Mike Obrien wrote: Because "permanent tax cuts" is socialism, right?

"Permanent tax cuts?"  See -- Obama hasn't even been sworn in yet and already they're taking things away from me with their socialist "redistribution" schemes!

;-)

Because "permanent tax cuts" is socialism, right? 

Pinko.

I am all about tax cuts, love 'em.  But how does this square with Obama's tax plan, Mike?  Is the stimulus package part of the $700 Billion or is it new debt -- neither was clear to me from the article.

Marcio Ferreira wrote: what kind of silly fiction is that?

Silly INDEED!  Still, I'm holding out hope that Obama will designate Samuel Jackson as the Secretary of Defense, then rename the Defense Department "SHIELD."  THAT would definitely make me feel safer!

:-)

Silly INDEED!  Still, I'm holding out hope that Obama will designate Samuel Jackson as the Secretary of Defense, then rename the Defense Department "SHIELD."  THAT would definitely make me feel safer!

:-)

+++

Marcio Ferreira wrote: grow up, please.

I'm assuming that you intended to have been a "smiley" emoticon associated with that statement -- if not, I'm going to have to insist that we invade Brazil. 

I'm just sayin'.

;-)

Stepping away from some of the vile racist-related stuff that's rearing its ugly head, I spotted this on another (non-comics related) message board that I frequent:

QUOTE: Obama's 'civilian national security force. ------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------- “have a civilian police force as strong as our military." "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded." Fill me in. What do think of this? Of all the Obama Plans this one should strike the most fear into the hearts and minds of ALL AMERICANS. This crap reminds me of the Brown Shirts Hitler had. What is your take? Are we talking about creating a police state here? The U.S. Army alone has nearly 500,000 troops. That doesn't count reserves or National Guard. In 2007, the U.S. Defense budget was $439 billion. Is Obama serious about creating some kind of domestic security force bigger and more expensive than that? If not, why did he say it? What did he mean?

THIS was my response:

I voted for McCain because things like this did concern me going into the election (lots of seemingly good ideas on the surface, but not enough details to make me comfortable about the possible execution or outcomes).  The paranoid part of me says "police state," but I think that in reality this comes down to two things:

1) Obama envisions a military that has a significantly reduced budget (more in-line with other domestic spending programs and less of a significant item in the budget), and;

2) Obama plans to use the money cut from the defense budget to essentially create a jobs program.  A "civilian national security force" could consist of many different elements -- increased federal spending for state and local police agencies, allowing them to better-equip existing officers, and also allowing them to put more officers on the street to help reduce crime at the local level (fewer officers and a rising crime rate have been recent concerns in Indianapolis, for example). 

This could also allow for increased funding for healthcare professionals -- additional student loans for those seeking nursing or medical degrees to ensure that there are enough healthcare professionals in the event of a pandemic, for example.

This could also make increased funding available for PAID "crime watch"-type community organizations -- pay people to serve as unarmed but deputized "peace officers" in high-crime areas; that would create jobs for the unemployed, thus reducing povety, and it would also help troubled areas of a community to become better organized to help stop existing crime from spreading.

These are just a few ways that I could see this actually WORKING for the American people in ways that wouldn't result in a "police state."  I'm hoping that these are the types of things that Obama has in mind.

Discuss.

[TYPO]

But how does this square with Obama's tax plan, Mike?

Shhh... Geoff, Geoff... let's not cloud the issue with facts and logic.  Barack Obama is President!  We all get to ride our unicorns over the rainbow and eat cotton candy clouds for breakfast!

Seriously, though?  I don't know.  One wonders if Pelosi is talking without consulting Obama's plan?  Look - I like Democrats and everything, and she's from my hometown, but... she's on that side of nuts and unreliability.  I would love for her not to be in the position she's in.

Having said that - why not permanent tax cuts?  It could be something to work towards.  Like... you know what they say about Nixon going to China - maybe, odd as it seems, it'll take the Democrats to finally enact what the Republicans always wanted?  (like Clinton decimating Welfare, or passing NAFTA)

Keep in mind - if you look at Obama's plans - read his writings - he's not going to dismantle our safety net programs.  That's clear.  But he's also not interested in giving out hand-outs to layabouts, either.  He's pushing for personal resonsibility - now it's easy to say that - let's see how he legislates personal responsibility, but my guess will be that it'll be as I've suggested here on this board and the net.54 board and the Magnus board - it'll be the current system, but more strictly regulated, and educated.  Some poor people are poor because they can't handle money.  We should teach them.  That sort of thing.

John Bodin:  Good thoughts (your original post - haven't read your new one just above mine).  Good man, Bodin.

Glad we're both Americans.