Are you bored of politics yet?

Dear god, I sure as hell am.

I started watching the debate last night, but about 10 minutes into it I went to bed to go read.  It just bored me to tears.  And there really isn’t any point.  I could see straight through everything McCain said.  It’s easy to spot his lies when you listen to him a lot.  And Obama wasn’t anything terribly inspiring.  He’s best in sweeping speeches that allow him to orate for long periods.  Those little two minute bursts waste his inspiring qualities. 

And I didn’t particularly like listening to John McCain’s sad “zingers” (really?  Like Jello to a wall?  Lame.) and listen to him beat the “My Friends…” horse to death.   Anyway, it’s no surprise who people were going to say won the debate…McCain is a  tired old man who’s lost his independent streak and honor running a disgusting campaign just because he can’t stand the idea of losing.  People will never respect you again, John McCain.  I hope it was worth it.

And I also wanted to point out an excellent article I read today in Rolling Stone about everyone’s favorite liar, Sarah Palin. 

Here’s what Sarah Palin represents: being a fat fucking pig who pins “Country First” buttons on his man titties and chants “U-S-A! U-S-A!” at the top of his lungs while his kids live off credit cards and Saudis buy up all the mortgages in Kansas.

You should go read this article, especially those of you who claim to inexplicably respect Sarah Palin.   Seriously, go read it and then refute how you can possibly think anything even vaguely positive about her.  Please.  I really, really want to hear it.


27 responses to this post.

  1. I am really tired of hearing that Palin is underqualified. Um, she is more qualified than the Democratic PRESIDENTIAL candidate. And I really dont take an article from Rolling Stone that seriously. It has been shown over and over how bias the media is.

    And when Obama said, “”Why should we ask the teacher who’s making $30,000 a year to tighten her belt” while better-off Americans “live high on the hog?” I almost fell off my chair laughing. First of all “live high on the hog”? Yeah that was lame. And second of all, what is the problem with rich people spending their hard earned money?? I don’t understand this hatred for the rich that Democrats have. They got there by working hard. Yeah I dont make much money but I dont hate rich people and expect them to give me money just because they have more.

    However, I am totally with you when you say you are tired of politics. I am tired of hearing the same things from both sides. Everyone believes there side is better and there is nothing to change that. I am tired of empty promises. Every presidential candidate makes promises that they never keep. I have no faith in any politician regardless of party.


  2. Posted by Ezra on October 8, 2008 at 3:48 pm

    The point isn’t about hating the rich. It is common sense. If you make 30k a year any increase can break you for a month. If you make over a quarter million dollars a year, paying an extra 2% probably won’t hurt your spending power. The idea that letting the rich have more and it will trickle down is ridiculous. The majority of rich people aren’t benevolent, they are border-line greedy. I have a personal experience where a very rich person was taking her family to St. Barts for the weekend, and when I couldn’t go because I had to work my small-time job, she couldn’t understand the idea of not being able to blow work off. If she can afford to fly off for a weekend, she can afford 2% more taxes.

    Taylor, if you didn’t watch the whole debate then you missed the parts where McC got senile. He talked about golden cadillacs, hair transplants as the kind of health care people need, and called Obama “that one.” It was like watching a man implode. Yet, today in Alabama people are talking about him like he did a great job.


  3. You are seriously saying that it is ok to take money from rich people and give it to poor? Are you kidding? And where are you getting your opinion about rich people being greedy? From a personal experience? What happened to facts?

    My parents are very well off. They got there because my father worked his butt off. We used to be on welfare and food stamps. My dad has worked so hard and climbed the ladder by being a good person. He deserves every cent he earns. He should get to keep his money. If he CHOOSES to he can donate to charities but the government should not be able to take money from him just because he has more.

    And that article was ridiculous. I just went back and read it again and it is just stupid. There were no facts at all. It was completely biased. If those are the sources that people are basing their opinions on, we are seriously screwed as a country.


  4. Posted by Ezra on October 8, 2008 at 4:53 pm

    They aren’t taking from the rich and giving to the poor. This isn’t Robin Hood. Rich people in this country generally pay a lower percentage of taxes than poor people. That isn’t fair. The money won’t be given to anyone. It will fund things like education, infrastructure repair, and health care. It will help make the entire country better, not just poor people, rather than helping the elite 5% express their dominance over things. That elite group rules the policies of the Republicans. It isn’t right for 5% of people to decide how the other 95% lives.

    And I’m not some bleeding heart poor person. I own a nice home. We have a beach house. There is plenty of money in the bank account. But I also do community service and charity events every weekend. I guess I just didn’t let our money give me a false sense of entitlement.

    No human being has the right to be healthier or happier than another just because they have more zeros on the end of their paycheck. And if you don’t agree with that, then I’m sorry for you.


  5. Becs, I think you are confused about the tax proposals of the different candidates. I’m not sure where you are getting this idea that Obama is going to take rich people’s money and give it to the poor (and that CERTAINLY isn’t what Ezra is saying). What he is proposing is that the rich people of this country pay their fair share of taxes. In our current administration and the the one that McCain is proposing, the wealthiest Americans are paying less of a percentage of their wages than the poorest Americans. A teacher making 30K a year may be paying $5,000 (these are arbitrary numbers that I’m just using to make a point) while a bank president is making 500K a year and paying $50,000 a year. That president may be paying more, but 50K to someone with his salary isn’t going to affect him much. Someone trying to survive on 30K is going to be hit very, very hard by that loss of $5,000.

    I seriously don’t know how anyone can possibly argue that it’s fair that rich people don’t have to pay taxes based on their income. And I REALLY don’t understand how anyone can justify giving millions of dollars in tax breaks to oil companies (which is what McCain wants to do!) as being sound economic policy. That’s just plain un-American.

    But, Becs, you didn’t answer my query about how people can respect Palin. Do you like her because of her terrible management of a tiny town in Alaska (a town LESS than half the size of the college I went to!)? Do you like her because of her reliance on earmarks and pork-barrel spending, even though she lies and says that she’s against it? Do you like her because of her ethics violations and her complete disregard for constitutional rights (though that doesn’t surprise me considering her husband is an avowed secessionists) ?

    And I think you should read that article just one more time, and pay attention to all of those facts (and yes, they are facts…please do your research) that show her for the person she truly is.


  6. Posted by Becs on October 8, 2008 at 10:32 pm

    Ezra and Taylor:

    I’m not sure where either of you are getting your information:

    “Rich people in this country generally pay a lower percentage of taxes than poor people.”

    Maybe this link can help clear up your confusion on taxes:

    If you don’t find wikipedia to be a credible source, please consult this link from the IRS:,,id=164272,00.html

    Both of these clearly show who pays what in taxes.

    I’m not wealthy, but I find it a little shocking to know that the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay 60% of the total amount of taxes. Contrary to your beliefs, it seems that wealthy are paying more than their fair share.

    Regarding the Sarah Palin article… The article itself is unarguably an opinion piece and, therefore, full of bias. Surely you are able to see this. I’ve read the article twice now and can only point to a few facts. If you think her background is sketchy, you should check into Obama’s. Come on now, I read your article twice, the least you could do is browse through this:


  7. Why was my last comment not posted? Did I say something wrong?


  8. Posted by Josh on October 10, 2008 at 4:27 pm

    The comment:

    “In our current administration and the the one that McCain is proposing, the wealthiest Americans are paying less of a percentage of their wages than the poorest Americans.”

    is a flat-out LIE!

    Please feel free to double-check my assertion via the IRS’s website.

    I’m not trying to attack anyone, just thought it was my duty to point out the lies of seen in these posts.


  9. Oh nevermind. I see it now.


  10. Becs and Josh (Hi, Josh, BTW…don’t think I’ve ever seen you comment here before.)

    You’re both right about that percentage statement. I completely misspoke. What I was attempting to say was that they pay a lower perceived percentage, which is why I went into that example I gave. Mea Culpa. I do, however, believe that wealthy people should pay a higher perceived percentage. I think that they should be inconvenienced by taxes as much as poor people. Then again, I’m an unashamed socialist.

    I read your article Becs (Twice! Just to be fair!), but it didn’t seem that damning to me. I’ve been aware of Obama’s tenuous connection to Ayers for a while now and, frankly, I don’t think it’s that big of a deal. They served on a board together…he supported his book (in which I thought he made some incredibly good points!)…they had a minor political relationship.

    Ayers is a pretty respected member of society these days. He’s a distinguished professor at University of Illinois, serves on the boards of anti-poverty, pro-education charities, and was named Chicago Citizen of the Year in 1997! I’m not saying that what he did was forgivable or justifiable, but he’s made amends in my eyes.

    This sudden upsurge in the Ayers story is nothing more than a smoke screen that the Republicans are trying to throw up to mask the fact that they don’t have an agenda…


  11. Posted by Josh on October 10, 2008 at 6:07 pm

    Well, after your socialist admission, you’re comments make more sense. My only argument would be that you say that they should pay their fair share… what is fair? That’s completely subjective.

    Oh, and by the way… in your example, the teacher would pay $4500 in taxes and the bank president would pay $175,000. That seems like a “fair share” to me.


  12. Taylor-
    Lets just agree to disagree. 🙂
    One thing to add to Josh’s comment, I posted a really cool tax story on my blog. It doesn’t mention anything about politics but it is a really cool way of explaining taxes. Check it out if you want.


  13. Posted by Ezra on October 10, 2008 at 6:34 pm

    I was obviously gravely misinformed about the percentage of income that is paid. My apologies.

    The point to be taken is that if you make 350,000, and pay 100,000, you still have a quarter million dollars. Your life is not going to change at all. If you make 10,000 and pay 1,000, that is huge.

    How many of you took loans in college? Federal college loans are barely enough to pay for an in-state education. But for each year of college, you get a little bit more money. By the time you are a senior, you are getting roughly an extra hundred bucks a month. Wasn’t your senior year a little more fun? Other than graduating, wasn’t there a little less to worry about? When you make so little, a hundred dollars more or less a month can make a drastic change to your lifestyle. It’s the difference between ramen noodles for a week, or getting to eat real food. It’s the difference between driving to work, or riding a bike.

    Anyone who brings home more than 100,000 per year will never have to worry about survival. Even after that huge chunk of taxes is taken out, they are still much richer than any of the people they urinate on while walking down the street.

    I’m going into a profession where the average yearly salary is about a million dollars. (Spinal surgery) When taxes take half of that away it will feel like getting a colonoscopy with no anesthesia, but I’ll still have plenty to live any lifestyle I choose. Most of America doesn’t get to choose whatever lifestyle they want. How much does anyone really need to be happy?


  14. You make some great points Ezra! However, your very last statement sums it all up perfectly!

    “How much does anyone really need to be happy?”

    That goes for both sides. Someone who only makes $10,000 a year can be just as happy as someone who makes $100,000. Yeah, someone with more money will have things a little easier, but they are making that money because of the choices they made and work that they did. I believe that everyone chooses the lifestyle they want. Yes, some people have more opportunities than others, but here in America (which is why I am so proud to live here) everyone has the opportunity to excel and lead a happy, successful life.

    Some of the words you use make it seem like you are very resentful towards people with money. “Even after that huge chunk of taxes is taken out, they are still much richer than any of the people they urinate on while walking down the street.” That is a huge assumption. I make $30,000 a year and hate taxes. However, when I hear how much my dad has to pay I can’t believe it! He works very hard and deserves his money just as much as I do. He is not a bad person and does not “urinate” on people in the streets (he makes over $100,000). My parents still struggle. Where my dad works, the cost of living is incredibly high. My mom will still call me crying to tell me how much they had to pay in taxes (not just federal taxes but the billions of other taxes that they also have to pay). I have never once thought that they should deserve to pay more and I should not. Everyone does the best they can in life and we should be able to live without the government interfering on every single thing.


  15. Posted by Ezra on October 10, 2008 at 11:38 pm

    Well, the urinating remark was a joke about people with little money being referred to as peons. And it was a joke.

    I understand everything you are saying. But the struggles your parents have are probably about if they can afford the Mercedes payment. The struggles some people, the majority of people, have are if they can afford the water bill. That is an extreme situation, but it is pretty accurate. People can make their own choices, but it is hard to make all of the right choices and rise up out of a project or even out of the middle class.

    The taxes will allow people to have a better education, better health care, and a better chance to make all of the right choices. We can’t expect every person to be able to overcome their deficiencies. Be those monetary or moral. But having a better education, and a little more money makes those moral choices a little easier to make.

    As far as happiness goes, I can remember an article I read about five or six years ago. It was about a big sociological research study to determine how happy people are. It showed that poor people are not happy. Some middle class people are a little happier. But that after you get to the point where you make 50,000, not one’s happiness increases any further. So up to a point, money does by happiness. Everyone will always struggle and have worries. But the worries of some people are about survival. When I was very young, that was something that my family had to worry about. Like you, my family was on assistance programs. Without the help of the government, we wouldn’t have survived long enough to work hard and make the choices that have led to a better life.


  16. Posted by Ezra on October 10, 2008 at 11:40 pm

    And I wasn’t trying to be mean with the Mercedes remark. I was just making a point. I know I laugh my ass off when my mom says she is struggling to make her car payments. I also know those payments are 800 a month. So it can’t be that bad.


  17. Posted by Ezra on October 10, 2008 at 11:42 pm

    no one’s, and bye happiness. I wish I could fix the typos.


  18. Posted by Teresa on October 11, 2008 at 1:40 pm

    but they are making that money because of the choices they made and work that they did.
    Ah, I see. So my father (since we’ve all decided to start telling “My Daddy” stories), and all the other TEACHERS out there who are making shit wages obviously made a poor choice to go into one of the most important fields of work out there (where would our society be without an education system?!?!). And obviously they must not work hard–tell that to my high school band director, who also taught all of the music classes in our school district yet had to work a weekend job to support his family (and yes, his wife worked too)

    We can’t expect every person to be able to overcome their deficiencies. Be those monetary or moral. Exactly, Ezra! What I don’t understand is how my father (who worked all through college and graduate school, but still had to take out a ton of student loans, and because of that, is not going to be able to retire at 65 because he’s going to have no retirement savings, because he’s STILL paying off those student loans) is some how less of a deserving individual than another person of his same generation who came from a family that could afford to pay for his higher education, and thus doesn’t have to worry about his retirement, because he’s been saving for it for years!
    But then again, I’m just a silly socialist like Taylor.


  19. Posted by Josh on October 11, 2008 at 3:23 pm

    Bottom line is that neither of you (the two admitted socialists) will be happy until the bank president is making the same amount as the teachers. And that’s fine… we’ll just have to agree to disagree.

    My only argument would be that those who decided to be teachers did so on their own accord. It’s also fairly certain that they knew what their starting salary would be. Likewise, the people who chose to be bankers did so on their own accord and also knew what their salary would be. There’s a strong correlation between salary and lifestyle. Don’t get me wrong, the teaching profession is possibly one of the most important irofessions in our country. Most people become teachers because they want to make a difference in the lives of children and not because they want to live a luxurious lifestyle.

    I think the great thing about this country (the two socialists will probably disagree with this) is that the possibilites for acquiring wealth are endless. Anyone could be the next millionaire if they chose to do so. There’s nothing stopping teachers from inventing the next ‘must-have’ product or pursuing other interests that could lead to wealth. They could take a second job on the weekends. I work with a women who doesn’t make much money at her day job, but she started a second job as a real-estate agent. Anyone with the desire to make more money has the opportunity to do so.

    Keep in mind that I believe everyone in this country is paying too much in taxes (which is why I support the Fair Tax – check it out). If I had my way, I’d lower taxes significantly for everyone (our government is full of waste and could be much more efficient with the money they already take).

    Fact: the wealthy people are shouldering a disproportionate amount of the tax burden

    Opinion: the wealthy should be paying more taxes

    It’s important to note the difference between the arguments being made here.


  20. I guess I don’t see the point is here. What would be your ideal situation when it came to taxes? Would it be that people making over a certain amount should pay all the taxes and that those that make less shouldn’t have to pay any? If that were the case, why would anyone be motivated to go through med school (which would result in a LOT more student loans than someone with a 4-year degree) or get a Ph.D.? A lot of the higher paying careers are that way because it takes a ton more school, time and money to get there.

    And my parents do not own a mercedes, they have a Pacifica and a Durango. No, they do not struggle to afford the basics, but why should they? My dad has worked 60-80 hour weeks for almost 20 years to get where they are now. Why does that mean he should have to pay more taxes just because he worked hard to get the salary he deserves. I am not saying that everyone with a lower salary doesn’t work hard. However, those that make a higher salary do not deserve to have more of their money taken from them just because they earn more.


  21. Posted by Josh on October 11, 2008 at 6:17 pm

    Sorry for the rant…

    Two of you stated to be socialists. The problem with socialism is that it simply don’t work. Consider the following for a quick illustration of this. Name some countries that are socialist. If you can do that, name one socialist country that you’d prefer to live in over the U.S.A. I’m fairly certain I already know the answer to that question. There isn’t one socialist country in which the people have a higher standard of living than the United States.

    For a detailed explanation….
    Socialism would only work if the world were perfect. The main reason socialism doesn’t work is because goods and services have unequal values. As an example, the bag boy who carries groceries to your car gets only a couple dollar tip. Why? Because the service he provides to you is insignificant… you could easily do it myself. However, the doctor that just cured you of cancer got paid thousands of dollars. Why? Because the service he provides saved your life… something you couldn’t have done on your own. Attempting to balance this out in an egalitarian society (that which is promoted by socialism) destroys the value placed on goods and services.

    This is bad because, like it or not, acquiring wealth is a motivating factor. This isn’t just the case in the “evil” United States and its capitalist economy… it’s the same throughout the entire world. Always has been and always will be. The only difference the U.S. and the socialist countries is that here the wealth is owned by the people and that in the socialist countries, the wealth is owned by the government. Honestly, which sounds better to you?

    With wealth being a motivating factor, people are encouraged to come up with new ideas to improve the standard of living… iPods, cures for cancer and new medicines (i.e., goods and services that have value), because doing so can lead to personal wealth. If you take away the money factor this goes away. Why would engineers suffer through all that math and extra school if they wouldn’t be rewarded for inventing a new cell-phone technology? Why would doctors go through 8 more years of school than anyone else if they were gonna get paid the same as everyone else? Yeah, some would because they love the profession, but I promise you would see a decline in the advanced degrees. Again, if you don’t believe me, do a little research on socialism. Specifically, look at the standard of living and the economy of those countries that are socialist.

    Again… sorry for the rant…


  22. Posted by Ezra on October 12, 2008 at 3:44 am

    I think the comments about being socialists were jokes. But, the reason socialism doesn’t work is because human beings will always want more. We always want to have more, or be considered better, or to get ahead. There is nothing wrong with that, but you can’t have true fiscal equality because someone will always strive to get ahead. So socialism can never work without a lot of drugs to eliminate free will.

    There is another thing to consider in regard to how much people take in taxes. A low/middle class individual is likely to pay exactly what those tax table say in regard to percentage of income. But a very wealthy person is not. Their tax rate may start out there, but a wealthy person has an accountant and/or a tax attorney to dig through every receipt, make every deduction, and find every loophole possible. This is why the reality is that many people who make over a million dollars can end up paying less than 10% tax.

    I would never want to live in a world where everyone has the same income. If that were the case no one would know what they should strive to achieve – be that monetary achievement, mental achievement, or moral achievement. But people deserve a chance. And the poorest people have no chance. They have no chance because we can’t afford to educate them and keep them healthy (even with medicaid). A poor person sees no chances, so they don’t have a reason to try.

    The rest of us should shoulder the burden not because we are socialists, but because we are human beings. Your worth as a member of humanity is not determined by your wallet. Your wallet can make you comfortable, but your value to society is in your ability to help the other members of the human race.

    These are the facts, say you make 250,000, and you pay 35%. That’s 87.500. Obama’s plan would raise that tax back to 39%. And you would pay 97,500. That is take home of 162,500 vs. 152,500. Do you really think that 10k will have any effect at all on that person? And no one making less than that would see any increase, and most would pay LESS. Seriously, how unreasonable is that? All it does is bring the tax rate on the 250k+ people back to the level it was at before Bush — you know, when the economy was strong. And it lowers taxes for the rest of us. How can that possibly sound bad?


  23. Posted by Josh on October 12, 2008 at 7:50 am

    I’ll try to make this short….

    1) I agree about the tax loop hole point… which is why I support the Fair Tax, read up on it.

    2) What you suggested does not sound bad. I don’t know if that exactly describes Barack’s tax plan (even if it does, the president can only do as much as congress will let him).

    3) If you think raising taxes on the rich will make the economy strong again you are wrong. Our current situation has absolutely NOTHING to do with taxes. Also, history has shown that everytime taxes are lowered, the government receives more tax money. Why? Because when people have more money to spend, they spend more money. And no one spends more money than those that are extremely wealthy.


  24. Posted by sandie on October 13, 2008 at 9:53 am

    I would just like to add that the debate on this blog is infinitely more interesting than the so-called “debates” which have taken place between the presidential and vice presidential candidates. There is an actual exchange here of ideologies which really matter in today’s reality…

    Have any of y’all considered going into politics? All of you are more intelligent and more insightful than what current politicians have to offer!!


  25. Lol thanks Sandie! I agree that the presidential debates have been pretty awful. I cannot even stand to watch them. When I was young and naive I used to think I would be a great politician. I would be the one to make a difference. I would be different than all the other politicians. I would never lie or be corrupt. Unfortunately, I grew up and realized that there is no such thing. I honestly think that going into politics changes people because how can the entire field be made up of corrupt, slimy individuals?


  26. Posted by Josh on October 13, 2008 at 12:46 pm

    I have strong ambitions to run for president one day, but I got a ways to go before I’m at that point… I think my first step will be city council… I’ll keep you posted.


  27. Posted by Ezra on October 13, 2008 at 5:18 pm

    I think it’s funny that I am making the 27th comment to a post about being bored with politics. I think this is a record for Taylor’s blog.

    I think it would be great to go into politics, but I think it is a very difficult life. People say that you have to get a soul transplant to become an attorney. I know that isn’t true because there are several good attorneys in my family who are also good people. But going into politics is even more dangerous. There is temptation everywhere. I am impressed with people who are able to be successful in politics while maintaining any sense of who they are.

    Obama and McCain probably represent the two best people we have had run in a long time*. They have very different ideas, but they are good people who want to help their country. Oddly enough, my choice to support Obama has a lot to do with the direction he wants to take us in regard to his area of least experience – foreign policy. I think he has approached it rationally, and has a plan to restore us to a position of leadership around the world, instead of just the punchline to the jokes in other countries. A McCain presidency wouldn’t improve our ability to work with other countries. I think either of them can help us domestically, but McCain is too angry to work diplomatically.

    *Gore was a good guy too, but he was also a censor. So I think both of these guys are better. Don’t mess with my freedom of speech, or the freedom of the people who write my movies, video games, and books. And one of Gore’s projects was to censor mass media. But that is another blog altogether.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: