The 2,000 lb elephant in the room

[George Gervin's Afro]

Look people have been dancing around the race issue during this whole election cycle. Race is playing a part in this election whether anyone wants to admit it or not. African Americans, for the most part, will take it personally if Obama doesn't win. Hillary has a solid majority of Latino support behind her that Obama will need to win in the general election. No one knows if he can garner the hispanic support he needs to win in November.

Last night at my caucus 311 people were counted as delegates.

225 for Obama
185+ African american
30 anglo
10 hispanic

86 for Clinton
60 anglo
25 hispanic
1 African American woman...


Race will play a part in this election whether anyone wants to admit it our not.

I am hispanic and support Clinton only because I don't think Obama is ready..

[BonnerDynasty]

Just wait till the illegals can vote. Obamania will crumble!

[AFBlue]

Question is....

If Obama wins, will Latinos be so turned off that they vote for the old white guy?

Or If Clinton wins, will African Americans be so turned off that they vote for the old white guy?

I'm not so sure...

So while I agree that it might play a part in the selection of a democratic presidential nominee, I think it matter to a much smaller degree in the general election. Fact is, minority voters (be they Latino or African American) tend to go Democrat anyways.

[some_user86]

Look people have been dancing around the race issue during this whole election cycle. Race is playing a part in this election whether anyone wants to admit it or not. African Americans, for the most part, will take it personally if Obama doesn't win. Hillary has a solid majority of Latino support behind her that Obama will need to win in the general election. No one knows if he can garner the hispanic support he needs to win in November.

Last night at my caucus 311 people were counted as delegates.

225 for Obama
185+ African american
30 anglo
10 hispanic

86 for Clinton
60 anglo
25 hispanic
1 African American woman...


Race will play a part in this election whether anyone wants to admit it our not.

I am hispanic and support Clinton only because I don't think Obama is ready..

Ready for what? To do the cha-cha? How freaking ready was JFK? Bush and Clinton both were governors. Yet Clinton may have been more "ready". Why is that?

Both of them are going to be surrounded by experienced advisors every step of the way. They aren't going to make decisions in a friggin vacuum.

At the end of the day, it's about who has the better judgement. Who has the better willingness to do what's right for the country above campaign promises and partisan bullshit? It ain't Hillary.

Better judgement is why Bill was better at the job compared to Bush (well, not always... he didn't have judgement enough to stop himself from getting a BJ in office.).

[smeagol]

Look people have been dancing around the race issue during this whole election cycle. Race is playing a part in this election whether anyone wants to admit it or not. African Americans, for the most part, will take it personally if Obama doesn't win. Hillary has a solid majority of Latino support behind her that Obama will need to win in the general election. No one knows if he can garner the hispanic support he needs to win in November.

Last night at my caucus 311 people were counted as delegates.

225 for Obama
185+ African american
30 anglo
10 hispanic

86 for Clinton
60 anglo
25 hispanic
1 African American woman...


Race will play a part in this election whether anyone wants to admit it our not.

I am hispanic and support Clinton only because I don't think Obama is ready..

I always though you and RtD were black.

One wrong . . . one to go . . .

[CubanMustGo]

2,000 pounds isn't much of an elephant (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_average_weight_of_an_elephant) :elephant

[Ignignokt]

Look people have been dancing around the race issue during this whole election cycle. Race is playing a part in this election whether anyone wants to admit it or not. African Americans, for the most part, will take it personally if Obama doesn't win. Hillary has a solid majority of Latino support behind her that Obama will need to win in the general election. No one knows if he can garner the hispanic support he needs to win in November.

Last night at my caucus 311 people were counted as delegates.

225 for Obama
185+ African american
30 anglo
10 hispanic

86 for Clinton
60 anglo
25 hispanic
1 African American woman...


Race will play a part in this election whether anyone wants to admit it our not.

I am hispanic and support Clinton only because I don't think Obama is ready..



suck me off, racist.

[101A]

Look people have been dancing around the race issue during this whole election cycle. Race is playing a part in this election whether anyone wants to admit it or not. African Americans, for the most part, will take it personally if Obama doesn't win. Hillary has a solid majority of Latino support behind her that Obama will need to win in the general election. No one knows if he can garner the hispanic support he needs to win in November.

Last night at my caucus 311 people were counted as delegates.

225 for Obama
185+ African american
30 anglo
10 hispanic

86 for Clinton
60 anglo
25 hispanic
1 African American woman...


Race will play a part in this election whether anyone wants to admit it our not.

I am hispanic and support Clinton only because I don't think Obama is ready..Not just race; women go for Hillary FAR more than Obama.

Democrats are Racist AND Sexist

[inconvertible]

Is this some kind of code for Oprah?

[G-Nob]

Its not about race, its about whats right. Right now, uniting the country is the right thing to do. Hillary causes more division.

[boutons_]

Of the tons of comments here and on the web, my biggest fear is that Hillary's game will be defined as "I'm entitled to the Presidency. Gimme! It's mine. And if I can't have it, no other Dem will have it."

The TX/OH success of her recent negativity and personal attacks on Obamba (he's not a Muslim "as far as I know" will certainly say "keep going, Rove-like, dirty, personal, and scummy. Destroy Obama (and alienate his supporters into not voting at all, giving the election of InSaine.)"

If the Dems are kept in the energizing national spotlight up the convention with postive campaigs, then great. The Dems will win. But if Hillary take the campaign unrelentingly ugly and personal (Obama will have to respond similarly because Americans respond to negative shit), the Dems could tear them selves apart and lose the election.

Racism and sexism are huge deciders in this race, as is name-ism (vote against real, given name of Hussein, but adore a fake, taken name like John (Wayne) :lol )

Never misunderestimate the stupidity the American circus watchers.

[xrayzebra]

Of the tons of comments here and on the web, my biggest fear is that Hillary's game will be defined as "I'm entitled to the Presidency. Gimme! It's mine. And if I can't have it, no other Dem will have it."

The TX/OH success of her recent negativity and personal attacks on Obamba (he's not a Muslim "as far as I know" will certainly say "keep going, Rove-like, dirty, personal, and scummy. Destroy Obama (and alienate his supporters into not voting at all, giving the election of InSaine.)"

If the Dems are kept in the energizing national spotlight up the convention with postive campaigs, then great. The Dems will win. But if Hillary take the campaign unrelentingly ugly and personal (Obama will have to respond similarly because Americans respond to negative shit), the Dems could tear them selves apart and lose the election.

Racism and sexism are huge deciders in this race, as is name-ism (vote against real, given name of Hussein, but adore a fake, taken name like John (Wayne) :lol )

Never misunderestimate the stupidity the American circus watchers.

Guess who boutons is voting for? It aint Billary.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Of the tons of comments here and on the web, my biggest fear is that Hillary's game will be defined as "I'm entitled to the Presidency. Gimme! It's mine. And if I can't have it, no other Dem will have it."

The TX/OH success of her recent negativity and personal attacks on Obamba (he's not a Muslim "as far as I know" will certainly say "keep going, Rove-like, dirty, personal, and scummy. Destroy Obama (and alienate his supporters into not voting at all, giving the election of InSaine.)"

If the Dems are kept in the energizing national spotlight up the convention with postive campaigs, then great. The Dems will win. But if Hillary take the campaign unrelentingly ugly and personal (Obama will have to respond similarly because Americans respond to negative shit), the Dems could tear them selves apart and lose the election.

Racism and sexism are huge deciders in this race, as is name-ism (vote against real, given name of Hussein, but adore a fake, taken name like John (Wayne) :lol )

Never misunderestimate the stupidity the American circus watchers.


So Obama plays tough politics and Clinton's smear people.. :rolleyes
So when is a campaign not personal? Please give me an example of Clinton getting ugly..Hear it all the time but no one ver produces anything to back it up..



KROFT: You don't believe that Senator Obama is a Muslim?

CLINTON: Of course not. I mean, that's -- you know, there is no basis for that. You know, I take him on the basis of what he says. And, you know, there isn't any reason to doubt that.

KROFT: And you said you'd take Senator Obama at his word that he's not a Muslim.

CLINTON: Right. Right.

KROFT: You don't believe that he's a Muslim --

CLINTON: No. No. Why would I? There's no --

KROFT: -- or implying, right?

CLINTON: No, there is nothing to base that on, as far as I know.

KROFT: It's just scurrilous --

CLINTON: Look, I have been the target of so many ridiculous rumors. I have a great deal of sympathy for anybody who gets, you know, smeared with the kind of rumors that go on all the time.


So are you taking things out of context boutons?Of course you are..

[some_user86]

You know, the experience thing is such bullcrap anyways.

She can't win on that argument, because she's going to be running against McCain. He'll say, "You want experience? Can't beat me in experience!"

Really, anyone who is favoring experience should go ahead and vote for McCain anyways. Because he's got more than both candidates combined.

[George Gervin's Afro]

You know, the experience thing is such bullcrap anyways.

She can't win on that argument, because she's going to be running against McCain. He'll say, "You want experience? Can't beat me in experience!"

Really, anyone who is favoring experience should go ahead and vote for McCain anyways. Because he's got more than both candidates combined.


Does experience matter or not?

[some_user86]

Does experience matter or not?

Not. Better judgement trumps experience.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Not. Better judgement trumps experience.


How do you know Obama has better judgement than the other 2?

[PixelPusher]

Does experience matter or not?
Not as much as judgement, particularly since our political system rarely punishes politicians for how they vote; so they just keep getting re-elected in their safely gerrymandered district, and then have "experience".

[George Gervin's Afro]

Not as much as judgement, particularly since our political system rarely punishes politicians for how they vote; so they just keep getting re-elected in their safely gerrymandered district, and then have "experience".


My point is that no one knows anything about Obama other than he is good lokking and articulate... Wow he's qualified to be president..

[some_user86]

How do you know Obama has better judgement than the other 2?

Hilary voted against her conscience in Iraq, created the HMO mess we live in today (brilliant healthcare plan, Hil), wants a healthcare mandate, and supported NAFTA and is now against it (switching sides; can't have it both ways, Hil).

For the record, I like NAFTA. I don't think Obama is serious about withdrawing from NAFTA (as evidenced by the Canadian calls he made), and I don't think he would be able to if he tried. The unions that back him aren't against NAFTA. Hilary, on the other hand, is practically bound to do everything possible to withdraw from NAFTA if she wants to win a second term. The unions that support her are very anti-NAFTA.

[some_user86]

My point is that no one knows anything about Obama other than he is good lokking and articulate... Wow he's qualified to be president..

We know plenty about Hilary to know she isn't the one we want.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Hilary voted against her conscience in Iraq, created the HMO mess we live in today (brilliant healthcare plan, Hil), wants a healthcare mandate, and supported NAFTA and is now against it (switching sides; can't have it both ways, Hil).

For the record, I like NAFTA. I don't think Obama is serious about withdrawing from NAFTA (as evidenced by the Canadian calls he made), and I don't think he would be able to if he tried. The unions that back him aren't against NAFTA. Hilary, on the other hand, is practically bound to do everything possible to withdraw from NAFTA if she wants to win a second term. The unions that support her are very anti-NAFTA.


Sort of like me voting against my conscience because Obama's cooler than Mccain..

[PixelPusher]

My point is that no one knows anything about Obama other than he is good lokking and articulate... Wow he's qualified to be president..
That "3 a.m." ad really did a number on you, didn't it?

[George Gervin's Afro]

We know plenty about Hilary to know she isn't the one we want.


Please provide something to back this up? Anything? Please save any baseless claims that can't be backed up.. seriously I hear alot of this about Clinton BUT NOTHING TO BACK IT UP.

[George Gervin's Afro]

That "3 a.m." ad really did a number on you, didn't it?


never saw it. But i certainly get the point.. has some merit don't you think?

[xrayzebra]

Hilary voted against her conscience in Iraq, created the HMO mess we live in today (brilliant healthcare plan, Hil), wants a healthcare mandate, and supported NAFTA and is now against it (switching sides; can't have it both ways, Hil).

For the record, I like NAFTA. I don't think Obama is serious about withdrawing from NAFTA (as evidenced by the Canadian calls he made), and I don't think he would be able to if he tried. The unions that back him aren't against NAFTA. Hilary, on the other hand, is practically bound to do everything possible to withdraw from NAFTA if she wants to win a second term. The unions that support her are very anti-NAFTA.

Erahhh, Hillary didn't create the mess of HMO's, as much
as I would like to lay it (pardon the pun) on her. You
have to give credit to his honor, the swimmer, Mr.
Kennedy, from Mass. HMO's were going to solved all
health problems. Like most liberal ideas.

Hillary's health plan failed miserably when put to the
legislative body of our great country. But only after
folks were told what it contained.

[some_user86]

Please provide something to back this up? Anything? Please save any baseless claims that can't be backed up.. seriously I hear alot of this about Clinton BUT NOTHING TO BACK IT UP.

You first. You keep using your own incompetence and inability to discern what Obama stands for (read: the same fucking things as Hilary, only more tame on healthcare) as an attack on his supporters.

[PixelPusher]

never saw it. But i certainly get the point.. has some merit don't you think?
No, and it's pathetic that you do. Don't ever bitch about Republican fearmongering about national security on this board again.

[George Gervin's Afro]

You first. You keep using your own incompetence and inability to discern what Obama stands for (read: the same fucking things as Hilary, only more tame on healthcare) as an attack on his supporters.


Didn't think you could provide anything.. no one ever does. She is tougher than he is... for Christ's sake he was flustered when he had to answer tough questions.. " I have already answered like 8 questions already.." Clinton has been attacked for 16 yrs and she is still standing tall..

[George Gervin's Afro]

No, and it's pathetic that you do. Don't ever bitch about Republican fearmongering about national security on this board again.


We have the choice of 3 people.. 2 I think are capable of handling the job and one doesn't... now I am accused fear mongering? some of the libs are over sensitive bitches..

[xrayzebra]

Didn't think you could provide anything.. no one ever does. She is tougher than he is... for Christ's sake he was flustered when he had to answer tough questions.. " I have already answered like 8 questions already.." Clinton has been attacked for 16 yrs and she is still standing tall..

8 questions and walked off. Of course he doesn't have
that cackle...........
:p:

[some_user86]

Didn't think you could provide anything.. no one ever does. She is tougher than he is... for Christ's sake he was flustered when he had to answer tough questions.. " I have already answered like 8 questions already.." Clinton has been attacked for 16 yrs and she is still standing tall..

She's incredibly divisive. For god's sake, she's tearing the Democrats apart. Divide and conquer doesn't work if you do it to your own party.

Thank god, I don't have to give a crap about the future of either party. Cue rise of Libertarianism. :)

[George Gervin's Afro]

She's incredibly divisive. For god's sake, she's tearing the Democrats apart. Divide and conquer doesn't work if you do it to your own party.

Thank god, I don't have to give a crap about the future of either party. Cue rise of Libertarianism. :)


How is she tearing apart the party? What is she specifically doing? Or is simply because of her last name?

So I am supposed to buy that she and her husband are master politicians who are purposely trying to harm the same party she n eeds in order to become President? makes zero sense dude.

[PixelPusher]

We have the choice of 3 people.. 2 I think are capable of handling the job and one doesn't... now I am accused fear mongering? some of the libs are over sensitive bitches..
From a nihilistic, Karl Rove persective, that was the brilliance of that ad...in foisting the batard of "national security experience" as the most important qaulification, it ranks Hillary slightly above Obama, but then the logical conclusion is that McCain is ranked way, way, way above both of them.

Way to go, Clintonites.

[xrayzebra]

She's incredibly divisive. For god's sake, she's tearing the Democrats apart. Divide and conquer doesn't work if you do it to your own party.

Thank god, I don't have to give a crap about the future of either party. Cue rise of Libertarianism. :)

You talk and act like a liberal. Liberal dimm-o-crap at
that. Boy do you.

[George Gervin's Afro]

From a nihilistic, Karl Rove persective, that was the brilliance of that ad...in foisting the batard of "national security experience" as the most important qaulification, it ranks Hillary slightly above Obama, but then the logical conclusionis that McCain is ranked way, way, way above both of them.

Way to go, Clintonites.


I didn't realize Clinton's experince was in question? Oh wait it's not...

[some_user86]

You talk and act like a liberal. Liberal dimm-o-crap at
that. Boy do you.

How so?

Social liberal, Fiscal conservative. The libertarian anthem.

[JoeChalupa]

I'm the only one supporting Obama in my immediate family. My parents and siblings are all supporting Clinton.

[George Gervin's Afro]

How so?

Social liberal, Fiscal conservative. The libertarian anthem.


Obama's not a fiscal conservative.. But he looks great in a suit!

[xrayzebra]

How so?

Social liberal, Fiscal conservative. The libertarian anthem.

For goodness sakes, read what you just typed. Grrrrrrrrr.
:pctoss

[PixelPusher]

I didn't realize Clinton's experince was in question? Oh wait it's not...
Actually, it is. And you can bet your ass McCain will skewer her supposed "foreign policy" credentials.

again, way to go.

[some_user86]

Obama's not a fiscal conservative.. But he looks great in a suit!

Neither are the Republicans.

That leaves the Democrats. Hilary would definitely balance the budget.

I'll take my risk with Obama still. Her healthcare plan is too risky and I don't expect her to be able to get out of the partisan mold. Obama is unknown in that aspect. I'll take the risk.

[some_user86]

For goodness sakes, read what you just typed. Grrrrrrrrr.
:pctoss

Social liberal is a personal choice. I wouldn't impose it on you. Just like no libertarian would impose his personal choice about social policy on you.

I used to be socially moderate. Then I matured. It ain't my right to tell who should marry who, do what to their bodies, own what influential plant by products, or worship what god (if they have a god).

The only place I differ from libertarianism is education, where I liked NCLB, until Bush underfunded it.

[ApolloCreed]

I think we're about to see an Obama backlash.

[xrayzebra]

Social liberal is a personal choice. I wouldn't impose it on you. Just like no libertarian would impose his personal choice about social policy on you.

Hey I am not imposing anything on anybody. I am a
conservative. I want to live like I want and let you live
like you want. I wont tread on your turf and you don't
tread on mine.

Now, got that off my chest. If you mean "social liberal"
taking care of those that cant take care of themselves,
and yes the do exist, I agree. But if you mean those that
can care for themselves and don't, then I do not agree.

I really don't care if anyone lives above or below my
level. I am comfortable. Many have more than me and
many have less than me. How I handle that is my business. I guess I am a contrary old man who worked
my butt off and have a little something to show for it.
So what. Anyone can do it. Just work. You got a real
problem, then I am here to try and help. But I cant
support you.

[PixelPusher]

I think we're about to see an Obama backlash.
Already started 2 weeks ago.

[JoeChalupa]

The road to victory can take it's toll.

[some_user86]

Hey I am not imposing anything on anybody. I am a
conservative. I want to live like I want and let you live
like you want. I wont tread on your turf and you don't
tread on mine.

Now, got that off my chest. If you mean "social liberal"
taking care of those that cant take care of themselves,
and yes the do exist, I agree. But if you mean those that
can care for themselves and don't, then I do not agree.

I really don't care if anyone lives above or below my
level. I am comfortable. Many have more than me and
many have less than me. How I handle that is my business. I guess I am a contrary old man who worked
my butt off and have a little something to show for it.
So what. Anyone can do it. Just work. You got a real
problem, then I am here to try and help. But I cant
support you.

I think I edited my post while you were writing this.

When I say social liberal, it means about social policy such as gay marriage, abortion, separation of church and state, removing artificial government regulation on the drug free market, etc.

I am not in support of any of those things in my private life (except for separation of church and state; I am an atheist). But, I also don't want to dictate my conservative lifestyle on someone else.

[101A]

Fiscal Conservative and either of the Democrats health proposals do not belong in the same conversation.

Oh, that's right; Some User doesn't care about THAT spending; it's won't be discretionary.

You're not a fiscal conservative; you just want a balanced budget; and don't care if the govt. raises taxes to get there (we've already established that you deceive about your tax bracket)!

What evidence do you have that Clinton would balance the budget? She has proposed FAR more spending than she has tax increases to pay for it! You think because it happened in '99 when Bill was president, it'll happen again? You know how much capital gains tax was paid on Enron stock in '99?

The revenues the govt. collected that year were an anomaly; might happen once in a blue moon; but 20% of GDP to the treasury, thus far, has been a once-in-a-lifetime event.

[some_user86]

Fiscal Conservative and either of the Democrats health proposals do not belong in the same conversation.

Oh, that's right; Some User doesn't care about THAT spending; it's won't be discretionary.

You're not a fiscal conservative; you just want a balanced budget; and don't care if the govt. raises taxes to get there (we've already established that you deceive about your tax bracket)!

What evidence do you have that Clinton would balance the budget? She has proposed FAR more spending than she has tax increases to pay for it! You think because it happened in '99 when Bill was president, it'll happen again? You know how much capital gains tax was paid on Enron stock in '99?

The revenues the govt. collected that year were an anomaly; might happen once in a blue moon; but 20% of GDP to the treasury, thus far, has been a once-in-a-lifetime event.

I thought I made it pretty clear why I personally would love higher taxes if it meant a stabilized economic environment in my family's field of work? How is that decieving? We would personally make more money and be able to recover the lost income from taxes by having a stabilized economy. It's selfish? Yes. But aren't we all. It's the fucking basis of capitalism.

Yes, my dad established the company. Yes, it's daddy's money. Yes, I talk about it like it's mine. I'm waiting to finish my grad school (just started last semester!) before I can make my own dent. Yes, I've had to support myself. And yes, I do know that I've got a pretty nice fallback plan, which most people don't have.

Fuck you for your ad hominem attack, thereby making this about me.

[xrayzebra]

I think I edited my post while you were writing this.

When I say social liberal, it means about social policy such as gay marriage, abortion, separation of church and state, removing artificial government regulation on the drug free market, etc.

I am not in support of any of those things in my private life (except for separation of church and state; I am an atheist). But, I also don't want to dictate my conservative lifestyle on someone else.

We are getting way off the thread and I wont go much
further with this argument or discussion really.

I am a Christian. I do not support gay marriage, abortion,
and so called separation of church and state, boy that is
a whole different argument. I am not sure what you mean
by drug free market, if you mean free to freak yourself
out, I am not sure I would agree with that. I do my share
of "drugs" by having some adult beverages, which are
now considered drugs. Used to smoke the old weed,
tobacco, which I am still not sure it is that bad and miss it
sometimes. It now stinks, but so does some things
that are pleasurable and essential to the preservation
and continuance of mankind. But it does cause problems
to some folks and others get a way clean, that is die
from other causes. Anyhow, like I stated in my previous
post, I too do not want to impose my views on others,
well guess I do, when I get on here and spout my views,
but I really don't care if they follow my view. I just
don't want them to try and impose their beliefs on me.
Like on of the late posters on this site, RNR, rough-n-
ready, who thinks the world is coming to an end because
of oil. Poor soul, doesn't know what got him where he
is today.

[some_user86]

We are getting way off the thread and I wont go much
further with this argument or discussion really.

I am a Christian. I do not support gay marriage, abortion,
and so called separation of church and state, boy that is
a whole different argument. I am not sure what you mean
by drug free market, if you mean free to freak yourself
out, I am not sure I would agree with that. I do my share
of "drugs" by having some adult beverages, which are
now considered drugs. Used to smoke the old weed,
tobacco, which I am still not sure it is that bad and miss it
sometimes. It now stinks, but so does some things
that are pleasurable and essential to the preservation
and continuance of mankind. But it does cause problems
to some folks and others get a way clean, that is die
from other causes. Anyhow, like I stated in my previous
post, I too do not want to impose my views on others,
well guess I do, when I get on here and spout my views,
but I really don't care if they follow my view. I just
don't want them to try and impose their beliefs on me.
Like on of the late posters on this site, RNR, rough-n-
ready, who thinks the world is coming to an end because
of oil. Poor soul, doesn't know what got him where he
is today.

Cool. So we have something else in common. We both live pretty conservatively (except for religion). That's nice. But the problem I have with most Republicans (current President included) is that they aren't as enlightened as you are about enforcing their norms on others. That's a big no-no for most libertarians. Also, the drug thing... I believe in personal responsibility. Marijuana is much tamer than alcohol, yet it's a Schedule I drug. WTF? Tax it and get some revenues from it. Exposing it to free market pressures will eliminate the black market, or at least bring the distributors under the rule of law. We're just propping them up by restricting access to it.

[some_user86]

Fiscal Conservative and either of the Democrats health proposals do not belong in the same conversation.

Oh, that's right; Some User doesn't care about THAT spending; it's won't be discretionary.

You're not a fiscal conservative; you just want a balanced budget; and don't care if the govt. raises taxes to get there (we've already established that you deceive about your tax bracket)!

What evidence do you have that Clinton would balance the budget? She has proposed FAR more spending than she has tax increases to pay for it! You think because it happened in '99 when Bill was president, it'll happen again? You know how much capital gains tax was paid on Enron stock in '99?

The revenues the govt. collected that year were an anomaly; might happen once in a blue moon; but 20% of GDP to the treasury, thus far, has been a once-in-a-lifetime event.

We already have socialized medicine. Ever been to a county hospital? Know what that is? Socialized medicine. The people who can pay, pay. Otherwise, county hospitals can't refuse emergency service to anyone. So most people use as a visit to a general clinic. Then, they don't pay.

It's our dark secret. Either that or most people turn a blind eye to it.

It costs us more to run individual county hospitals at varying degrees of standard than to have a simple federalized chain of healthcare locations. Fuck healthcare plans. The simple answer is that the health industry needs competition. The free market solves most problems, but where it can't an oligopoly or monopoly sets up. That, by its very nature, is anti-free market. And it's the government's right and purpose to break up unhealthy trusts (since ca. Teddy Roosevelt).

You have to spend the least money the right way. You can't cut off all funding and you can't throw money at a problem and hope it goes away.

And using taxes to lower government debt is a marker of fiscal conservatism. Get your facts straight.