Archive for Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Claudia Peters: Obama not for change
October 21, 2008
Editor's note: This is the first part of a two-part letter to the editor. The second part will appear in Wednesday's Daily Press.
To the editor:
The Obama/Biden team has been claiming they stand for change. After listening for something of substance for the better part of a year, all I have heard is the same old Democrat message of class warfare and envy of anyone who prospers in America.
Then there is the same tired tax and spend message. Change? I submit that real change in America would be a promise of a smaller government and a reduction of government spending. Sen. Obama is proposing new spending of $1.3 trillion in his first term, if elected. This is in addition to the almost $1 trillion we are being asked to fork over to bail out the banks.
Let's put that into perspective. How much is a billion? A billion seconds ago, it was 1959. A billion minutes ago, Jesus was alive. A billion hours ago, it was the Stone Age. A billion years ago, no one on the Earth walked on two feet.
In a recent debate, Sen. Obama said $18 billion in earmark spending isn't a lot of money.
I don't know about the neighborhoods he lives in, but in my neighborhood, and I bet yours as well, $18 billion is a lot of money. Sounds like very cavalier attitude toward our hard-earned money that goes toward taxes.
Sen. Obama plans to increase the capital gains tax from 15 percent to 28 percent.
Do you have a 401(k) or plan to sell your home? Plan on keeping less of your own money. He plans to increase the tax on dividends as well as increase the tax on gasoline and utilities such as water, electric and gas. And plans to double foreign aid.
At the same time, he plans on cutting taxes for 95 percent of the population. We need to do some math here. At least 33 percent of all individuals pay no income tax. So how can they receive a tax cut? They don't. They receive a welfare check, plain and simple. Nice little vote buying ploy at real taxpayers' expense during an election.
Claudia Peters
Craig
Advertisement
Advertisement
21 October 2008
at 11:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
Wapitipoker (Anonymous) says…
Claudia shouldn't be spreading the lies and misinformation that is rampant on the internet and in McCain commecricals. The 28% rate on dividends is not true. The increased tax on home sales is not true for the majority of homes ($250,000 for single/$500,000 for joint filing). The increase for those above that (average home price is US is far lower than that) would be from 15% to 20%. I encourage all readers to visit www.factcheck.org to debunk the myths from both side on their own.
21 October 2008
at 12:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
rhammel (Anonymous) says…
I have to agree with Wapitipoker, that Claudia try coming up with facts; not using the McCain rhetoric. It is just plain old poppycock.
however, should the Chinese economy go into the dumper and demand the money that the U.S. owes them for the Iraq war, where is the money going to come from?? I see us having to come up with a very big tax bite in probably the not so distant future. It will not matter who is president. We will just have to pay it.
21 October 2008
at 12:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
nikobesti (Anonymous) says…
Claudia, $18 billion in earmarks IS small potatoes—less than 1% of our total budget. How is this a strategy to reverse a trillion dollar deficit? We spend that much in Iraq in less than two months. $18 billion a year in earmarks and $120 billion a year in Iraq. I find it truly funny that you push cutting less than 1% of our total budget as a solution for out of control spending. Sounds like you're falling for a distraction to me.
So McCain is proposing to cut a measly $18 billion, and has said several times that he doesn't think anyone should pay more taxes. Excuse me? What fantasy land do McCain and the Republicans live in where taxes aren't a necessary part of running a government? Guess he just plans on borrowing more money from China, which is exactly how Bush is paying for his hobbies. I'd rather hear an honest assessment of what we need to do in order pay for our own expenses instead of contending a government doesn't need tax dollars and continuing to pretend we can make everyone happy.
21 October 2008
at 3:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
Permalink
johntheman7 (Anonymous) says…
Our beautiful soon to be Vice President Sarah Palin is also would be better at leading our nation in the future after a McCain Presidency than Senator Barak Obama would be in leading our nation in the future starting in January 2009 because of three areas which are as follows: ideology , experience, and accomplisments. Ideologically she is a conservative. Experientially she has two years of executive administrative governing experience . When it comes to accomplishments she accomplished 3 major things which are as follows: government reform, the state budget and the economy, and wise use of natural resources. She reformed government by standing up to the big oil companies by breaking up the monopoly on power and resources. She insisted on competition and basic fairness which ended the control that the oil companies had on the state, and thereby returning control of the state back to the people. She lead well in the state budget by generating a surplus which came about by vetoing a half billion dollars of wasteful spending. Economically under her leadership she brought about the largest private-sector infrastructure project in North American history. She also suspended the state fuel tax, and when oil and gas prices went up dramatically, and filled up the state treasury, she sent a large share of that revenue back where it belonged - directly to the people of Alaska . On natural resources she has shown great leadership by beginning a nearly forty billion dollar natural gas pipeline to help lead America to energy independence, so please vote John McCain for President and give to our beautiful soon to be Vice President Sarah Palin the opportunity that she deserves leading the nation into the future after a John McCain presidency.
Thank You,
John Warren