U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
October 03, 2008 03:50 PM UTC
94 Comments
Sarah Palin’s folksiness wears me out. She reminds me of G.W. Bush. With lipstick. Joe Biden clearly demonstrated
more command of the issues. But Palin got off her talking points, and also, a few snarky asides, and also, managed to run her run on sentences together until, also, she hoped we would not notice she did not answer the questions.
Maybe you should tell Hizbollah that. After all, they were kicked out of Lebanon for a time by the US and the French without their knowledge.
And tell China about Biden’s invisible plan to export clean coal technology to them. They’ll be so happy to hear it.
Misrepresented McCain’s position completely, according to ABC News. And had the wrong name of the guy running things in Afghanistan.
And…
.
http://www.cleancoaltechnologi…
.
Except for that first unit. After that, they will figure out how to do it themselves. “Clean coal” really isn’t rocket science, which the Chinese have proven themselves capable of.
It’s just like Boening selling aircraft on the condition that major assemblies be built in China to get the deal. And American CEO’s find that just fine.
Most Americans don’t watch cable news or read the newspapers. They will get a 5 second sound bite and decide they like her, or don’t like her.
The issue is she is now defendable. Before yesterday she was not. Will this win for the McCain camp – no way, nothing has changed.
100% of the women coming into our restaurant over the last two days do not like her. And yes, I have asked them all – small sample I know. The female Repubs are confused why Kay Bailey Hutchinson is not in line to be President. Sarah Palin is still an insult to intelligent women, both Democratic and Republican.
Are you going to post the fact check info on the speech last night? Coming in to work today I heard on the radio reports about the authenticity of claims made last night.
Biden exaggerated some claims and compared different funding for the spending on the wars.
Palin exaggerated and was flat out wrong on many of her statements.
Why do I even watch these things?!
http://www.factcheck.org/elect…
If they never lied, they wouldn’t be running for office. 🙂
they wouldn’t be running for office if they weren’t liars?
I wish the moderators in the US would be as difficult/tenacious as foreign journalists when following up on questions.
If the statement is false, exaggerated or the candidate doesn’t answer the question – call them on it.
Left to their own devices, Pols will present the spin and hope no one follows up with checking the truth.
by the campaign against her. And also, the McCain people specifically negotiated a no-followups clause into the debate rules. So even if Ifill wanted to discuss specific things or demand a candidate ask a question, she didn’t have much leeway to do so.
Biden could have demanded she answer a question, but then a lot of people would have called him “mean,” and so he let her get away with some dodges.
Palin could have tried to correct Biden on some of the misstatements that Laughing Boy pointed out, but since she clearly didn’t know anything, she found that difficult.
The profession, for the most part, is a joke. They don’t know history, culture, can’t spell (homonyms go right through spell check.)
You can’t be an antagonist, either, when your questions will put you in the persona non grata part of the room.
The rise of internet as a news source has been a double-edged sword. Yes, I love being able to keep up with happenings on a minute-to-minute basis. Accessing commentary and analysis 24-7 is exciting and wonderful.
But there are two unfortunate upshots:
1. Traditional news sources don’t have the cash to invest in time-intensive investigative journalism, nor can they afford hiring more qualified reporters. Have you noticed that most of the old-timers don’t have bylines in the Post and RMN anymore? Many were bought out and laid off due to financial pressures. That means there are “greener” folks–and fewer of them–to churn out the news. Why the financial pressures? Fewer people subscribe to papers because they read websites–and their ad revenue has crashed due to Craig’s List, etc. Broadcast news seems to be having the same problem, but to a lesser degree.
2. For news, many folks only seek out blogs that validate their worldview, which tends to polarize us as a society. For conservatives, that would include WorldNetDaily and Face the State, while for liberals it would be DailyKos and ProgressNow. It’s reassuring that Pols contributers are a little more well-rounded and always demand links. But the point is, the more we as a people rely on opinion sites as opposed to news sites, the more we build a chasm between left and right.
I lament the declining quality of news, too, but understand that the rise of the internet which we all love so much is partly to blame.
Okay, let the drubbing begin! 🙂
You’re absolutely right.
To quote Barack.
But there is a difference, easily detectable, of an honest error and obfuscation. And one can also see that one candidate makes some boners and another uses mistruths for heavy artillery. McCain and Palin are certainly the latter.
One category to completely ignore most of the time is “He/she voted for/against X.” With congress able to tack on so many amendments to a bill, the reasons to vote for or against are many and certainly don’t fit into a sound bit.
Morgan Carroll opined to me once that congress needs a Colorado style “single topic” rule for bills. She is absolutely correct.
He came and had a Sam Adams. Nice guy, very smart.
Nice to finally meet you, Danny. I look forward to more discussions on our Colorado Congressional Delegation. LOL
Your website made the place look awesome. And I would really like to meet you as well.
Palin is so much smarter than people (including myself) gave her credit for. She came out swinging at Biden and Obama, kept hard to the talking points, and was probably the most conversational, colloquial VP debater in US history (modern anyhow.)
She pretended like she was on the ropes, much like she did when McCain first selected her. The McCain campaign was on the defensive after the interview, but Palin’s debate performance gave them a little bit of energy going into the final stretch.
No matter what happens in November, I have a strong feeling that we will see Gov. Palin running for higher office again sometime in the future.
“I have a strong feeling that we will see Gov. Palin running for higher office again sometime in the future.”
Haven’t we had enough ? We’ve got a lightweight in the White House right now, and look where we are ? What the hell is wrong with Americans – are they blind ?
And the GOP is absolutely crazy for her. Right now she’s probably the most popular Republican in the world.
From Daily Kos/Research 2000:
Yesterday’s polling, the first after the debate, was the strongest Obama day picked up by the R2K tracking poll. He led 51-42, and therefore, Obama had a +9 on Sa to go with +5 Th, +7 Fri (MoE +/- 5.1 for individual days.) Sarah Palin’s fav/unfav are now -10 (40/50), and Obama is +27 (his improvement is via dropping his unfav to 32.)
And although the Kos polls are the only one to have her with a net unfavorable rating, she’s also lower than McCain in other polls.
people DON’T like Palin all that much on closer examination. When she was announced as VP choice, Obama lost most of his big advantage with women but since then he’s gotten it all back and then some.
The idea of Palin was apparently more appealing than the reality. Of course she has a core of enthusiasts but she now seems to be doing McCain more harm than good with lots of segments he needs like independents and undecideds.
If McCain/Palin loses (fingers crossed) I predict she’ll never again be a serious contender on the national scene, though she may remain as a religious right celebrity.
This shouldn’t be overlooked:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/…
Mr. Krauthammer holds his nose and predicts a victory for senator Obama. I’m not sure senator McCain can afford too many of these, because if the even the conservative media hops on the bandwagon, there probably isn’t too much time to get it back.
Krauthammer is wrong on almost everything. If he thinks Obama is going to win, that is very bad news for Obama.
…was watching Peggy Noonan on the Daily Show and thinking some of what she said actually made some sense.
Very scary. I guess the rats have jumped ship and are now scrambling to find a new home.
Wasn’t he? Buehler? Copernicus? Palin?
Try not to let Krauthammer get to you, Dave.
I’m just saying, given the media’s need to churn presidential election stories, things are getting dangerously close to neighborhood of the first “is it over?” pundit roundtable.
Of course that doesn’t control the outcome of the election, but it further shifts the conventional wisdom.
People are wagering with REAL MONEY.
Hold Corporate Bosses, Political Bosses, and Union Bosses accountable.
Their PAY-OFFS removed Amendment 53, 57, and trampled on peoples rights.
He/she/it is getting boring.
.
I suppose you prefer reasoned argument and explanation and facts
over
trite oversimplifications that tell me nothing about the issue ?
Me, give me slogans over substance every time!
.
At least your consistent.
p.s. This is an open thread you crackhead.
The adults just spanked libertine. 😉
Colorado government workers have the Right-to-Work, shouldn’t all Coloradans have the Right-to-Work?
Your position is zzzzzzzzzzzz
PALIN: “I do take issue with some of the principle there with that redistribution of wealth principle that seems to be espoused by you.”
AMERICANS: Well, we are sure you will get right on stopping those $3200 wealth redistribution checks going to every Alaskan from the grease the skids O&G arctic slush fund.
PALIN: “I like being able to answer these tough questions without the filter, even, of the mainstream media kind of telling viewers what they’ve just heard.”
AMERICANS: Our media tried that with W.and his Iraq war and learned the lesson of “fool me once”. Hopefully, it will never happen again.
I have to admit that I didn’t really understand Sarah Palin’s logic until I read a primer on Palin speak.
Oh, and who is that running up the white flag of surrender in Michigan?
GM, Ford and Chrysler?
Oooooh, you mean ole’ Johnny Mac the “Original Maverick”. It is the mavericky thing to do.
Will continue to feel the crunch so long as people can’t get loans to buy cars.
…until the get out of the 1990’s and get ahead of the technology curve. And, design cars that people actually want and aren’t total pieces of crap.
Until then Honda and Toyota are going to continue to kick their sorry behinds.
I don’t think tightening of credit is totally a bad thing. America is as addicted to easy credit as we are oil. People need to learn to live within their means, defer gratification and be more responsible with their money.
A car when their wages aren’t increasing as fast as inflation?
I agree with you that people are addicted to credit, but that doesn’t mean it’s bad. People should be buying cars they can afford within their means, but that just means buying the $16,000 economy vehicle, and not the $35,000 SUV.
I agree with you 100% that Detroit has brought some of this on itself by not making affordable, fuel efficient, clean energy vehicles a priority.
But if people can’t get a loan, there’s no way they can afford even the most modest new vehicle. I guess that’s good news for Rocky’s though.
…they could do what I did (and my parents before me) and scrimp and save every last penny to pay cash–or at least enough of a down payment to make the monthly payment something they can afford. Deferred gratification/living within one’s means.
I know, it is a radical idea. Guess it is just the Iowan in me. But, there is no entitlement to owning a car–much less a brand new one.
If the government wants to push people into newer/”greener” cars and trucks, I guess they will have to make it attractive enough through tax incentives and the like.
The biggest failure of our country in the 21st century is to pretend a healthcare system based on the 1930’s is how to be competitive against countries with a year 2008 healthcare system.
Once our healthcare system is realistic our country, or what is left of it after the last 8 years, can then start a long climb to become a world leader once again.
The government had slapped on wage and price controls to curb inflation. Henry Kaiser was looking for a way to hire workers away from competitors to build his ships. He hit upon the idea of offering them health care and hired “Rosie the Riveters” in droves. (p.s., Rosie was actually a welder, but that’s another tale.)
When the government accepted that idea and exempted such fringe benefits from income tax, the employer-based health care system was born. The problem is how to extend that system to the 47 million Americans without health care without unsettling the 253 million that do. Good luck with that!
Thank you for the correction. I just talked to the UAW about when the autoworkers got employer paid healthcare. Beginning in the 1950’s they were able to purchase healthcare out of their wages, then in the 1960’s healthcare became a company paid benefit. In the 1970’s it was extended to retirees.
The way to get healthcare to all citizens, and visitors is to break the thinking that has encased our working families and companies for so many decades. We need to look to successful countries such as Canada and Great Britain. We have to break the pharma and health insurance control of big money politics and elect politicians willing and strong enough to bring about the change necessary for universal healthcare.
As I talk to more and more citizens of Aurora and the Aurora-Denver Metro region, I learn so many are without healthcare now. Their employers are dropping it as an option even. This is what we are facing as a country. A return to those fabulous years of peasantry when do it yourself surgery was so popular.
We have seen Congress is not up to any task that requires any type of “brass”. However, individual states are working on this,with Massachusettes providing a workable solution, or as best can be provided at a state level.
Once enough states have created statewide coverage, several paths open up. One would be Congress might consider trying some type of universal healthcare, another would be a Supreme Court decision clarifying the interstate commerce actions of healthcare between the states or the president might see it as a high priority to force through Congres.
But, whatever, our healthcare system is broken right now. It needs to be revamped in to a healthcare system of 2008 and beyond.
but if you’re suggesting that the Supreme Court can just mandate that everyone gets it, that’s something of a reach.
Massachusetts style is better than nothing but ultimately, we need a Canadian style single payer. My solution: lower the age for Medicare to birth.
Your job: Find a way to pay for my solution!
If there is enough of a mess of interstate commerce caused by several states with different healthcare solutions the Supremes would have to step in to clarify the issues, which would then be up to Congress to porvide some type of correction. This has been done before, breaking the “seperate but equal” lie in a series of cases from the ’50’s on. The Supremes would not be making a decision for Universal healthcare though, just what is unconstitutional.
Pay for it?! Well, considering what $700B spent on Iraq and now another $850B spent on Wall St (which was a blank check for Wall St, and $150B of pork for 50 states) – all that could have bought a lot of healthcare. ( I know it is debt though, causing future problems for our country)
The long term solution will probably be a hybrid of Canadian, British, and other countries that have working models which can be modified for our country.
The Supreme Court has no power to regulate interstate commerce. Congress does. The court can only decide whether it abuses that power. Forget about begging Alito and Scalia to solve the question and tell Copngress to do its job.
You are focusing on only one possible path of the many that are possible in bringing about the impetus to universal healthcare. Supremes do not regulate, and I am not saying they regulate, they decide constitutionality. They might have cases about disparity in care between states showing up. This may show up in cases regarding restrictions of same-sex healthcare, the “separate and unequal” type of care.
The current Court is one in which we will be lucky to keep away from making decisions in many cases. Later courts will have to be less reliant on the 1760 dictionary. But, the importance of the Supreme Court makeup in this election is for a discourse other than this one.
I did point out the trillion bucks is debt, not usable. But, I did it to show how our Congress and people can see large dollar numbers being used for one project. Although, many of us do not agree with why the debt is being created, the shift away from no regulation to a little re-regulation can occur without the world completely collapsing. A shift from our current system to a universal coverage system can also occur without the world collapsing.
Besides the role of the Supremes iis only that of raising a flag about situations that must be resolved legislativly. And,it is only one of several possible paths that would be important towards universal healthcare.
Medicare is not great in it’s current version. The VA healthcare system is very good, but underfunded like Medicare. Again, Bob has pointed out some of the possible models the U.S. could use. I am very sure that our Congress would create some variation of the Canadian, British and other possible models. The difficulty is keeping the insurance companies from making up the U.S. model.
The funding mechanism is where the U.S. is going to need politicians with lots of brass to tell the insurance and pharmacutical companies they are going to undergo major surgery in the U.S.
VAT is one option. Another option would a budget item, like the defense department, through the income tax, keeping in mind those who would be major users of the healthcare system are the ones most likely to not be working. Another possible funding variation may include employer payments.
My major disagreement with the Canadian model is the lack of national uniform care decisions. Each Province can install limitations that other Provinces do not have. Uniformity and equality are important. We do not want a state like North Dakota having it’s board decide to not fund birth control.
But no matter what the U.S. needs to change away from our current system towards a system taking the burden of costs off the employer and employee.
Forgot to add in:
Under universal healthcare Medicare would be absorbed or replaced, so that budget item is changed. Also, the V.A. healthcare system might be absorbed too. Universal healthcare would mean universal. And the monies spent on those two would be moved into the funding of universal healthcare.
…with your Medicare idea. Effectively, it performs the same functions now that any of the BigHealth carriers do–claims, pricing, enrollment, product/coverage development, claims processing, contracting doctors and facilities. All of those function exist now. It wouldn’t be a huge stretch to expand Medicare and offer it to everyone.
BigHealth is really nothing more than an middleman, driving up the administrative costs. However, they could continue to provide supplemental coverage to those who desire and can afford it.
is that it lets the private sector provide the care while government provides the insurance. Socialized medicine british style doesn’t work very well since government is just not very efficient at providing services. Socialized insurance , on the other hand, is ideal for government because universal coverage is the ultimate risk averaging.
The question is how to pay for it. Pam’s notioons are useless — the bailout is made of loan guarantees, and in the end might cost us nothing. In any event, it’s a one-time charge unable to cover annual recurring expenses.
The best way would be to adopt a national value addewd tax — a kind of national sales tax. Every time you pay $1 for a McDonald’s double cheeseburger, you’d pay a nickel for your health insurance. There would be modest co-pays to discourage overuse but health care would otherwise be privately provided, universal and free at point of service. That’;s how Kaiser works. I’ve been in it 36 years and the focus on [preventative medicine saves money and lives alike.
A couple of years ago some outfit surveyed Americans and their opinions on the care that they receive.
Contrary to common knowledge, the VA administration came in firs place. The VA is on the British model, note.
Health care for our military and their families are also “on the British plan.” (Full disclosure: I was born in the Chelsea Naval Hospital and other than misusing those forceps……..)
Note, too, that even after 70 years the Brits haven’t voted to change their health care system. They certainly could if they wanted to.
until Bill Clinton reformed it, the VA was a mess. I used the VA/British vs. Medicare/Canadian models for many years and remain convinced the Canadian is the better.
Of course, voters won’t change a free lunch. But Canadians wouldn’t scrap theirs either.
And the mix of provideers in Canada, paid for by a single insurer, gives Canadians a choice and quality that Brits lack.
I also had health care in the military … and it sucked. Stay away from Army dentists, yeeshh.
Either system, brit or canadian, beats the hell out of our lottery, of course. But give me the North Country Fair over Old Blighty.
Using the government as the insurer, and the private sector as the provider, makes sense. I am not sure I would want the government providing health care, but I sure as hell DON’T WANT private companies providing the insurance – it’s exactly bass ackwards.
There are huge savings involved in ending the profit skimming, fraud, denial of procedures, and paperwork involved when you take private health insurance companies out of the picture.
They provide no real value and they profit from a flawed system at the expense and misery of millions of Americans.
Insurers spend at least a third of their money making sure people don’t get health care — screening out high risks and denying claims. The money they waste in that unproductive effort would more than pay the costs of treating the 47 million uninsured.
Insurance, along with national defense, is one of the few things government does best.
On the other hand, if you want a vision of hell, imagine a government run brothel.
Ooops, I forgot that’s not a figment of my imagination. It’s called Congress.
Funny how that line wouldn’t seem to bring out them out of work blue collar folk there.
From Rich Lowry at National Review:
In other news, the Barista really is flirting with you, and in addition, that stripper really likes you.
…of having to look at Ann Coulter, MoDo, K-Lo and Malkin makes someone like Caribou Barbie that much more attractive to some gullible people.
To me, the evil radiates from the inside out. Do. Not. Want.
Now I understand why I wasn’t impressed with her performance. I’ve had more than a few cases where a woman tried to hit me up for favors (or money) with smiles and winks and were terribly surprised when I was immune to their charms.
I’m equally shallow though, if the handsome Obama winked at me… <laugh> Well, no not really. Being a nerd first and gay second I tend to live in my head and so when a person is speaking I tend to hear the words rather than noticing looks or body language.
Matthew
When I look at Palin, I think Ugh.
Listening to the likes of Pat Buchanan and all the other GOP creeps who think she’s some dynamite hottie… the Milf4VP.com crap and such, its disgusting.
Like this post that Kos posted on his site yesterday, on the post-debate ‘analysis’ from Faux Noise:
No, Brit, I can’t. I need the whole package, not an empty wrapper.
Unfair, Unbalanced and Unafraid ….to make an ass out of himself.
and Palin winked, my wife asked me “what the hell was that for”
I thought, you sly dog Fidel.
I was surprised. Sarah Palin did not self-destruct on stage.
On the contrary, she did not come across as a ditzy former beauty pageant winner but instead as an engaged, energetic, confident, and upbeat condidate who could disagree with her opponent without being grumpy and disagreeable.
In sum, she was the opposite of McCain during his first debate with Obama.
I’m still not voting for McCain-Palin because of my profound differences with the GOP ticket on almost every issue, and because the Repub ticket is tantamount to a third term for the Shrub. But if the Repubs were smart, they’d ask McBush to step aside for the good of the nation and their party (Country First, Party Second, Ego Third?) and let Palin take the baton…
Both Palin and Biden had jobs to do last night.
She had to avoid a train wreck, which she accomplished.
He had to avoid shooting from the hip and putting his foot in his mouth, and he did.
Richard Trumka on racism and the 2008 election. Great speech.
That really was good. Wish Gecko would watch it.
If Ralph says it, it must be so.
Here’s an interesting game. Think all the way back to high school English class and remember how much fun diagramming sentences was. Now diagram the sentences the candidates used in their debates.
McCain: Nuclear power is not only important as far as eliminating our dependence on foreign oil but it’s also responsibility as far as climate change is concerned and the issue I have been involved in for many, many years and I’m proud of the work of the work that I’ve done there along with President Clinton.
Obama: Mostly that’s just me opposing George Bush’s wrong headed policies since I’ve been in Congress but I think it is that it is also important to recognize I work with Tom Coburn, the most conservative, one of the most conservative Republicans who John already mentioned to set up what we call a Google for government saying we’ll list every dollar of federal spending to make sure that the taxpayer can take a look and see who, in fact, is promoting some of these spending projects that John’s been railing about.
Biden: But if it did, I would carry out Barack Obama’s policy, his policies of reinstating the middle class, making sure they get a fair break, making sure they have access to affordable health insurance, making sure they get serious tax breaks, making sure we can help their children get to college, making sure there is an energy policy that leads us in the direction of not only toward independence and clean environment but an energy policy that creates 5 million new jobs, a foreign policy that ends this war in Iraq, a foreign policy that goes after the one mission the American public gave the president after 9/11, to get and capture or kill bin Laden and to eliminate al Qaeda.
Palin: And Secretary Rice, having recently met with leaders on one side or the other there, also, still in these waning days of the Bush administration, trying to forge that peace, and that needs to be done, and that will be top of an agenda item, also, under a McCain-Palin administration.
Sure, I intentionally looked for the long winded sentences but that, in itself, was surprising. As much as Biden talks, he’s pretty good at forming short, coherent sentences. It’s hard to find tough examples from him. McCain was the next hardest to find examples for. Obama can provide a few tough, but doable sentences. Everytime Palin gets flustered, she spews examples.
from FiveThirtyEight
I think Rush just had some of those “little starbursts” go off.
In his pants.
a “tingle up his leg”?
As of yesterday evening the number of registered Dems in Arapahoe County was only 370 less than the number of registered Republicans! Have checked this out with the Arapahoe County Dems. It’s real. The Obama voter registration drive has been relentless and the story is probably similar in counties in states all across the country. Yes, they have to turn out to vote but even so, pretty jaw-dropping
But it certainly is good news for down ticket Dems in races where none of the candidates have a lot of wide spread name recognition. On the other hand, in a world where that number is possible in Arapahoe County, what ISN’T at least possible?
Here’s how it works…
Answer each of the questions. Each time you side with Obama, you’ll score a point. Each time you do not side with Obama, you’ll lose a point.
If you end with a + score, vote for Obama.
If you end with a – score, consider if Obama’s positions are really what you want for America for the next 4 years.
http://www.barackobamatest.com…
If you feel compelled, post your results, but just be honest and true to yourself.
do you favor or oppose clubbing cute puppies to death type poll.
with the one about the “death tax” being a notable exception.
But it was just long as hell. I was kind of curious about what the score or reward would be at the end, but I got way too bored halfway through after a bunch of nearly identical taxation questions.
I do agree that this survey is extremely long for but the results are pretty amazing. I was surprised as to the end result myself. Well worth finishing.
.
And they are going to also tap into the $700 B Bush just loaned to a guy who sent him an email from Nigeria. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10…
The big problem with Danny’s analysis and endorsement of the bailout
was his assumption that the folks who made this mess have learned their lesson and are chastened.
Instead, they have learned their lesson, and are going to set fire to that taxpayer subsidy/ wealth transfer to come up with even more highly leveraged, less-understood gambles that promise them high commissions now, even if the assets evaporate next week.
.
is that you’re looking at this with a pre-
9/11credit crisis point of view. We are now in a different world than the day beforeSeptember 11th, 2001September 29th, 2008.We’ll hunt down and catch
Osama Bin Ladenthe Wall St. crooks if we have to chase them to the gates of hell.Or deeply disturbing.
must not really speak for you. This is not politically correct but can inform Republican and Democrats alike about the issues that Barack Obama stands for. You are not forced to share your results just look into the matters and then decide for yourself.