Money is the whole ball of wax; Democrats need to fear that.

We all need to fear that! Indeed, they will be ruthless. People kill
over money daily. I pray for
Obama’s safety.

I think I collected about $35 and most of the people who came were surprised that the buttons and bumper stickers weren’t free. They were doing a favor to wear a button! Disappointing experience, to say the least.

Something has happened in the years since and its not all Barack Obama. Over a million Americans are willing to put up their money to take this back from special interests that are very deeply distrusted. Distrusted beyond just the suspicion that they are stealing our tax money (the motivator of the $100 maximum donation Brown campaign was the S&L bail-out). People suspect that these special interests got us into the Iraq War for selfish reasons that have never been exposed and remain covered up by the media and Congress even thought Democrats were given control of Congress.

They will try to stop Obama and they will be ruthless. If it weren’t for those special interests, logic would have forced many more superdelegates to come over to Obama 2 weeks ago. Money is the whole ball of wax; Democrats need to fear that Obamas donors can be turned against them if they conspire to aide McCain, as so many of them conspired to elect Lieberman over Lamont in 2006.

do not forget

“Obama’s answers are vague at best. And I agree that I am blessed. But I don’t feel that supporters of tax increases have a right to tell me how much I can and cannot afford to lose.

“Not a very persuasive argument on either point.”

::

I’m not attempting to persuade. I’m stating opinions and facts. You got along well before the tax cuts, you’ll likely get along well if they’re repealed. The same can’t be said for a host of other families who’ve yet to receive a tax cut. And that’s a fact.

If Obama isn’t your candidate, then don’t vote for him.

Obama’s answers are vague at best. And I agree that I am blessed. But I don’t feel that supporters of tax increases have a right to tell me how much I can and cannot afford to lose.

Not a very persuasive argument on either point.

::

I don’t accept your definition of hedging, anonymous.

Obama’s answers, thankfully, aren’t dogmatic which means it won’t be about defending against a line in the sand. Obama’s answers are about seeing more than one side of an issue and allowing a further examination of the issues to determine a solution.

And you’re truly blessed that you make so much money that you can lose $24,000 of your income and still live comfortably.

Is education reform to be achieved by advancing the policies of merit pay and school vouchers? Or will Obama cave to the NEA? He is still hedging on this issue.

Washington takes too much of my hard earned money as it is and spends it wasteful ways that are not always transparent. Seeing how my money is wasted is not as good as keeping it for myself.

If Obama repeals the Bush tax cuts and raises the cap on Social Security, I personally face a salary cut of approximately $24,000. That’s one year of college for my son. That’s the total of my charitable contributions for the year.

We still live in a representative democracy, where we entrust elected officials to act in our best interests. Right now, I’m not convinced Obama’s my man.

Even if many of the individuals contributing to his campaign at first belonged to industries famous for seeking influence in Washington, his small donations now out weigh them. This is a truly radical change because as president, he won’t have to worry about pleasing any particular special interest group, when he is confident that he can raise even more from small individual contributors over the internet.

This is any amazing turn of events that has not yet been fully explored by the media.