mention letting fags get married and woman having the right to control their own bodies. The two front runners have both sold out their souls in the pathetic hope of getting the ChristoFascists to jump on their bandwagon. It's beyond pathetic, it's sickening.

Jameson,

There is a major flaw in the consumer tax. The richer you are, the less you consume as a percentage of your income. Second, it is much more expensive to be poor than it is to be rich. Just the ability to buy in bulk, make contacts where you can get deep discounts on products and services etc. puts the poor at a major disadvantage to the wealthy.

As to what is wealthy, yes 100K has a different value in New York than it does in Arkansas, but 100 K is also only two times the median income.

Certainly no corporation should be rewarded for outsourcing it's production. Any products brought back into the U.S. should have a tarriff penalty. It might make them think twice before closing down plants in the U.S.

dnd!!!! WOTTA game! I thought it was over before Berrian made a GREAT catch at the end. One of the clasic games of the season.

COREY ... don't feel too bad...Justin Fargas, the Raider that beat your Chiefs with that great run, is a Michigan Wolverine.
I was at M Stadium the horrible day he broke his leg.

Dex,
Shit. The Broncos snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

dnd....
I was rooting for your Broncos.....
but Dex is right...... what a game!....

now Gooooooooo Patriots!....

quite a game however kicking to #23 of the Bears is not a smart move in any regard. There were 3 touchdowns in 25 seconds or so.

yo soy Horsedooty!

Short of Money, G.O.P. Is Enlisting Rich Candidates
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/26/us/politics/26recruit.html?hp

Big payday for KO. A cameo on the Simpsons, and a repeat of his episode of Family Guy.

Jamie said, "There is a major flaw in the consumer tax. The richer you are, the less you consume as a percentage of your income. Second, it is much more expensive to be poor than it is to be rich. Just the ability to buy in bulk, make contacts where you can get deep discounts on products and services etc. puts the poor at a major disadvantage to the wealthy."

Well put!

tt

Jamie, worth repeating, again, "Certainly no corporation should be rewarded for outsourcing it's production. Any products brought back into the U.S. should have a tarriff penalty. It might make them think twice before closing down plants in the U.S."

tt

Hi, everyone! Long time listener, first time caller... I met Craig on the campaign trail in Laconia, NH last week, and he asked if I thought Romney was going to win NH. I said that while I wasn't predicting a winner, I did think that McCain and Paul would surprise a lot of people. I commented that I see tons of Paul signs in my lengthy travels throughout the state. So yesterday on the way home from spending the weekend in Montreal, the friend I was travelling with decided to count the yard signs from the moment we entered New Hampshire in West Lebanon until we reached my home in Meredith -- approximately 55 miles of rural state routes. Final Republican tally: 11 signs for Paul, 9 for Romney, 4 for Huckabee, 1 for Tancredo. I emailed Craig with the results, and he asked me to share them with you. As I told Craig, however, the clear overall winner was For Rent. (I hear his foreign policy position paper makes for good readin'.) So, I didn't get any evidence to support my McCain hunch, but I'll stick with it. Hope everyone had a wonderful Thanksgiving! Craig, be sure to let me know when you're next in central NH...a hot toddy at the local pub will be waiting for you!

One for Tancrado? Really? I bet it was easy to see being illuminated by the light from the burning cross!

Brian! *L*

LOL, Brian! When I sent my email to Craig with the results of my unofficial yard sign poll, I listed: "1 for Tancredo (really)" but left the "(really)" off my post here. (Didn't want to editorialize on my first post...) :-) Yes, really...and it was one of those HUGE signs, too. It appeared to be on a piece of commercial property as opposed to someone's front lawn. I would have expected to see at least one McCain sign before I'd ever see a Tancredo sign. But my brother made a good point: If the 55 miles I traversed had started in the southern part of the state by the Massachusetts border, I surely would have seen McCain signs. The Tancredo sign was in Belknap County, which had the highest percentage of Republican voting in the 2006 election of any county in the state.

I posted saturday night about the yard signs here in my small city in NW Ohio...still, just over 11 months to the election, only Ron Paul signs. A helluva lot of them. You might think there'd be a Kucinich sign...this IS Ohio! I am gonna try to find one for my yard.
I feel strongly that Romney wins NH.

wonder why Trent Lott is quitting....qho is offering him a big fat job.....