NewtonSylmar

I called that one about three months ago. The only Senate Republican to vote against the war...totally abandoned by the Red Party in the 2006 Midterms...an early Obama endorser who is now an Independent...

For those who think, it would be a pretty strong ticket. posted 07/07/2008 at 20:07:38

Germany and Canada have a national sales tax...we do not. The individual states set their own sales tax levels, which is a big part of the reason why interstate transactions are not charged. First, which state's sales tax do you use...the buyer's or the seller's? The lower or the higher? Secondly, states with lower sales tax would most likely make more sales. Finally, forcing the seller to charge taxes on top of the shipping charges would most likely make interstate commerce less attractive to them, because they would be forced to pass those costs to the buyer. If we tried to impose a national sales tax, a lot of states would benefit (those with taxes higher than the national), but I believe even more would suffer (those with taxes lower than the national).

Dealing with internet-based transactions opens up another level of problems. If the company is located in one state, but their servers are located in another state, which state's tax do you use? I can pretty much guarantee you that if internet transactions are taxed, Nevada will definitely be the biggest winner, due to the simple fact that the Nevada Secretary of State does not information-share with the IRS. posted 06/22/2008 at 00:00:42

I thought about it.
I want Hillary to drop out for the same reason that "Happy Days" should have closed up shop after Richie Cunningham moved out. It wasn't the same show after that, and the show that was left wasn't that good. When Hillary decided to challenge Obama with experience that she lacked as well...when she pulled out the 3AM phone call ad...when she said that McCain would be a better choice than Obama...when she challenged his patriotism because of his pastor's remarks...when her campaign compared him to Ken Starr because he was asking for her tax returns...when she lied about Bosnia...when she continued to lie about Bosnia after the video was made public and expanded on that lie, as well...when she shifted positions on Jeremiah Wright after a week had passed because the expected "damage" to Obama never materialized...Hillary wasn't the same Hillary after that, and the Hillary that was left wasn't that good. posted 04/01/2008 at 13:14:05

Your statement may be accurate, but in the primary process, the basic unit of measure is delegates, not voters. For that reason, Obama not only gets credit for the "11-in-a-row", but also, as reported yesterday, for Texas.

I don't have a problem with Hillary's qualifications (inflated, as they may be) nor do I lack confidence in her ability to do the job if she were to get the job. My only problems with her are very simple. She exerted more energy and aggression in the last three months toward a member of her own party than she did for her entire Senatorial tenure against the Iraq war and other policies that went against the better interests of the voters. It is also bad enough that she "embellished" her qualifications and experience. But, when presented with irrefutable evidence to the contrary challenging her claims, she just chose to continue the lie and expand upon it.

Hillary has disappointed me because I truly expected better from her. She thought she could simply walk into the Oval Office on name value only. She never saw Obama coming, and he made her pay for her complacency, and is continuing to do so by making her look as desperate as she is. Here it is, April 1st, and what was supposed to be a guaranteed Democratic landslide in November (thanks to seven-plus years of ineptitude and unabashed cronyism) has now turned into a race too close to call. posted 04/01/2008 at 12:56:26