瀟灑人生路
人的一生最重要的是自由和隨之而來的責任。
最近幾天，美國主流媒體的一些有良知的新聞人，也對媒體對奧巴馬的獻媚表示擔心。ABC資深記者MICHAEL S. MALONE 說，媒體的這種偏袒讓他作為一個新聞工作者感到可恥。媒體是在同憲法，職業道德，和讀者玩火。
早年從中國大陸出來的人，都知道在國內每天早上聽中央台新聞，上班看“人民日報”，晚上看中央電視台的新聞聯播。 在“人民日報”，“光明日報”，“解放軍報”，“紅旗”雜誌，和“文匯報”等報上發表的社論或是特約評論員文章，是每天要看要學習和討論的話題。 當時人們的思想和意識，對事物的看法和判斷，基本上是同這些官方媒體所表達的是一致的。這叫統一思想和認識。
現在覺得很可笑，別笑的太早。這個現象正在美國發生，你每天打開電視看NBC，CBS，ABC，CNN，MSNBC，讀“紐約時報”，“洛杉磯時報”，“華盛頓郵報”，甚至看中文台，上中文網，你所接觸到和感受到的都是奧巴馬是美國的未來，是中產階級的大救星，是改變美國的救世主。民調已都支持奧巴馬，麥肯是擋在通往美國美好明天的絆腳石。共和黨是富人黨，民主黨是為勞苦大眾謀福利的政黨。
你沒看見那些為奧巴馬唱讚歌的孩子們有多天真爛漫嗎？ 你沒看見那些為奧巴馬跳忠字舞的有多神聖嗎？你沒看見那些美國年輕人對奧巴馬那種狂熱的崇拜嗎？你沒看見有多少人覺得能見到奧巴馬同能見到上帝一樣令人熱血沸騰嗎？
毫無疑問，奧巴馬在改寫美國的曆史，將改變美國的政治。在美國曆史上還沒有一個人有他這麽有煽動性和激發人們對政治的興趣。奧巴馬的競選將列入美國的政治和曆史的教科書。
是什麽樣的力量，讓一個不見經傳的年輕參議員擊敗理所當然會得到提名的希拉莉，很有希望擊敗麥肯成為下一屆美國總統。
支持奧巴馬的黑人精神領袖們認為奧巴馬是救世主，有神的力量在保佑他。支持奧巴馬的白人認為奧巴馬是民心所向。支持奧巴馬的華人你是怎麽想的？
我在網上和網下同不少華人同胞接觸，華人支持奧巴馬的主要原因, 基本上都是媒體和奧巴馬陣營給灌輸的垃圾：
1。布什把美國搞的一團糟，麥肯是布什，不能選麥肯。
2。共和黨是富人黨，民主黨是少數民族黨，不能選共和黨。
3。麥肯年紀太大了，佩林沒資格當副總統。
更多的華人選民以前是支持希拉莉的，現在轉向支持麥肯。對此，我做了個調查。 在華人圈子裏，支持奧巴馬的沒我想象的那麽多，也沒什麽極大的熱情。當我同他們談了我的想法後，很多人同意我的觀點，有的人轉而支持麥肯了。
這個現象令人鼓舞。
現在的民主黨早變味了，一些極端左派分子已經劫持了民主黨，自由主義已經不再是以前的自由主義了。
這也是為什麽當希拉莉納降於奧巴馬以後，有很多希拉莉支持者並沒有跟隨她去支持奧巴馬，而是轉向麥肯的主要原因之一。
其中最著名的算是PUMA（PARTY UNITY MY ASS）組織。
當政客們握手言和的時候，選民們知道他們的利益被出賣了。選民們沒有跟著政客走，而是走向獨立，這些選民是有主見的選民。
但你們聽到媒體報道你們了嗎？ 沒有！
而就是你們，將決定誰是美國下一任總統!
套用老毛的一句名言：希望寄托在你們身上！
題外話：
有關【美國大選】個人見解
Couric: You've cited Alaska's proximity to Russia as part of your foreign policy experience. What did you mean by that?
Sarah Palin: That Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between a foreign country, Russia, and, on our other side, the land-boundary that we have with Canada. It's funny that a comment like that was kinda made to … I don't know, you know … reporters.
Couric: Have you ever been involved in any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?
Palin: We have trade missions back and forth, we do. It's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia. As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there, they are right next to our state.
如果她像你說的，“沒有說服過任何人，也沒有在執政中涉及過此議題‘ 那這段采訪中所說她認為roe v wade 應該從聯邦法中去除由各州來單獨立法呢？
Couric Why, in your view, is Roe v. Wade a bad decision?
Sarah Palin: I think it should be a states' issue not a federal government-mandated, mandating yes or no on such an important issue. I'm, in that sense, a federalist, where I believe that states should have more say in the laws of their lands and individual areas. Now, foundationally, also, though, it's no secret that I'm pro-life that I believe in a culture of life is very important for this country. Personally that's what I would like to see, um, further embraced by America.
我倒是感覺麥肯還是能贏, 美國白人有些事情隻做不說.
my point is: Palin has more executive experience than Obama, Biden, and McCain combined. She may not sound like a layer or insider of Washington, buy she is not dummy as the media and democrat want you to think.
Do you know anyone else who will tell you what he or she really think about the issue?
Everyone is telling you what you want to hear. If you like what you hear, keep you eyes on your poket. All smooth talkers want your money and make you feel good at the same time.
Will America be better off with people like Sarah Palin in Washington? 100% yes!
"how much budget and how many people does Palin manage?"
how many people - 少於63萬。
how much budget - 不知道。可以google。 但是不會多，憑common sense。也許你知道，那就告訴我。可是 What is you point?
how much budget and how many people does Palin manage?
Let me ask you a question:
All terrorists have endorsed Obama, will that make Obama a terrorist?
好，這麽說吧。
你是老板，要招人當經理。來了兩個人應聘。一個年紀大了些，但很有經驗，處理過很多危機。一個大學剛畢業，很年輕，很有活力。
你問他們，怎麽當這個經理。 老人說，看好你的錢，做好你要我做的事。年輕人說，你知道你公司的問題是什麽嗎？
你一愣，哦，請指教。
他說，你要完了你知道嗎？
你嚇一跳，那怎麽辦？
他說，要變革。
你一聽，很好啊，怎麽變？
他說，把你的錢給員工分分，他們日子好了，你的日子才能好。
你說，怎麽分？誰多誰少？
他說，交給我辦。
你說，交給你，那你以前有類似成功的經驗嗎？
他說，以前別人都錯了，我這種方法有效。
你問，哦，你成功過嗎？
他說，有你和配合能成，YES WE CAN。
你當時很激動，覺得遇到高人了。 這個年紀大的老了些，年輕的好象有能力。
回頭一想，不對，你憑什麽說我的生意要完了，有什麽資格說你就能成功？
你把老人找來問，你不覺得我要完了嗎？
老人說，不會，你的根基很好。 隻是前任花錢大手大腳的老喜歡幹大事。
你說，那你怎麽辦？
老人說，開源節流，上馬未上馬的項目一律暫停開銷，咱們看看那些是浪費的項目，能不上就不上。
你說，哦，那錢怎麽來。
老人說，你有很多外購，能自己解決的還是自己解決。把錢用在刀刃上，多生產自己的產品。
你說，不分給員工什麽錢？
老人說，現在沒錢，先不分了，等生意好了以後再說。 你的生意好了，員工的工作才能穩定。 你都幹不下去了，他們隻能失業了。
你說， 你覺得那個年輕人怎麽樣？
老人說，我以前也很自負。但實踐告訴我，誰都能說，不是誰都能說到做到的。 我和他之間的選誰要看你覺得誰靠得住。
你說，你有什麽缺點？
老人說，不會忽悠，說話有時不討人喜歡，但我實話實說。
你又把年輕人找來再麵試。
你說，你真的能有本事做這個工作？
他說，你跟著我，無事不能。
你說，怎麽跟著你？
他說，把錢交給我，出任何事情你都要跟我站在一起。 YES WE CAN。明天更美好！
。。。。。。
我要是這個老板，我就雇那個老人，把這個信口開河的年輕人給轟出去。
突然好奇心起，google 了一下 Alaska 和 Hawaii 的人口。
Alaska：62萬6千9百32人；
Hawaii：1百28萬5千4百98人；
U.S.A.:2億9千9百萬人。
毛主席教導我們說 “凡是敵人反對的，我們就要擁護。凡是敵人擁護的，我們就要反對”
"如果你不在競爭激烈的幾個州，如OH, FL, PA, CO,VA，你這一票給誰基本上不起什麽作用。"
很不幸，我就在這幾個州之一。
我本就沒有想“起什麽作用”,你沒看我是為兒子才去投票嗎？
但是我也可以投老邁一票，如果你能以common sense 的語言說服我的話。你以上的信讓我看到的隻是激情。
當然我也可以投小奧，或廢票。
Exactly, she is a Governor of State of Alaska for God sake. Show some respect at least.
very good points, thanks.
佩林反複說墮胎是個人選澤。至於她對墮胎有自己的看法，她沒有說服過任何人，也沒有在執政中涉及過此議題，一些人深仇大恨從何而來呢！
在美國要抽人，後果不妙吧。
如果你不在競爭激烈的幾個州，如OH, FL, PA, CO,VA，你這一票給誰基本上不起什麽作用。
Wait for my Part 3, I am not done yet. : )
我一直沒有花功夫研究過兩造的政策，不大感興趣。可是當我聽到老邁選了佩林當副手，我就對老邁的判斷力失去了信心。
老邁老了，佩林在必要時接過總統的擔子是一個非常現實的可能性。可是她ready了嗎？我的判斷是堅定的No! 我不用知道別的，就一個詞：經曆。好，再加一句話，哪裏的經曆？我一年都聽不到幾次阿拉斯加的新聞。它有一百萬人口嗎？它有夏威夷人口多嗎？我不知道。但我把它們相提並論。（By the way, 我也不認為小奧的經曆夠格）。
佩林聲稱她完全夠格當總統讓我惡心。她打心裏真的認為她夠格嗎？？？
關鍵不是佩林，是老邁的判斷力。判斷力比目前的政策重要。四年會發生很多事，目前的政策可能很多不著邊際。想想8年前，小戈和小布大侃怎麽花財政盈餘，轉眼盈餘連個影子都沒有。
當然，我也沒有看出小奧有好的判斷力。
就你的信：
1）我不知道媒體為什麽要偏小奧。我的老美老板曾經告訴我，媒體是聽老板的，別的是瞎扯。可是媒體老板不是有錢人嗎？有錢人不是Pro共和黨的比較多嗎？不解。
2）“1。布什把美國搞的一團糟，麥肯是布什，不能選麥肯。” 你也沒有證明這話不對。
布什不是一個人撐了美國的天，是有一幫子人，一幫子共和黨人在幫他出主意，管這一大灘子。我可不認為他能不走共和黨的路子，一手遮天。
好，問題來了，共和黨有倆條根本不同的路子嗎？？？我不知道，你也沒證明有。過去8年確實不怎麽樣。你同意嗎？
哎，看來我是傾向投小奧的票了嘿！且慢！我到目前為止，看到的分析都是說我可以剪更多的稅，如果我投老邁的話！
投誰？看不看錢包投票？noso 你再掰一掰？
right on! you truly understand the urge I have for slapping at certain ones sometime. Let me complete my list:
If some say people who believe in religion are all brain washed and should go f**k themselves, I ll slap u. If some say people don't believe in religion have no soul and deserve to die, I ll slap you. If some say all blacks are criminals, I ll slap you. If some say all Muslims are terrorists, I ll slap you. If some say all Irish or Jews are sneaky, cheap bastards and should be wiped out from earth, I ll slap you. If some say, I have to give birth from rape or incest, I ll slap you. If some say, children will be watching pornos ,parents will be marring their kids once Obama is the president(thaz all over the Evangelical websites), I ll slap you.
人家cuteyeve說佩琳是女人的敗類是因為她反對墮胎即使是在被強奸的情況下。如果今天某個人強奸了我媳婦，還跟我說她應該把孩子生下來，我覺得這個人不僅是女人的敗類，更是全人類的敗類。沒有最起碼的良知，沒有同情心。回去看cuteyeve的原文，她說如果你說所有的黑人都是靠政府救濟的懶漢，她會抽你。我很欣賞她的nature passion. 這是一個有正義感的女人。你說把她的帖子留在這裏，讓大家看看支持obama的人都是什麽素質，從她身上我看到的是一個人起碼的良知，正義，愛心。反種族歧視就是正義。我對大部分黑人也沒有什麽好感，但是我明白不是所有的黑人都是惡棍。
to cuteyeve: you rock~~~~
你說:她(Palin)是我們女人的敗類！給我們女人丟臉！！
看來你是女人，可你又在其他評論中說:不要跟我說所有的黑人都是，我抽你! 這話不像一個女人說的。
如果你真是一個女人，夠可怕的。
Michelle Malkin
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
To paraphrase Queen Elizabeth II, 2008 is not a year on which honest journalists shall look back with undiluted pleasure. This has turned out to be even more of an annus horribilis than 2004, when Dan Rather's fake Bush/National Guard memo fiasco redefined the "BS" in CBS News. There were so many mainstream journalists swimming in the Democratic tank this year, the nation's newsrooms looked more like overcrowded aquariums at PetSmart.
In less than a week, the campaign season will be over. But the Obamedia's most shameful biases and notorious blunders shall not be forgotten. Here are my Top Five, by no means comprehensive and in no particular order:
1. The Los Angeles Times and the suppressed Obama/Jew-bash videotape.
In April, L.A. Times reporter Peter Wallsten reported on a 2003 farewell party for Rashid Khalidi, a radical Palestinian Liberation Organization spokesman/adviser turned Ivy League professor. The anti-Israel Arab American Action Network sponsored the gala. In attendance: good neighbors Barack Obama and Weather Underground terrorist duo Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.
Wallsten reported that the "event was videotaped, and a copy of the tape was obtained by The Times." But the news organization refuses to let readers watch the video of Obama and his left-wing terrorist friends and will not release the tape. It's "old news" now.
The paper had no problem, however, embedding a video clip of Sarah Palin's 1984 swimsuit pageant on its gossip blog and deeming it newsworthy.
2. Ogling Obama.
In May, CNN posted "breaking news video" of female journalists on Obama's press plane fawning over the Democratic presidential candidate as he talked on his cell phone. The caption listed on the network's website: "Obama in jeans: Sen. Barack Obama surprises the press corps by wearing jeans."
In the clip, several members of the press corps yell at a Secret Service agent to "sit down" because she's obstructing the view of their beloved Obama. They giggle and sigh as Obama straddles over a row of seats and they furiously click away on their cameras. "You're killing us," one of them says breathlessly.
No, you're killing yourselves.
Runners-up for Most Drool-Covered Groupies: The journalist who squealed "He touched me!" at the UNITY minority journalists' convention in July; the MSNBC producer who broke down and shed tears of joy upon learning that The One had clinched the Democratic presidential nomination; MSNBC host Chris Matthews, who proclaimed that he "felt a thrill up his leg" after an Obama speech in February; Oprah Winfrey, who confessed she did a "happy dance" for Obama; and the writer for the German publication Bild, who worked out with Obama at the Ritz-Carlton in Berlin and reported: "I put my arm around his hip -- wow, he didn't even sweat! WHAT A MAN!"
3. The Atlantic Monthly's deranged photographer.
Publisher David Bradley's once-esteemed magazine hired celebrity lens-woman Jill Greenberg to snap portraits of John McCain. Greenberg, an outspoken left-winger who goaded children into crying on film and captioned the images with anti-Bush slogans, sabotaged the photo shoot and gloated about it on a photo industry website.
After tricking McCain into standing over a strobe light to create ugly shadows on his face, she then posted vandalized versions of the imagery on her personal website with crude, vulgar labels. One featured McCain with fangs and blood dripping from his mouth -- with the Greenberg-added words, "I am a bloodthirsty warmongerer (sic)." Another piece of her "art" showed an ape (a favorite Greenberg subject) defecating on McCain's head. The highly respected editors at Atlantic professed shock despite Greenberg's notoriety. The name of her blog: "Manipulator."
4. The quote doctors and math-manglers at CNN.
In a botched attack on Sarah Palin, CNN reporter Drew Griffin cited National Review writer Byron York allegedly questioning Palin's abilities and character: "The National Review had a story saying that, you know, I can't tell if Sarah Palin is incompetent, stupid, unqualified, corrupt, or all of the above." York, however, was characterizing the press coverage of Palin.
In a botched tally, CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien proclaimed that an audience poll showed "overwhelming" preference for Joe Biden after the vice presidential debate. A freeze frame of the show of hands, however, showed the audience split. The mathematically challenged O'Brien also claimed that Palin slashed Alaska's special needs budget by 62 percent (which she recycled from the liberal Daily Kos blog), despite the fact that the governor increased special needs funding by 12 percent. Facts, schmacts.
5. Us Magazine publisher Jann Wenner's Obama apparatchiks.
The gossip mag's partisan slime job on Palin and her family ("Babies, lies, and scandal") last September opened the floodgates of Palin-bashing across the mainstream media and was the nadir of the year. Wenner -- a prominent Obama backer who ran countless hagiographies of him in sister publication Rolling Stone and featured the Obamas with the slavering headline "Why Barack Loves Her" on Us Magazine's June cover -- had his media flack e-mail the anti-Palin hit piece to all media in St. Paul for the Republican National Convention: "Might be useful as an illustration of how the news is playing out," the flack wrote.
Indeed, the side-by-side covers of the Palin smears and the Obamas' deification perfectly illustrate the year in Obamedia.
把你的帖子留在這裏，讓別人看看投奧巴馬的個別人都是什麽素質。
看來你就是那些每年收入在１0萬到１５萬之間或者更少的卻支持 McCain的。。。我還以為你多有錢呢？哦。。。
告訴你我對Palin 就是有深仇大恨，別讓我看到這個女人，看到她就是兩個中指！她是我們女人的敗類！給我們女人丟臉！！
告訴你我為什麽認為支持Palin的人都是腦子進水！Palin這個女人在被強奸下仍然反對墮胎，認為全球變暖不是人類造成，相信世界末日。瘋狂的宗教狂愛信什麽信什麽，我沒意見，但是這幫人用自己狹隘的心胸和世界觀對別人的選擇和權利指手畫腳就不行！！！！！！！！她自己因為住在一個離俄羅斯比較近的州就有足夠的外交經驗？一個明顯不了解基本國家政策的
palin還有這麽多鐵杆支持，不是因為她的知識經驗水平，是因為Palin的無知讓他們自我感覺良好，是因為她是一個堅決的極端的原教徒！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！凡是堅決反對墮胎的人（無論什麽原因）等哪天有人把你或者你女兒強奸並且懷孕了，我看看你是不是還反對墮胎！如果你自己被輪奸了還想把孩子生下來，那是你自己的選擇，不要強加給別人！
不選奧巴馬的十大理由
完整視屏：
http://www.youpai.org/blog.php?id=3332
不選奧巴馬的十大理由--第十條：判斷是非的能力
不選奧巴馬的十大理由--第九條：媒體偽造的產物
不選奧巴馬的十大理由--第八條：不可靠的副總統候選人
不選奧巴馬的十大理由--第七條：前後矛盾，反複變化
不選奧巴馬的十大理由--第六條：極左理念
不選奧巴馬的十大理由--第五條：民主黨一黨當政同時掌控國會
不選奧巴馬的十大理由--第四條：鼓吹種族分裂
不選奧巴馬的十大理由--第三條：高稅收；高政府開支
不選奧巴馬的十大理由--第二條：危險的外交政策
不選奧巴馬的十大理由--第一條：經驗嚴重不足
傳統上，台灣來的中國人（或台灣人）支持共和黨，大陸來的中國人（或大陸人）投民主黨的票。這是理念使然，據說共和黨是有錢人的黨，要搞資本主義；民主黨向著窮人，要走社會主義道路。上兩次大選，我就是投票給高爾和克裏，我討厭共和黨人假冒偽善。當我這次決定投麥肯一票後，許多朋友不以為然，認為我背叛了，嫌貧愛富，想傍大款，冒充富人。這都是誤會，雖然我不見得能說清楚。 不容否認，奧巴馬的確年輕，算得上漂亮，還很會講話。尤其是當他和麥肯站在一起辨論，麥肯不僅年老，長得不討人喜歡，說話也結結巴巴的。愛美之心，人皆有之，年輕人、婦女喜歡奧巴馬，也就沒有什麽奇怪了。但任何事情都有它的兩方麵，有一利必有一弊，套用大陸已經用濫了的一個術語，叫一分為二。年輕，經驗就缺乏。有經驗了，也就老了。漂亮，確實招人愛歡。但漂亮的，繡花枕頭者居多，鮮有漂亮且有兼智慧的。誰不愛聽好話？會講話絕對是個強項。既就是假話、空話，人們也愛聽，認為這是善意的謊言，是有異像、有遠見（vision）。我大概是年齡大了，對年輕、漂亮有了不同的認識；對會講好聽話的有了戒備，反倒覺得年老、有點醜、不善言辭的麥肯讓我放心。 奧巴馬提出的立即從伊拉克撤軍、改革、均貧富，聽起來不錯，細想就有問題了。 從伊拉克撤軍，這是遲早的事，但怎麽撤就有問題了。繼續打下去，不得人心，這麽大的開銷，美國再富也撐不了多久。撤軍有兩種模式，一種是南韓模式：大部撤出，留一小部分威懾，使對方不敢輕舉妄動；另一種是南越模式：全部撤出，讓北越吞並南越。從曆史和現實看，南韓模式既符合美國國家利益，也有助於地區穩定。無條件撤軍或人為地訂下撤軍時間表，無異於自取其辱，南越很快覆亡就是前車之鑒。 改革也是勢在必行，共和黨上台這八年，完全背離了共和黨的理念：財政平衡，小政府，已經和民主黨沒有本質差別了。唯一不同的是把錢錢在什麽地方，花給誰，難怪共和黨人及其傳統的支持者也都對共和黨不滿。但誰能改、怎麽改還是個問題。奧巴馬在芝加哥政壇、華盛頓圈子混了也不是一天兩天了，他都改過什麽？好像沒聽說過。明眼人都知道，美國當下的根本問題是大企業和院外活動集團在左右政府運作。目前，美國最需要的是敢於對大的利益集團說不的政治家，而不是隻會說好聽話的政客。聽說，奧巴馬競選花的錢是曆史上最多的，哪裏來的錢？還不是大的利益集團捐的？吃人家的口軟，拿人家的手軟，讓奧巴馬改革不是與虎謀皮嗎？ 均貧富，無論從人道上還是從社會安定上講，都是應該的。一味偏向利益集團，損害的當然是中產階級和窮人的利益。但怎麽幫窮人也有很大的學問，發錢當然最容易，且立馬見效，卻不長久。長遠的辦法是發展經濟，讓窮人有工作；發展教育，讓窮人有好的工作。外國人（印度人，中國人，墨西哥人）能到美國找到工作，找到好工作，為什麽生長在美國、享有各種政府幫助、保護、扶持的美國人反倒成了窮人，這說明了什麽？這恰恰說明發錢、保護根本不能結決窮人的問題，隻能使他們更窮，更依賴政府。奧巴馬的發錢政策也許會為他贏得選民、贏得大選，對美國經濟卻未必是福，這決非危言聳聽。 其實，我開始屬意的是民主黨的希拉莉和共和黨的哈克比，初選時，我是將票投給了哈克比。希拉莉和哈克比運氣不佳，都沒出線。在觀看了幾次辯論和看了有關的材料之後，我決定支持不那麽討人喜歡的麥肯。相對而言，我更信得過麥肯。我的一票不會有什麽作用，但我該盡自己的義務，也不用違心地去投一個自己信不過的奧巴馬。
next time, try not even reat it. goodbye!
來源: 辛評 於 08-10-29 06:56:38
奧巴馬從一個聞所未聞的議員，一躍而成為一個美國主要政黨的總統侯選人，甚至可能問鼎總統寶座，不能不說是一個人間奇跡。
奧巴馬是怎麽崛起的？
奧巴馬自己說是圓了美國夢。
如果真是這樣，也太神了點，這夢還真像是個夢。說穿了，除了年輕、形象好、能說會道，錢才是那隻看不見的手。
奧巴馬的錢好像是永遠花不完似的，希拉莉不行（據說克林頓會募款），麥肯更不行（雖說共和黨代表富人）。
奧巴馬的錢是從哪裏來的，恐怕隻有奧巴馬和捐錢給他的人知道了。肯定不是窮人，窮人還等著奧巴馬通過征稅把錢從富人手裏搶過來分給他們呢。有了錢，奧巴馬可以大作廣告，天天作，時時作，哪個媒體敢得罪財神爺？誰不看電視、上網、看報紙、聽光播？不怕你不信。
有了錢，奧巴馬可以讓ACORN花錢雇人投票。有了錢，奧巴馬可以雇用“自願者”拉選票。140美元一桶的石油天價，雖然讓大的石油公司撈了一把，更讓阿拉伯的產油國富得流油。他們富了，用油的都窮了，所有的人都窮了，這才是世界金融風暴的起源。
布什政府頂多是推波助瀾，大的石油公司和產油國才是背後真正的推手和贏家。人窮了怎麽過日子？奧巴馬說，這都是布什政府的罪過（布什怎麽把經濟搞糟的，沒人知道，也沒人關心），選我奧巴馬，我給你們發錢。中國共產黨說得好，人活在世上，生存權是首要的，那是基本人權。
馬斯洛的需求層次理論不也是在講人對生理的需求（食物、水、空氣和住房等）、安全的需求（人身安全、生活穩定）是最基本的嗎？對不信神的人來說,肚子也真是最根本的。人窮極了，有奶便是娘，能不選奧巴馬嗎？至於奧巴馬的花言巧語是望梅止渴還是飲鳩止渴，那是沒人知道，更沒人關心的。
如果奧巴馬真的當上總統，那將是民主的悲哀（選舉隻是彰顯了民主的局限而已：誰有錢誰當選），也是美國的劫數（該走下坡路了，美國隻能在極右的布什和極左的奧巴馬之間折騰）。
支持奧巴馬的都很狂妄，動不動就說不支持他的人不是傻就是腦子進水了。罵起佩林來深仇大恨。
很可笑。
還用裝什麽，全文學城都知道我是麥肯和佩林的強有力支持者。
你說的觀點等我在第三部分給你逐一解套。 Read what I have written, you may learn something here. : )
你想對華裔選民說什麽呢？稅收都用到了養懶人身上，你太缺乏對福利社會的理解了。社會福利不僅僅是對無家可歸的人，單親媽媽和沒有工作的人的照顧 -- 說實話，他們用不了幾個錢，從伊拉克提早一個月撤軍，夠養活他們好幾年的了。
稅收的大部分（絕大部分）用來改善教育和實現全民醫療保險--這才是最花錢的，也是奧巴馬獲得支持的原因。作為美國的一分子，你和你的後代也可以，並這是你的權力去享受這些。
提到稅收，布什讓每一個美國人都負債，出兵伊拉克，都用的是你的納稅人的錢？你是願意用錢去打仗，“在伊拉克再呆100年（老邁語），肥了那些美國最富有的石油軍火商,而普通百姓隻有冒失去孩子的危險，被削減教育和福利，替布什還天文數字的債，還是，換個理念不一樣的政府試試看。
還有一點，候選人代表自己的政黨。脫離政黨，用個人背景作判斷是不明智的。奧巴馬代表的正是希拉利克林頓的政黨。按照作者的說法，希拉裏的支持者，轉而支持風馬牛不相及的老邁。。。是你糊塗，還是那些人糊塗。
我最不喜歡的是布什-老邁的外交政策。老買一看就是個戰爭狂，自己在越戰時被人家俘虜，遭到虐待--現在居然投票支持虐待戰俘--他的小肚雞腸，睚眥必報可見一斑。布什把美國帶到了崩潰的邊緣，現在再來個人和他差不多。。。誰會希望美國人這麽傻呢？？？
如果你想知道美國的財產分布，好好看看這個表。按比例美國全部人口為１00，全部財產為１00，仔細研究一下：
50 individuals at the bottom have a nickel. ($0.05 times 50 = $2.50)社會最底層的５0％平均每個人隻有５分
The next 40 each have $0.70 of wealth (40 times $0.70 - $28.00).
中間的４0％平均每個人有７毛
The next 9 each have $4.00 of wealth (nine times $4.00 = $36.00)
中上的9％平均每個人有４塊
The last richest individual has $33.40 (one time $33.40). 最有錢的一個人，注意隻是一個人，也就是１％，卻擁有３３.４0
這是２00６美國做的國家財產調查，自己google一下 US Wealth Distribution，看看我有沒有蒙你！！！！！！
如果你們家庭收入在２５萬以上，你不願意每年多交１000稅款而不支持obama，我可以理解。我認為願意幫助別人是情分，但是保護自己財產也是本分。我們沒有必要去譴責那些不願意多出一毛的人，畢竟不能拿自己的高尚風格去要求每一個人。但是那些每年收入在１0萬到１５萬之間的或者更少的卻支持 McCain的，我就不明白了，你們是腦子進水了還是休克了？你們是不是還做著平生有機會成為億萬富翁的美夢？？？自己好好想一想，在未來的２0年裏哪個機會比較大，擁有１億美金，還是丟了工作要靠政府救濟一段時間直到你重新找到工作？除了現在已經擁有２000萬美金以上的人有可能成為前者，其他的人別做夢了。。。。。。。
說Obama是社會主義，你們連什麽是社會主義都沒有搞懂。社會主義是認為生產資源應該由社會或政府所控製。Obama有說這麽做嗎？他說的spread the wealth是指在過去８年裏，美國9５％的人收入的增長比例遠遠小於通貨膨脹物價的增長，所以收入在１0萬左右的人生活越來越拮據，而這主要是由於金融機構的風險投機和戰爭造成的。所以國家現在的根本任務是要幫助這些人度過難關。有錯嗎？你現在也許並不是這其中的一員，但是如果有一天你不幸成為了，你希望一個總統給你減稅多還是給億萬富翁多？
我對支持McCain的人沒有意見，站在自己的利益上看問題很正常。但是堅決支持Palin的人就是，特大號的！
我欣賞Obama, 不支持McCain，Palin讓我惡心，但是用種族，宗教，個人喜好，家庭等等去攻擊別人，就不行！！！！！！不管是我喜歡還是討厭的人，都不行！！！！
"他都70 多歲了也不缺錢，可 他為什麽要競選總統? "
Simple: Power, power, power!
Why did Chairman Mao start the Culture Revolutionary while he had already had the highest power? The absolute power.
No one is "美國真正的救星, 他是自由,正義和公正的化身". Mccain is not, Obama is not either. A democracy country only has leaders, good or bad, but no leader should be put into the seat of a savior. Obama does inspire a lot of people and he has shown his great leadership and organization ability during the year-long process. By making big mistakes on selecting the running mate and commenting on economy, Mccain has provoked all critics about his judgements.
us is already adopting socialism, at the moment the stupid $700B bill passed.
好吧。那我把“錯誤”改為“不夠明智”，夠溫柔了嗎？ ：））
政治見解南轅北轍是正常的。你可以說服別人 但不可以說別人的選擇是錯誤的。我是一希飯 但是當我仔細研究了08的政治記錄和他的政綱後 覺得08是不符合我的理念的後選人 相反的老麥有一些值得我考錄的地方。當道不同不象謀的時候 學會遵重別人 這才是真正的“beauty of the america"。
另外 很多當處選bush的人現在後悔莫及. 隻有better one沒有best one
麥肯也曾經與不少背景可疑的人打交道。隻不過因為他的能力就已經是夠大的批判靶子了，所以民主黨懶得拿這些來說事。
我們的根本不同是：你信奉個人自由，我信奉互相關愛。這正是美國兩黨觀念的差異所在。有不同是好事。有競爭才有活力。
但是，對於華裔族群來說，又多了另外一個考慮，那就是作為少數族裔的利益。這就是我寫那篇文章的動機。
全力支持樓主的觀點!
非常高興看到樓主的文章能夠再次讓廣大的文學城讀者看到， 並能引起大家的理性思考.
我在這裏隻想說一點, 麥凱恩作為一個曾經出生入死戰場的老兵, 自己的孩子還在前線, 他都70 多歲了也不缺錢，可 他為什麽要競選總統? 他不是在為自己私利考慮， 他是在拯救美國， 他才是美國真正的救星, 他是自由,正義和公正的化身.
希望華人朋友們擦亮眼睛， 認清奧巴馬掩藏非常深的真實麵目, 不要煤體左右你的投票權.你們的未來在你們的手中!
政治見解南轅北轍是正常的。你可以說服別人 但不可以說別人的選擇是錯誤的。我是一希飯 但是當我仔細研究了08的政治計
tell me why LA Times is protecting Obama:
LA Times Refuses to Release Tape of Obama Praising Controversial Activist
Video of farewell party for alleged PLO worker shows Obama toasting 'friend and dinner companion' with questionable past.
Rashid Khalidi, a professor and activist tied to the PLO, was feted by Barack Obama at a farewell dinner for the Palestinian activist. (AP photo)
The Los Angeles Times is refusing to release a videotape that it says shows Barack Obama praising a Chicago professor who was an alleged mouthpiece for the Palestine Liberation Organization while it was a designated terrorist group in the 1970s and '80s.
According an LA Times article written by Peter Wallsten in April, Obama was a "friend and frequent dinner companion" of Rashid Khalidi, who from 1976 to1982 was reportedly a director of the official Palestinian press agency, WAFA, which was operating in exile from Beirut with the PLO.
Click here to read the original LA Times story: 'Palestinians See a Friend in Barack Obama.'
In the article -- based on the videotape obtained by the Times -- Wallsten said Obama addressed an audience during a 2003 farewell dinner for Khalidi, who was Obama's colleague at the University of Chicago, before his departure for Columbia University in New York. Obama said his many talks with Khalidi and his wife Mona stood as "consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases."
Khalidi is currently the Edward Said professor of Arab Studies at Columbia. A pro-Palestinian activist, he has been a fierce critic of American foreign policy and of Israel, which he has accused of establishing an "apartheid system" of government. The PLO advocate helped facilitate negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians in the early '90s, but he has denied he was ever an employee of the group, contradicting accounts in the New York Times and Washington Times.
The LA Times told FOXNews.com that it won't reveal how it obtained the tape of Khalidi's farewell party, nor will the newspaper release it. Spokeswoman Nancy Sullivan said the paper is not interested in revisiting the story. "As far as we're concerned, the story speaks for itself," she said.
The newspaper reported Tuesday evening in a story on its Web site that the tape was from a confidential source.
"The Los Angeles Times did not publish the videotape because it was provided to us by a confidential source who did so on the condition that we not release it," the Times' editor, Russ Stanton, said. "The Times keeps its promises to sources."
In recent months Obama has distanced himself from the man the Times says he once called a friend. "He is not one of my advisers. He's not one of my foreign policy people," Obama said at a campaign event in May. "He is a respected scholar, although he vehemently disagrees with a lot of Israel's policy."
But on the tape, according to the Times, Obama said in his toast that he hoped his relationship with Khalidi would continue even after the professor left Chicago. "It's for that reason that I'm hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation -- a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid's dinner table ... [but around] this entire world."
A number of Web sites have accused the Times of purposely suppressing the tape of the event -- which former Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn reportedly attended.
Sullivan said she would not give details of what else may be on the tape, adding that anyone interested in the video should read the newspaper's report, which was its final account.
"This is a story that we reported on six months ago, so any suggestion that we're suppressing the tape is absurd -- we're the ones that brought the existence of the tape to light," Sullivan said.
The Los Angeles Times endorsed Obama for president on October 19.
http://blog.wenxuecity.com/blogview.php?date=200809&postID=12598
但我尊重美國式的民主，所以也尊重你的意見。有一點我同意你，就是華人應該多關心一下美國政治、美國社會。關心多了、思考多了，自然會對自己的選擇有更準確的判斷。
來源: wxcfgh85 於 08-10-28 15:31:00 [檔案] [博客] [舊帖] [轉至博客] [給我悄悄話]
醇香美味又健康 用豆漿機自製鮮豆漿 | 全自動的現代高壓鍋 | 眼睛保健及舒壓助眠儀
原來打了很長的一篇文章, 誤按了一個鍵就全沒了. 隻能簡單地談談了. 原因有三:
1, 個性問題, 喜怒不形於色. 這樣的人城府很深, 而且當政的曆史不長,無法判斷他的具體政治取向.但是有一點可以確定, 他不喜歡現在美國的政治格局,是很不喜歡,但是他想采取什麽措施來改變? 沒有人知道.
2, 心胸狹隘, 或者可以說是固執已見. 這從他不用希拉利作副手可以看出. 你可以說這是他不喜歡讓難支配的實力政客進入他的班子, 但我會認為這說明他很不喜歡自已的政治主張受到那怕一點兒中和.有人可以說如果迫於壓力就選一個自已不喜歡的人,這會變得太容易改變立場. 但是我會認為一個政治家本來就是應該隨時修改自已的政策來應對實際的需要.太固執已見的人,也許不是政客,卻可能會是極端主義者.
3, 他上台,基本上美國很可能會輸掉兩場戰爭. 現在伊國的遊擊戰已被壓製到了原來高峰期的三四成. 阿富汗的塔利班實力則不算太強,頂多就是二三萬人,而且武器不強,到現在為止都隻打死了二三百名美軍. 也就是說,隻要美國願意,這兩場戰爭失敗的可能性不大.但是以他的說法,如果巴基斯坦解決不了內部的極端主義包庇塔利班的行為,他就出兵巴國. 這根本是難以想象的事. 因為你一邊為了伊國的那點遊擊力量就想撤離, 另一邊卻吹要進軍巴國,很明顯就是吹牛. 巴國的軍力和戰爭潛力就是比起90年時第一次波斯灣戰爭的伊拉克都要強上好幾倍.光是一億人口的戰爭潛力,和到處都是的宗教學校,還有民間的自造武器能力,這就是打遊擊戰的良好基礎. 可見他隻不過是口頭說說, 以近期不可能實現的打巴來掩飾他上任後從伊國撤軍的意圖. 事實上,如果按他的主張,阿富汗也是不可能打勝的. 這樣一來,美國必然會出現國內政治嚴重分裂的局麵.
輸掉戰爭都還是其次. 據報道, 他在競選中指責賣很恩"想徹底消滅北朝鮮",消滅北朝鮮又怎麽了? 你為什麽這般關心? 似乎他關心北朝鮮還關心多於美軍. 對於這麽一個政治人物, 人們就可想而知他的政策大方向會是怎麽樣的了.
現在人們討論O8和賣很恩, 似乎老是集中在加減稅上麵, 好象加減稅幾百幾千就是實行了什麽製度. 依我看, 這都是很次要的問題. 關鍵在於O8一旦實行激進的對外對內政策,美國內部的其他政治勢力都不會甘心就此罷休. 肯定會造成整個社會的分裂和對抗.
金融危機隻是小事,美國經曆的經濟危機多了, 采取各種經濟手段, 渡過危機也隻不過是時間問題. 但是O8一旦當選, 如果一意孤行地推行他的政治意圖,這才是最要命的.如果人們期待的是一場轟轟烈烈的革命,那麽您還可以選他.但是如果您要的隻是一場變革,希望您們等到再過十年後,他的政治主張已經能從他的政治生涯中得以完整的反映後再作決定.
有報紙說, O8有成為偉大總統的潛質, 我對這種論調是很反感的, 因為是否偉大應該在執政結束後以至於結束一段時間後再由人們作決定, 而不是僅靠一場選舉活動就認為某人已有可能成為偉大總統.
選黑人當上總統,以減少種族主義, 這種思路是對的. 但是,也要選黑人中比較有包容心而非是激進主張的一個. 從現在的種種情況來看,我隻是看到O8與極端思想有種種聯係,看不到他包容的一麵. 大家也好,O8自已也好, 應該給他更長時間的政壇磨練, 過早的成為總統, 對所有人都不會是個好
"我們也許今天沒有25萬的收入 但是明天， 我們的兒子， 孫子，需要得是一個良性的上進環境。" well said. If I want socialism, I would not have come here. For our next generation, we must say no to Obama.
奧要取消高中的PA科程 gpa不須超過4。00 我們孩子學業上的竟爭
優勢被“wipe out" 生存空間會很惡劣。
奧的“打土豪 分田地”在中國已經臭名昭諸 難道我們還要經曆一次嗎？
JUST WORDS: Obama's Ever-Changing Definition Of Rich
ARLINGTON, VA -- Today, in Pennsylvania, John McCain highlighted the fact that throughout this campaign, Barack Obama's "definition of rich has a way of creeping down." From $250,000 to now $150,000.
Obama has made a lot of promises. First he said people making less than 250,000 dollars would benefit from his plan, then this weekend he announced in an ad that if you're a family making less than 200,000 dollars you'll benefit -- but yesterday, right here in Pennsylvania, Senator Biden said tax relief should only go to "middle class people -- people making under 150,000 dollars a year." It's interesting how their definition of rich has a way of creeping down. At this rate, it won't be long before Senator Obama is right back to his vote that Americans making just 42,000 dollars a year should get a tax increase. We can't let that happen.
Agree!
As I said, when someone applies a job with no experience but says he can do more the job offers, he is full of hot air.
You know, if he did not fraud the vote in primary, it will be Hillary against McCain, and Hillary may just win the election. Looking back, now I think I would be OK with her than a socialist Obama.
look, if you can publish that book, and have many followers like Obama does, then you will be rich. Obama made $4.2 mil in 07, most of his money came from the book selling.
In the real world, you need money. : )
"to pay tax and you are going to die one day"
good point. I remember this:
"in America 兩個東西， 稅和死亡不可避免"
Then America should create Tax, otherwise it would die.
I will publish my books and tell the truth from heaven and create taxes. I do not know if America sentences me and let me die. Is it legal to tell the truth from heaven which may be different from public view??
This is my sole concern!!
I would appreciate it if you could give me further advice on this since you have more knowledge on American law.
let me tell you something:
The real deal is you are going to pay tax and you are going to die one day.
Everything else is not real.
When you can support yourself in real life, then the world is wild open to you. : )
Thanks.
The physics community is not real as you can see in my book. That is why it is hard to get a job from physics academia.
I try to find a job in real world. I am afread the real world is not real either!
No personal attack there! I was kidding. Your personal details page says that you are 12.
Get real, get a job. : )
typical personal attack from lefewingers, I really don't care what you think about me, because I am not running for President and I don't belong to any party.
If you think watching Foxnews make me a 12 years old, then you have not born yet. : )
First of all, that artical is written by someone else. Second of all, if you think others people is yours, then you are a socialist, period.
I am a "youpai" if you really want to label me.
Great points, I agree with you.
Like many people here, I came from China with my bare hands. Now I can give job opportunities to my fellow Americans. Under Obama's administration, I am better off retire. But money is not the most important issue in my life, I have enough.
The issue is the ideology of socialim is poison to this great country and to our next generation. When people think it is their "right" to take other's hard earned money, when the government tells us how much is rich and how much is too much, then who wants to be rich and who wants to work hard at all? The ideology of socialism will kill this country's prosperity and make it a third world country. That's only money side problem, the moral side will go down the drain when people think others' money is their.
Go check a website: www.youpai.org, you will find many people agree with you there.
other reasons why I will not vote for JM:
1) He is too hawkish. He will start more wars than Bush.He was willing advocating for the Iraq war and he will likely venture into other areas of the world.
2)He is a hot head and has a short temper
3) The worst: He picked Palin
I am not surprised by your postings, since you are a FOX watcher (or you are only 12).
"OBAMA牛到現在，掀起了一股個人魅力的風潮，但這是選總統，不太相信一個偶像派能把國家治理好。"
well said. : )
Then you should vote for Obama. : )
我的看法是，誰當總統也不能保證美國繼續單極稱王。過去有資源和高科技引領。現在已達到飽和！！！物理學已達極點(生活技術幫助方麵)，而生物學如克隆人，沒有一絲商業價值！！
而且，美國的高中生學中國的小學課程，大學生學中國的高中課程，就象中國的文化大革命一模一樣！！！知識上不可能總是指望移民(今年有五萬中國人回國)；產品不可能總是指望中國製造；騙錢(華爾街)已經行不通了！！！！
一言之，誰當總統也不能保證美國繼續單極稱王。我害怕的隻有一點：戰爭，戰爭！！！
建議大家看看另一篇博文，再做抉擇，由“78級興趣”寫的“您選誰？ 奧巴馬vs.馬凱恩”：
http://blog.wenxuecity.com/blogview.php?date=200810&postID=37419
還有，此三點不無道理，起碼不是垃圾：
1。布什把美國搞的一團糟，麥肯是布什，不能選麥肯。
2。共和黨是富人黨，民主黨是少數民族黨，不能選共和黨。
3。麥肯年紀太大了，佩林沒資格當副總統。
再有，多數富人的巨額資產和收入，不是平等努力來的，是掠奪或投機來的。
I came from China, a socialist country. Look what that did to the Chinese economy in the old days. What B.O. (Obama) talks about scares me, I will share a few thoughts with you:
1). B.O want to give rich people's money to the poor.
There is a reason the poor become poor. Have you seen any Chinese beggers on the street? Or Asian beggers for that matter? We work hard, we give our kids the best education we can afford once we make money. What is the motivation? You can be what you want to be if you work hard and have an education in this country. What B.O. does is to take away that motivation. If you know your hard earned money is going to somebody who does not work, will you still work hard? If everybody think so, that can not be good for this country in the long run.
2). B.O. promised lot of things. Money for lots of programs. One of thre programs we all know is the minority program in academic institutes (affirmtive action). I do not know about you, but, in the lab, if you accuse a white student lazy, you do not worry about other things, the fact is the fact. If he or she is black person, you better make sure you have all the evidence, otherwise you will not be able to concentrate on your work for a while, because you are a racist. I like people in all colors, but, don't you think we play the race card too much now, it is sicking. What do you think this situation will become after B.O. is elected.
3). I just do not trust B.O.
By the way, I watch Foxnews and local media alternatively, very amusing, but, you will sort out who is lying pretty soon, we all pretty smart, right?
Thanks.
But those real jobs are not secure at all as the current crisis reveals.
I can see you are very enthusiatic with the Election and I appreciate it. We have the same amount of enthusiasm but in different directions.
Plus, you seem to think this way: if I happen to agree with something said in the media, it is because I don't have my own judgment.
I don't understand who this logic works.
Let me give you some advice if I may:
Leave that job to God, and find a real job for yourself.
what you said in the first part doesn't make any sense to me.
On the second part, as I said in my writing, those reasons are the biased junks that media and Obama campaign have been feeding voters. They did a good job to you sine you agree what they said.
Here is catch:
If it is OK for you to take other people's hard earn money for benefit yourself, will it be OK that others take pieces of your hard earn money to benefit their well being?
If McCain is elected, it will be a very sad thing for America. I don't think he has the right temperament for being a good president. Talking of experience, I think good judgment is more important. If McCain passes away in office, which according to acturial data, is highly possible, Palin is even worse.
What is dangerous about Palin is because she has such a small mindset, which is unfit for the arduous tasks ahead facing this great country.
can you find a teaching job?
alabama
thanks.
I do not have Green Card. Are you willing to help me?
interesting, where did u graduate with Ph.D?
"We Chinese often apply green cards for elder parents, taking advantage of medicaid and other governmental programs. Where does that money come from?"
What a good question!
and you vote for Obama?
What are you thinking? : )
Thank GOD we still have Foxnews to watch, otherwise, I will never watch TV any more.
Foxnews is the only network who have gutts to question Obama.
That's why Foxnews has more viewers than CNN and MSNBC combined. American are not stupid as many elit people think they are.
whenever someone questions Obama or Biden, they don't like it and shut down their voices.
就在我開始寫這本書一周之後，世界爆發了全球性的史無前例的金融危機和經濟危機(它告訴人們，市場的民主自由和全球一體化不適合人類社會)！因人類的過度貪婪造成的溫室效應幾十年內不斷惡化！妄稱宇宙沒有意義的廣義相對論即將接受引力探測器B實驗的宣判！我的博士畢業論文在三年前宣告星係圖案是有意義的！十二年前第一個克隆動物多麗羊誕生！
人類到了是選擇與自然和諧存在還是像低級動物一樣自相殘殺滅亡的時候！
不善良的人們，總統和億萬富翁們，相對論騙子們：在上述鐵的事實麵前，你還相信宇宙是沒有意義的嗎？你還相信世界不是物質的嗎？你懂得鑽木取火的簡單道理嗎？
I agree with you. Only creation of job can help the economy, and who can create more jobs? Not the government, the small business will. and who is going to punish the small business? Obama!
We all know talk is cheap.
When you apply a job, you need to show the records what you have done and why you are qualified for the job.
If someone says he can do a better job than the job offers, you know he is full of craps.
That person is going to be the President of this country, that's scary and I want to say wait a minute, I rather let someone who knows the job to have it.
That's OK, you are entitled to what you believe.
I don't care how they collect tax. I want to see how they can stimulate the economy.