The Obama Show

NEWSWEEK

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: JunnyHuynhNewsWeek @ 10/23/2008 4:43:56 PM

    Who will win ? Who know ! Behind the mess, we saw Jesus, not a kind of Alah in American soil, NOT OsAMA-biLAden here please. Wake up America. Do-not vote for that couple <oSama Hussen Barrack & his 2nd commander in chief BiLAden> please. They are SCARRY LIERs

    • Posted By: ly81 @ 10/23/2008 5:24:54 PM

      Oh, you are beyond ignorant...

    • Posted By: pitzold @ 10/23/2008 4:51:36 PM

      Oh please, try your lies else where...you know where people like you can't think for themselves!

      • Posted By: Thisisajoke @ 10/23/2008 4:55:04 PM

        Why don't you go to this place. Amen

  • Posted By: RichardJ2008 @ 10/23/2008 5:23:57 PM

    Putnam is brilliant and very grounded. Obama is fortunate to have him make this ad.
    R Semiatin

  • Posted By: JOJAZZ @ 10/23/2008 4:12:47 PM

    In response to pfisher.....what fantasy land are YOU living in? Isn't it convenient to perpetuate lies....lies that have already been denounced and clearly dismissed by Snopes and FactCheck....and even corrected in print by THE BIG KAHUNA, Rupert Murdoch of FOX and rag publications throughout the world !!
    Check out FactCheck with regard to Obama's connection with Bill Ayers....and the former head of Freddie !! Plus, our dear friend Rupert had to print a correction regarding Michelle eating caviar in her hoitie-toitie hotel suite. She wasn't even in NYC !!! Get your facts right before you speak - or write anything. You lose your credibility when you spout off with this nonsense. This is all "yesterday's news"......old, proven false and boring !! Typical Republican knee-jerk reaction to being on the losing side !! Can't wait until November 4th. Already have a party planned with my Obama friends. We are going to celebrate through the night !!!!

    • Posted By: pitzold @ 10/23/2008 5:23:18 PM

      The Republicants don't what to know the truth they prefer to believe there own lies. They will never admit the truth..poor misguided people!

  • Posted By: the way it is @ 10/23/2008 5:21:10 PM

    Regardless of who you support or who you want / need to win

    HONOR what our forces are fighting for and quit gripping

    V O T E

  • Posted By: the way it is @ 10/23/2008 5:18:31 PM

    YOU / WE can do it all in one word

    V O T E

  • Posted By: StevenNavy @ 10/23/2008 4:13:34 PM

    Bottom line folks McCain and Palin should not throw stones at anyone: McCain left his wife for Cindy who had money, Palin can't keep her daughter from getting pregnant by a scrumbag kid with no education. Todd Palin seems to do want ever he wants because he's the first dude. And most of all when Mccain was getting his butt spanked by G Bush in 2000 he cried the loudest and look at him now. He really is like Bush more than we think. And Palin may look good to all of theose republican men supporters except Mark Foley, she is dumb as can be. I hope women don't think she is someone they look up to.

    • Posted By: notObamalover @ 10/23/2008 4:34:41 PM

      StevevNavy , You are the real scumbag!!

      • Posted By: pitzold @ 10/23/2008 5:17:47 PM

        I guess the truth really hurts. StevenNavy only spoke the truth. Republicans can't handle the truth! All they know to do is call others names & lie, lie lie, deny, deny, deny!

  • Posted By: the way it is @ 10/23/2008 5:15:12 PM

    Comment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_a8-YDogNN4

    This tells it all on the Palin / McCain reactions to come

  • Posted By: JustSayNoBama @ 10/23/2008 5:14:45 PM

    Nice headline... "MUST SEE TV"? Are you kidding me? Once again, Newsweek is showing their true colors. Give me a break.

  • Posted By: cardinal33 @ 10/23/2008 5:04:32 PM

    Worry about bandana's health !! NOPE , he just wants to be the 1st black guy elected president,whats happened to his wife lately? don't hear anything about her...She looks stoned !

    • Posted By: hatU @ 10/23/2008 5:12:12 PM

      They can't afford to parade "the angry black women" around, they have her tucked away

  • Posted By: kleart21 @ 10/23/2008 4:57:44 PM

    WorkingClassSlob

    How do you think those lovely roads that you drive on each day get repaired???? Let me help you out with that taxes and who do you expect to pay them oh yes the little guys I guess. I 'm so tired of the rich getting richer. Don't you get it the trickle down effect has not worked in 8 years you believe that they need 4 more. This expensive war that we are paying for could be helping people here.

    I make an excellent wage and am doing rather well but I don't like seeing those around me struggle.

    • Posted By: WorkingClassSlob @ 10/23/2008 5:12:09 PM

      Here in California our roads are partially paid for by the gasoline tax - or that part of it that isn't being diverted for "other" projects. I AM a little guy, and I AM paying taxes. What I recognize is that the "rich" pay what they want to pay, and they have other sources to draw on (like my future pay raises) to keep their cash flow going. I too want to help out those less fortunate, and do so by donating to various causes, both money and time. The problem with the federal government hasn't been revenue collection - check a chart, it goes up whether tax rates go up or down. The problem is spending. If you really want to eliminate the deficit, impose a federal spending freeze for a few years. But don't kid yourself - taxing the rich will result in the rich imposing their own "tax" on the middle class.

  • Posted By: R_eap @ 10/23/2008 4:55:23 PM

    To Newsweek moderator: Is garbage like the post by JunnyHuynhNewsWeek actually allowed on here? If so, please de-activate my membership

    • Posted By: Thisisajoke @ 10/23/2008 5:01:50 PM

      Why don't you report is as abuse if this is the way that you feel instead of in a post. Read the
      directions.

  • Posted By: Thisisajoke @ 10/23/2008 4:33:48 PM

    This ad will fit right in. It's trick or treat night here, so I guess I'll just have to miss it along with many
    others to give the little ghosts and goblins their treats. I call still do this because of not having to pay
    higher taxes. Hopefully next year I still can, only if Obama is not elected.

    • Posted By: pitzold @ 10/23/2008 5:06:56 PM

      Oh please....you must not be a true conservative! You believe in trick or treat. Isn't that of the devil..witches and goblins? That is not of the BIBLE! You're a fraud!

  • Posted By: andersen1120 @ 10/23/2008 5:04:52 PM

    Cardinal33 is right. How do any of the supporters of either candidate justify this waste? You'll all get the government you deserve when you sheepishly watch this kind of money-spending and say nothing, do nothing.

  • Posted By: broman @ 10/23/2008 5:04:49 PM

    thisisajoke,,,,,,,,,are you implying McCain has morals? Now that would be a joke, he has done everything possible to prove that wrong since he started running for president this time. And,,,,,,,,,this time he even chose a running mate who is his clone on morals,,,,,,,,be real would ya.

  • Posted By: broman @ 10/23/2008 5:04:18 PM

    thisisajoke,,,,,,,,,are you implying McCain has morals? Now that would be a joke, he has done everything possible to prove that wrong since he started running for president this time. And,,,,,,,,,this time he even chose a running mate who is his clone on morals,,,,,,,,be real would ya.

  • Posted By: in texas @ 10/23/2008 4:36:16 PM

    Just another example of ways Obama is wasting money. If he has so much to spend why doesn't he "spread the wealth" and donated the money to the deficit?
    Go McCain and Palin!

    • Posted By: pitzold @ 10/23/2008 5:03:00 PM

      So is McCain/Palin spening too much money that is why the campaign is now broke. They need to return all those clothes they both for Palin...all 150.000.00!

    • Posted By: kdean62 @ 10/23/2008 4:46:06 PM

      Both candidates are spending enough monies for this election. If used wisely that money could furnish medical insurance for the 1.4 million uninsured Americans for the next 2 years. Both should be ashamed of themselves. We have needy people in our nation because of the spending habits of idiots like these two. And they want to talk about our 54" Color TV Sets? My TV did not put our nation at a Trillion dollar deficit.

  • Posted By: R_eap @ 10/23/2008 4:54:52 PM

    To klicker:

    His campaign isn't based on "rich buddies", the vast majority of his campaign contributions have come from donors giving less than $200. There is nothing desperate about it, this TV time was booked weeks ago. And as for your hand-holding comment - I would rather have Obama holding the hands of our troops as he brings them home rather than McCain holding their hands as he ships more off to Iraq and other fronts. The most pitiful thing in this campaign was watching McCain, a formerly upstanding public servant, sell out and become just another cog in the Republican machine.

    • Posted By: Thisisajoke @ 10/23/2008 4:58:41 PM

      Donating $200.00 to get a large check back later.

      • Posted By: R_eap @ 10/23/2008 5:02:34 PM

        Donating $200 in hopes of saving our country.

  • Posted By: in texas @ 10/23/2008 4:43:07 PM

    It worries me to see so many so ready for a "change" that they would think that the Democrats would help us out. I have always seen them as the spend more guys. You have to have a good head on your shoulders and not just spend money to help people and lead through crisis. We need experience, not someone still wet behind the ears that thinks he has experience. I am tired of the negative comments from both parties but I have DEFINETLY heard more from the Democratic side. The media is supposed to me non biased but I have not seen that yet!!

    • Posted By: americandefender @ 10/23/2008 4:58:33 PM

      Are you in complete denial? Or are you just an idiot? You actually have the nerve to say that Obama has been negative, it's amazing complete denial you republican's must be sensing Defeat. McCain is done toast. Go Obama! Change is coming.

    • Posted By: pitzold @ 10/23/2008 4:56:36 PM

      Are you for real?! Where have you been living? Under a rock? We have had 8 years of the Rep and now we are depper in debt them we have ever been. When Clinton (A Dem) was in office we never had it like this and he left the W/H with plenty. The Reb has eaten it all up & yet you say that the Dem does all the spending. My goodness, WAKE UP! Also, did you not see just how much money was spent on Palins wardrobe! Stop being led to drink the koolaid!

  • Posted By: broman @ 10/23/2008 4:55:47 PM

    hatu,,,,,,,,get over it, McCain is losing because of his "unpopularity" and with the lipstick queen sitting next to him a snowball in hell has a better chance of survival.

  • Posted By: tom1960 @ 10/23/2008 2:35:26 PM

    The Obama effect on Jobs.

    It is a very simple formula but it can be used to calculate the minimum number of jobs LOST due to the Obama effect ??? increased taxes.

    Take the taxable income of a business. Multiply that by the percent increase in their taxes. Divide that number by the average burdened salary (pay plus benefits, etc.). The result will be the minimum number of people that will lose their jobs to so their company can maintain the same cost structure and margins. Of course, other things need to be taken into consideration. When they are, the resulting number of layoffs will be even higher!!!

    So, a company that has a taxable income of $5,000,000 with a tax increase of 3% and an average burdened salary of $45,000 will have to lay off 3 people to break even. If the burdened salary is $35,000, then they will have to lay off 4 people. This starts to kick in around $750,000. However, for large companies, the tax increase will be significant and the effect on jobs will be much higher.

    Get a clue Obama fans, there will be NO wealth to spread around!!!

    • Posted By: jnakhoul @ 10/23/2008 4:53:54 PM

      you studied economics at clown college right?

    • Posted By: missconservative @ 10/23/2008 3:40:01 PM

      Oh yeah, you're right about there not being any wealth to spread around. Exactly like how there wasn't any wealth to spread around during the years of 1992 to 2000 when President Clinton was in office. He gave tax cuts then, too and the economy was a helluva lot more stronger then than it is now! Not to mention businesses had higher taxes then and many of them were still standing throughout it all. Businesses have started closing under President Bush, your fearless leader who is now offering them tax CUTS.

      • Posted By: Nowforthetruth @ 10/23/2008 3:44:11 PM

        The U.S. economy shrank in three non-consecutive quarters in the early 2000s (the third quarter of 2000, the first quarter of 2001, and the third quarter of 2001). According to the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), which is the private, nonprofit, nonpartisan organization charged with determining economic recessions, the U.S. economy was in recession from March 2001 to November 2001, a period of eight months. However, economic conditions did not satisfy the common shorthand definition of recession, which is "a fall of a country's real gross domestic product in two or more successive quarters," and has led to some confusion about the procedure for determining the starting and ending dates of a recession.
        The NBER's Business Cycle Dating Committee (BCDC) uses monthly, rather than quarterly, indicators to determine peaks and troughs in business activity[1], as can be seen by noting that starting and ending dates are given by month and year, not quarters. However, controversy over the precise dates of the recession led to the characterization of the recession as the "Clinton Recession" by Republicans, if it could be traced to the final term of President Bill Clinton. A move in the recession date in a 2004 report by the Council of Economic Advisors to several months before the one given by the NBER was seen as politically motivated.[2] BCDC members suggested they would be open to revisiting the dates of the recession as newer and more definitive data became available.[3] In early 2004, NBER President Martin Feldstein said:
        "It is clear that the revised data have made our original March date for the start of the recession much too late. We are still waiting for additional monthly data before making a final judgment. Until we have the additional data, we cannot make a decision."[3]
        Nonetheless, as of early 2008, no further revision to the dates has been made.
        Using the stock market as an unofficial benchmark, a recession would have begun in March 2000 when the NASDAQ crashed following the collapse of the Dot-com bubble. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was relatively unscathed by the NASDAQ's crash until the September 11, 2001 attacks, after which the DJIA suffered its worst one-day point loss and biggest one-week losses in history up to that point. The market rebounded, only to crash once more in the final two quarters of 2002. In the final three quarters of 2003, the market finally rebounded permanently, agreeing with the unemployment statistics that a recession defined in this way would have lasted from 2001 through 2003.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse