I was told that Barack Obama plays chess and he definitely supports chess. However, it is also known now that his wife plays chess as well.
“Mrs. Obama and her brother were expected to fill their time with books, chess, sports — and, critically important they both said, dinnertime conversations with their parents.” (Source: NY Times – The link was sent to me by Ellen. Thanks Ellen!)
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
That’s pretty cool. Obama has been the candidate of my choice for some time now, and I guess this solidifies that! I’d love to play him sometime. Looks like the odds of that happening, which were slim before, are only going to get slimmer, though.
I’m reading Obama’s first book, Dreams from My Father and he talks about learning chess from his grandfather and his step-father. I wonder whether Barack and Michelle have taught their daughters to play chess. How cool would that be — to have a chess playing family in the White House.
That would be cool…about as cool as having the government pick our pockets even more…
Reality is lost on most liberal democrats.
And, come to find out that I pay (already too high) taxes AND make too much to get the GWB rebate.
How does someone making small money, pays virtually nothing in taxes, deserve a rebate?
Studies have shown (liberals, hold your nose – I’m actually going to ‘cite facts’ and we know how that sends you into hysterics) that only about 20% of tax ‘rebates’ goes back into stimulating the economy. The other is generally to pay off bills or is invested.
Facts are Stubborn Things…
Mitt 2012!
I think the news story says that they might have played once, but does not say that they play now.
Politics makes me feel dirty everytime I see it.
It is the same material, just different wrapping.
A liberal, is a liberal, is a liberal. No matter what color he she or it is, a liberal is what they always will be.
Wow, Dr. Seuss would be proud of me!
“No, I will not vote Democrat Sam-I-am” “I will not vote for one in a box, not here or there, not anywhere…”
Baptism only does not a Christian make.
“Anonymous said…
Baptism only does not a Christian make.”
And how is this relevant to Barak Obama?
Help me out please…
Amazing the venom that conservatives bring to political discussions. Guess I shouldn’t mention their consistent failures…
I assume the “facts” that Anon of 9:00 is referring to come from a recent AP poll which asked low income/social security dependent/Veteran’s benefits dependent Americans what they would do with a rebate were they to receive one. (It has been heavily cited in the Blogoshpere.) In it, 19% stated that they would spend it. The rest cited a plethora of other destinations for the money dominated by paying off debts.
I read ANON 9:00 correctly, the implication is that giving “stimulus” rebates to this group would not achieve the desired goal of stimulating the economy. However, OTHER polls (Zobgy), taken of a broader population which includes higher income folks who will actually receive the rebate, show very consistent responses across the board: roughly 20% of ALL people say they will spend the rebate money (not just low income folks) and thus stimulate the economy- which is, of course, the stated goal of the “stimulus” program.
So, if we assume the respondents of these polls to be truthful (how we can call future, declared, spending preferences a “fact” is beyond my understanding…) then it doesn’t really make a difference, macroeconomically speaking, who gets the money- just as long as it gets out and spent.
Moreover, if only 20% of the total gets spent, then this seems any awfully innefficent way of providing a jolt to the economy, but that’s another matter entirely. The argument that democrats- including, I assume Obama (which is why, I assume, ANON 9:00 brought it up in this thread)- are putting forth is that, if there is to be a rebate at all, it should be more equitably distributed.
In other words, why not give it to those who need it the most? Under the passed plan, people in the lowest tax bracket get a measly $300 bucks (and would probably blow their money, or at least 20% of them would, on ridiculous stuff such as, oh, food) while “families” consisting of a married couple and no kids who make $150,000 per year (the level at which the benefit tops out), would be getting $1,600 bucks and would, perhaps (well, 20% of them as polls indicate) spend it on stuff like Post-superbowl discount HDTVs and iPods. But I jest.
Okay, so what about the argument that people at the lowest end of the income scale don’t pay Income taxes, and therefore don’t need a rebate? While it’s true that they don’t pay much in income taxes, they DO pay quite a lot of payroll taxes (FISA, Unemployment, Medicare, Medicaid etc,.) Even people living on Soc. Sec. have to pay that. (Also, income is not taxed beyond a certain level- so this tax is actually regressive.) Why not give these folks a “payroll” rebate to compliment the Income tax rebate that the rest of us?
Facts are Slippery things… if not placed in context
Brad Hoehne
Whether they play now or not, both Barack and Michelle Obama are on record as saying that chess was important for them as kids. In Michelle Obama’s case, instead of letting her watch unlimited tv, her parents expected her to fill her time with books, chess and sports. In Obama’s book, he talks about bonding with his grandfather and stepfather over chess. If you listen to Obama’s speeches, he makes a big point about parents not letting their kids play unlimited video games and being a part of their lives. As the letter that Susan posted makes clear, Obama also understands the potential for chess to bring together people from different cultures and countries — all very important in our increasingly globalalized world.
“Anonymous said…
Amazing the venom that conservatives bring to political discussions. Guess I shouldn’t mention their consistent failures…”
Wow, a dissenting point of view to you is venom?
You probably run red lights because you think they are venomous. Or even take double the recommended dose of crazt pills because the bottle only allows 2 pills per serving, but you will not stand for that venom! You decide to eat the whole bottle to prove your intellectual superiority over the venomous dosage recommendations.
If you think this sounds strange, then why are you supporting an ideology that panders to world dictators, supports killing children while still in their mothers womb, and plans on enslaving the USA to a welfare state? Now that is just crazy!
Ron Paul for President now!
Mindless GOP Republicans worry
about Hillary spending 110 billion in a health care plan to cover all Americans, I think is essential as well as the governments moral responsibility. The richest country in the world should provide health care to its people! Yet these same Republicans arent phased about the illegal Iraqi war spending. According to a recent USA Today report, assuming The Iraq war accounts for about 80% of the total, the Iraq war would cost 1.9 trillion dollars including 564 billion in interest! This is from a party that is against spending! Louisianna still isnt rebuilt from the disasterous Katrina, and America’s infrastructure is ready for collapse. I can think of many more prudent and useful ways to spend that money than burning it in an illegal war. If President Bush would have concentrated on Afghanistan alone and not attack
Iraq against the United Nations order the war would be over. Now do really want to put the same old thing as Senator McCain into the Whitehouse, a former POW from Vietnam so he can continue this war for 100 years as he has stated. Come on GOP elephants start thinking!
Isn’t it time to stop using disingenuous labels such as liberal conservative and what not? why don’t you just look at the issues and what works and doesn’t? apparently GWBush’s plan for everything in the last 8 yeas hasn’t paid off at all. We are bankrupt, China owns our mortgages, the world sees us as imperialist bullies, no different than Germany of half a century ago and to top it off our officials choose to blatantly disregard the constitution whenever that seems to fit their interests.
Enough is enough I’d say, let’s try for something new.
Regarding tax rebates…apparently the anonymous self-identified non-liberal who posted “facts” forgets some important details and facts:
George W. Bush thought of “rebates” with full support of the Republican party. This was a Republican initiative purely put forth to gain popular support, and most Democrats were, AND STILL ARE, opposed. The only question that remains among Democrats (aren’t they the “liberals” of which you speak?) is whether to repeal them immediately or simply let them expire. Obama favors quietly letting them expire, presumably in order not to engender popular hatred.
Obama favors flat rate rebates and a different sort of stimulus package. Pelosi, as well as the Democratic platform in general, has traditionally been in favor of income taxation, and correlating income taxation to government programs for the people.
So, even though you purport to convey “facts,” you have contorted them to suit a bias.
I think if Obama and his family play the HHCF kids it’ll be a WIN for all involved.