John Adams

Here's another bunch of jobs Obama's anti-free trade stance would scuttle. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080710/ts_al...X0qDvI.kDgDW7oF But maybe the anti-free trade stuff would protect your programming job.

Before you said you were for people who were for labor, by which I assume you mean organized and non-organized laborers--a big umbrella. Are you including the non-labor middle class in the people you support?

You just mocked someone for voting for the guy you think may lose. Get your positions straight.

So you vote for the candidate who you think may win. How very principled of you. Some of us here will vote for the candidate we think is best.

I'll be getting one once the furor dies down. My blackjack is over 2 years old and has some wear and tear problems.

I'm for letting companies outsource if they want to.

So you want to make it harder for international companies to manufacture here? Toyota and Honda employ hudreds of thousands of people. GM--an American company--buys Honda engines, manufactured in the US. US manufacturing output is at an all-time high. While US labor jobs drop, just like they've dropped for every wealthy country around the world except Japan, since 1965. Lots of reasons for that--and only some of them have to do with your Chinese bogeyman. Machines produce more. Designs are more efficient and need less assembly. Less repairs and replacement parts are required. Of course, outsourcing those and other jobs reaps huge rewards for the consumer, who pays less for goods and in many cases is that same Labor class you care about. The world is complicated and being anti-NAFTA and free trade--like Obama--is a short-sighted and populist. It's a perspective that fails to recognize the benefits of free trade to your labor class. BTW, McCain is only reluctantly pro-Free Trade.

What is a "working-class American?"

Rolling back our free trade agreements will be just awesome for the working class. Barr? Maybe but not likely. He seems intellectually dishonest. It's one thing to change a position occasionally. It's another thing to lobby hard for one side. Then the other. On multiple issues.

You talk about how middle America has the choice of moving to Canada or voting for one of the two major parties like it's a binary proposition. I was taxing your brain to consider other options beyond Canada and Dem/Rep. Again, step out of line. Maybe you can vote for someone you believe in instead of someone you admit you don't. Or not. March on.

Or maybe...just maybe, they can vote for someone else who they like instead of lining up behind you in one of the two lemming-lines headed off the cliff.

Substitute Brady for Brand and Patriots for Duke and you've got the flavor of sour grapes we usually get around here. Thanks for the change up,

If only the Bills were such a non-Dynasty.

This is your best post to date. I am a Labatt guy. You have ignored the entirety of the counter-arguments in this thread. That's Molson-like behavior, whether you're him or not. And I don't disagree with you--just your arguments.

I waffle on the death penalty issue. My posts in this thread are to poke holes in 2 oft-cited rationales for the death penalty: cost-savings and deterrence. I don't buy either one. The death penalty is mostly about vengeance, and I'm not against it based on that--just pointing it out. When I hear about a heinous crime (esp where kids are involved), I think the death penalty is exactly what's needed. But that's about revenge, not deterrence or cost-savings. On the other hand, when I hear about the innocents or mentally impaired on death row (the vast minority, admittedly), my blood runs cold at the thought of our government bestowed with the power to kill its citizens.

Are you going to respond to arguments or just keep posting whatever you feel like? If you're not Molson, you sure have is MO down perfectly...just on the other side.

They area a great tool for novices and non-novices alike because they force you to rebalance. Almost no one can do better than investing in the major indexes, AND you'll save a ton of money on fees from specialty funds or paying a broker.

Dear Carl Marx, take your class warfare elsewhere.

I'm...crying? What an amazing video. Music is a 10. Video is a 10. If I get a high def camcorder, can I do this too?

Stop whining. If the government didn't take that extra 10% from you, you would squander it.

It costs more to execute than incarcerate. I found some Congressional testimony on this--seems pretty clear actually. Something like at least a million dollars more to execute than incarcerate for 40 years. Most of that legal fees of course.

A Troll FRENZY!

In a moment like Michael Douglas has in Falling Down, I could kill someone. And I gaurantee you, the death penalty would serve as no deterrent. Similarly, I could be out to dinner and a guy might say the wrong thing to my daughter and I could pound him to a pulp. Again, death penalty not on my mind. In other non-crime-of-passion examples, if I decided to kill someone--and planned it out in a premeditated way--capital punishment would not be on my mind. Getting caught would be--but not capital punishment. Like many killers, I'd rather be dead than in prison for 40 years. I don't see it as any deterrent. It doesn't save money. It's purpose is punishment and vengeance, and that's actually not a bad purpose, but let's not pretend otherwise.

You do know it costs more to execute someone that keep them in prison for 40 years right? And I'd rather the government's power to execute its own citizens be checked at every turn.

It's better that the government's power to kill not be checked.