Greetings from "fake" America! I know, traditionally Indiana has been considered part of "real" America. But the city I live in is home to at least one institute of higher learning, so that would seem to place us firmly in the "fake" America category.
CNN is reporting that Senator Obama will leave the campaign trail this coming Thursday and Friday to visit his ailing 86-year-old grandmother in Hawaii. Apparently she has been ill for quite some time now and has taken a turn for the worse. Obama was scheduled to appear in Wisconsin and Iowa those two days, but will instead make the flight to Honolulu to be with the woman he credits with rearing him to be the man he is today. I wish Senator Obama and his grandmother the best and hope he finds her well.
Be careful what you wish for, Samuel Wurzelbacher. You just might get it. The now infamous "Joe the Plumber" mentioned by McCain some 20 times during the final debate actively courted his fifteen minutes of fame, doing more interviews in 24 hours than Sarah Palin has given in six weeks of campaigning. But Wurzelbacher apparently didn't realize that when you turn your life over to the camera, you turn your whole life over to the media. And the media discovered a few things about him that didn't quite mesh with his self-crafted entrepreneur persona. First, Joe is not a licensed plumber. I know one does not have to be a licensed plumber to perform plumbing work. But I guess "Joe the Journeyman" just doesn't have the same ring to it. Second, according to both his most recently available federal income tax returns and his own admission, Joe made only $40,000 last year, which qualifies him for a larger tax cut under Barack Obama's tax plan than under John McCain's tax plan. And finally, Joe owes the State of Ohio $1,200 in back taxes. The man who told Obama that high taxes were discouraging him from purchasing his own plumbing business, had to rely on the charity of two conservative radio hosts in Portland to raise the $1,700 he needs to pay off the lien against him and cover the cost of obtaining his plumber's license. Say it ain't so Joe. Say it ain't so.
The biggest news of the weekend - and there was some pretty big news this weekend - was the endorsement of Senator Obama by former Secretary of State and retired four-star general Colin Powell. Citing, among other things, the scorn of intellectual rigor, embrace of ignorance, degenerating tone of the campaign, McCain's erratic response to the financial crisis and the selection of Governor Palin as a Vice Presidential nominee as reasons for his decision. With those words, Powell joined the growing list of prominent Republican / conservative intellectuals who have expressed their displeasure with the direction of the Republican Party and campaign, and endorsed Obama. The haters stepped forward immediately, lead by the man behind the "golden EIB microphone" Rush Limbaugh, who flat out called Powell a racist for endorsing the black "liberal" instead of the white conservative. Maybe the Oxycontin is impairing Limbaugh's judgment, but if Powell's endorsement was simply about one black man voting for another black man, Powell could have endorsed Obama 20 months ago. He was black then, and he's black now. Is it possible that Powell might have endorsed Barack Obama simply because he believes that he would make a better president than McCain? Possible?
Obama set a new fundraising record for September, collecting a whopping $150 million in 30 days, with over 600,000 new donors and an average donation of 86 dollars. Wow. While there is no reason to assume that just any candidate could accomplish what Obama has in terms of fund-raising, but is it too early to declare the death of public financing?
Obama drew 175,000 people to his rallies in Missouri this past weekend, 100,000 in St. Louis and 75,000 in Kansas City. I'm still fairly young, but I don't remember any other American political figure drawing the kind of individual attention Obama has garnered during this campaign. A substantial number of people in this country are searching for something different. And whatever it is, they seem to be finding it in Barack Obama.
For as long as I can remember, the Republican Party has accused the Democratic Party of class warfare, divide-and-conquer politics. I guess mother never told them that every time you point a finger, there are three fingers pointing back at you. During an interview with NBC News earlier this week, McCain campaign spokeswoman Nancy Pfotenhauer remarked that although northern Virginia has drifted Democratic in recent years, the rest of Virginia, or "real Virginia" if you will, is still very receptive to McCain's message. When given the opportunity to back away from dividing the state into legitimate and illegitimate citizens, Pfotenhauer pressed on, adding portions of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania to her definition of "real" America. Earlier that day while campaigning in North Carolina, Governor Palin told her adoring fans that, she was proud to be visiting "the pro-American parts of the country," talking to "...real Americans..., running our factories and teaching our children..." with "...small town American values." I think I'm going to be sick.
A few months from now, I will become an American citizen. But I find it a little disconcerting that my citizenship has been de-legitimized even before it's been bestowed upon me. Because I was born and raised in a city of half-a-million people, I can never be a "real" American. Because I've had a passport since I was two years old, I can never be a "real" American. Because I graduated from (one) college, with a professional degree instead of working in a factory or as an unlicensed plumber (because somehow what I do every day doesn't qualify as work) I can never be considered a "real" American. Because I drive an Acura and never learned how to field-dress a moose, I can never be considered a "real" American. Because I can remember what newspapers and magazines I read, and am fully capable of forming a coherent sentence featuring nouns, verbs, adjectives, articles, conjunctions and pronouns, I can never be a real American. Forgive my sarcasm, but I'm freakin' tired of being told by middle-aged men with multiple homes making $40 million dollars a year to sit in a leather recliner and blather into a microphone three hours a day that I am some kind of elitist while they are, and speak for, "everyday Americans." I'm tired of being told that people from small towns who smoke meth, drop out school, vandalize property, beat their wives and children in drunken rages and get pregnant at the age of fifteen are somehow more virtuous than big city “folks” guilty of the same offenses. I’m tired of being told that because I don’t think American soldiers should still be dying on Iraqi soil I don’t “support the troops” and because I believe that patriotism is something more than a brass pin made in China that I’m somehow “un-American.”
During the final debate last week, Senator McCain commented that if only Senator Obama had agreed to the series of town hall meeting he had suggested this summer, the current tone of the campaign would be very different. Translation, everything would be perfect if Obama had simply done everything McCain wanted him to. I’m old enough to understand that politics is a dirty business. And that in order to get elected, both McCain and Obama must attempt to make themselves look better than their opponent. But the hard reality is that come November 5th, we all have to figure out how to make this system work for the next four years with whoever was elected the night before. It’s one thing to function in an environment of philosophical differences. It’s quite something else to carve up the country into small town and big city America, populated by real and fake Americans who supported either a “war hero” or a “terrorist sympathizer” and expect the system to work. It’s foolish, it’s dangerous and it’s got to stop.
In an interview earlier this week, Governor Palin told Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family that "God will do the right thing on November 4th." I hope she still feels that way if Senator Obama wins the presidency.
Still trying to distill a coherent message out of the cacophony of his campaign, McCain has now resorted to throwing tired cold war labels at his opponent, hoping that something – anything – will stick. This week he seems to have dropped the “palling around with terrorists” mantra and reverted to the more traditional “tax and spend liberal” label, accenting it here and there with charges of “socialism.” I guess the term “borrow and spend conservative” doesn’t have the same historical connotations as tax and spend liberal, but I fail to understand how anyone proposing to spend as much money as McCain can try to negatively paint his opponent as a big spender. I also find it laughable that he would try to pin the socialist label on someone with the endorsement of perhaps the greatest living free market American capitalist and richest man in the world, Warren Buffet. But judging by the poll numbers, I’m not the only one befuddled by the flailing.
My NFL thoughts for Week 7:
I’ve lived long enough to witness the perfect 16-0 season. I hope I live long enough to witness the perfect 0-16 season. I thought I might score both in the same year last season, but Miami killed that dream for me. But this season, I have two chances. And I’m counting on at least the Lions to come through for me.
The Dallas Cowboys are in serious doo doo. All of a sudden, their all-star offensive line can’t block, their all-star running back can’t run, their all-star quarterback can’t throw, their all-star tight end can’t catch, and then there’s Terrell Owens and Terrence Newman and Pacman Jones and Roy Williams and, well, you get the picture. Jerry Jones insists everything is just fine. But when you have that much money, you can pay other people to tell the truth for you.
I love Seattle. Really, I do. What’s not to love about a city with bikini-clad baristas and a lingerie football league? But the Seahawks are embarrassing to watch. It’s like watching the short stubby kid with the greasy hair and freckles ask the head cheerleader to the prom, over and over again, with the same depressing result. Somebody take pity on them, please.
The Carolina Panthers and the San Diego Chargers are the two most perplexing teams in football. After seven weeks there’s still no consensus on whether or not they are any good. And L.T. is still ruining my fantasy football season.
Nothing perplexing about Tennessee. The Titans are the real deal. I know they played the Chiefs, but 330 rushing yards by two players in one game is unheard of. Only the Steelers stand between them and the AFC title.
Something is terribly wrong in Indianapolis. The most efficient offence in the league now looks barely average, and an average defense now looks like the Denver Broncos. Peyton Manning’s not happy and it’s showing.
Following their loss to the Giants on Sunday, the 49ers fired head coach Mike Nolan and replaced him with linebackers coach and legendary Chicago Bear Mike Singletary. Nothing against Singletary, but I don't think any coach not named Bill Walsh could fix the problems in San Fransisco.
My Superbowl picks as of Week 7: New York Giants vs. Pittsburgh Steelers
Nebraska's Safe Haven law allowing parents to turn over children they cannot care for to the State without fear of prosecution is causing a bit of a problem. The law was intended to prevent newborns from being left for dead in trash cans by frightened (mostly teen) mothers who couldn't or didn't want to care for them. However, in writing the statute, some genius replaced the word infant with the word child, thereby broadening the law to include all children up to the age of 18. Since the law was titled "Safe Haven" and billed as protecting children, no one actually bothered to read it carefully before voting on it. Naturally, bumbling ensued. Bad parents all over Nebraska have been leaving their babies, toddlers, tweens and even teenagers with child services for the State to care for. Bad parents from surrounding states have even gotten in on the action. Finally realizing the error of their ways the legislature promises to rewrite the law to suit the original intent. But this should serve as a lesson to every politican in America. READ THE BILLS BEFORE YOU SIGN THEM! When you don't, we end up with things like the Iraq war authorization and the Patriot Act.
Tiger Woods turned up on a golf course this week for the first time since the knee surgery that ended his season - as a caddy. He pulled up to the fifth hole at Torrey Pines in a Buick SUV golf cart to help some dude with his putting. Heckuva day for that guy, huh? How many people get to tell their friends that Tiger Woods caddied for them on the fifth hole at Torrey Pines?
The Fox television network’s worst nightmare has come true. And I’m not talking about the cancellation of American Idol. The Tampa Bay Rays and the Philadelphia Phillies will meet in the World Series this year. If you don’t know anything about either of those two teams, you’re not alone. Fox has invested millions in what might as well be a hockey game between the Columbus Blue Jackets and the Atlanta Thrashers.
I love Rashida Jones. Love her.
Finally, Andy Roddick auctioned off a one hour-long nude tennis lesson for charity for an exorbitant $15,000 to a delighted female fan/donor. It’s not clear whether only Roddick will serve and volley in the nude or if his pupil will join him in her birthday suit. But there is just something unsettling about nude male tennis. Way too much going on there. Too much.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
thoughts on things.
diversions
About Me
- Mark
- i'm a transplanted Canadian (going on twelve years now), living in the crossroads of America. i'm older than i'd like to be and think too much for my own good. my posts typically contain thoughts on current events, politics, sports, and every now and then, something completely unrelated.
13 comments:
go stillers!
rumor has it that "joe the plumber" halloween costumes are going to be hot this year. that's all well and good, but everyone at the parties still wanted to be an architect when they grew up. having grown up now, maybe there can be some pining for " I always wanted to be a real American."
Kathy
Nude tennis lessons. Niiiiiice. How many jokes about balls can you come up with in 30 seconds?
While I am an avid supporter of the Obama/Biden ticket, I wish I could smack Biden upside the head for his "crisis" comments made at recent fundraiser. Was he right? Absolutely. But you just don't say stuff like that 14 days before the presidential election. The race is - was - focussed on the economy, which is exactly where the Dems want and need it to be. Now, with these silly comments of Biden's, the GOP is trying to turn it back to foreign policy. Obama's doing increasingly well in foreign policy matters in polls, but Biden's words are just going to start a headache that the Dems don't need right now. Shhhhh, Mr. Biden. There's a good boy.
Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I think that Joe the Plumber was planted by the McCain campaign. This whole thing - and the timing behind it - was just a little too perfect for the McCain campaign. A couple of years from now, I bet that Joe is going to come clean on 60 minutes or something.
As for Sarah Palin's wardrobe, Cindy McCain is rocking $50K outfits and $12K watches to everyday rallies. Sarah can't look like less money than the wife. Although really, I want to know who needs to spend $20K on makeup. What's she hiding under there?
By the way, has anybody noticed that Cindy McCain seems to be permanently affixed to John McCain's back? Has she done a rally or anything on her own? Michelle Obama is working the circuit like a superstar. If she has done any rallying on her own, please let me know. I'd love to Youtube that.
Why you gotta be doggin on the 'Boys, huh? They's my boys!
I tumblr-ed your real America rant today (I almost wrote "tumbled" but I thought that might send the wrong message to the kiddies). Nicely put.
You should post the Rashida video.
Today, McCain made a HILARIOUS gaffe (and then goes on to prove your point about real America). I'd explain it, but it's funner to watch. Check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLVSURlFoQs
Hmmm...according to Ron Paul, the politicians weren't even allowed to see the wording on the Patriot act, they were just told to sign it... Fascism anyone? How about Marxism?
And as to the Rush Limbaugh comments on Colin Powell.
I listened to the entire show, and he never said Colin Powell was racist. He said his endorsement was about race. I don't necessarily agree with what he said, or how he said it, but he backed it up with asking the question, where are all the inexperienced white liberals that Colin has endorsed?
Limbaugh E-mail to Politico:
"Secretary Powell says this endorsement's not about race. Okay, fine. What I'm doing now Jonathan is researching Powell's past endorsements to see if I can find all the inexperienced, very liberal white candidates that he has endorsed. I'll let you know what I come up with.
As for Powell's statement of concern that he would have difficulty with two more Republican Supreme Court nominees, I was unaware that he had dislike for John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, and Antonin Scalia. I guess he also regrets Ronald Reagan making him a four-star general. I guess he also regrets George Bush making him secretary of state. I guess he also regrets George H. W. Bush naming him chairman of the Joint Chiefs. I guess he's also upset that a Republican appointed his son to head the FCC. Yeah, let's hear it for transformational figures."
And on the show here's what he said:
RUSH: I just want to button this up because the Drive-Bys had a tizzy over my allegation that his nomination was about race. Well, let me say it louder, and let me say it even more plainly. It was totally about race! The Powell endorsement is totally about race. People have forgotten, but I have not, ladies and gentlemen. Colin Powell publicly broke with the administration over affirmative action; specifically, affirmative action cases that were before the Supreme Court in 2003. It was a case in Michigan. I have the CBS story here, January 20th, 2003. "Secretary of State Colin Powell said Sunday he disagrees with President Bush's position on affirmative action case before the Supreme Court, as the White House called for more money for historical black colleges.
Okay, he didn't say Powell was racist. At all. He said the endorsement was about race. But no doubt this is just semantics since you can, and most likely will, argue that him saying it was about race, means Rush was calling Colin Powell racist. However, let me just remind the two of you that Obama, more specifically the typical Obama supporter, has made this race more about race than John McCain has. I don't think that McCain has brought up the race issue once. Not once. If he has, I'd sure like to hear about it.
Obama supporters, more than Obama I think, have made this campaign about race more so than McCain supporters. 97% of black people say they will vote for Obama because he's black. Gee...it's really not about race. In this effect, black people, are in fact, being more racist and racially biased than white people are. I find this very fascinating...those who accuse the white man of being racist are themselves being racist...hmmm...interesting.
So let me just clarify this, because it's been bothering me about this campaign.
Voting against someone because of their race is racist. Period. Voting for someone because of their race is racist. Period. There is no way you can get around these principles. Voting because of race is racist! It galls me that people of my "color" are being called racist because they'll vote for McCain. Wow... so basically, it's politically incorrect to vote for McCain now. Hmmm... does this strike anybody as being completely racist? But wait, no, it can't be racist because white people aren't the minority here. Ah, yeah...
So here we have a scenario where race is the key issue, and the issues are on the back burner. Sure, go ahead and attack Joe the Plumber because he doesn't make 250k a year. And he owes back taxes, and he doesn't have a license and he's been divorced. Wow...can you guys just take a step back for one second, and look at what is going on here? Joe asked Obama a question. And that doesn't really matter. What matters is what Obama’s ANSWER was. It doesn't matter who Joe is, it doesn't matter what he said. What the issue is ALL about is what Obama said in reply to Joe's comment. Specifically, the "spreading the wealth" comment.
If we're going to move towards socialist fascism or corporate fascism, or Marxist communism, then why not just say what it is alright? Obama said, "I think that when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody". Huh...what? Thank you Mr. Robin Hood! Taking from the rich and giving to the poor...yeah...this, I might point out, is NOT sound economic policy. At all. It's lunacy.
So go ahead and attack and ridicule Joe the Plumber all you want. It doesn't matter. What matters is what Obama said. For all that anyone knows, it could've been me or you who asked Obama that specific question, and it could be me or you who got caught in the political crossfire. So have a heart will you?
And by the way, Joe never said he made 250k a year. He said he was looking at buying a business that could earn him 250k a year. And you should hear his interview with Hannity where he explains why he doesn't have a license yet and doesn't need one until he has the business. Again, you can sing praises about cnn, nbc, cbs all you want, but they blatantly ignore the issues raised, and totally obliterate a man because he asked a question. And that's totally ignoring the remarks that Biden and Obama made about Joe in their campaign speeches which ridiculed the man even further. But it's all good because it's the messiah talking.
Anyways, back to taxes...
If taxing the rich man, or the business, is a good idea then please explain to me how the business or the rich men are going to offset those losses. As I see it, they can reduce employment, raise costs, or find a tax loophole to keep their money offshore. Of course, only the big businesses can do all of that, and the little businesses will probably have to close. Yeah, Obama's tax plan is great. It means that the government is going to get it’s money back from you because you’re going to have to pay for the corporate taxes because they’re going to offset their losses in one of the methods above. Guess what, THAT’S A TAX ON YOU! Either you lose your job, or pay more for groceries. It sounds like such a good idea!
And of course, I should point out that Obama's new spending for government programs, all 1.3 trillion of it, have to come from somewhere. This, of course, is spending on top of the 2.3 trillion the government blows away already. And let's not forget the "bailout" which could add up to 5 trillion to this total figure, although we can't really blame Obama 100% for that one.
What's our national debt at? 10 trillion? Let's see...so we spend, in 2009 or 2010, 3.6 trillion dollars. While we bring in only about 1.2-1.4 trillion dollars in tax revenue. So we're going at 2.4 trillion deficit spending. Then Obama wants to give money away in the form of "tax credits".
DOES ANYBODY YET SEE THE LUNACY IN THIS PLAN? HOW ABOUT THE CONTRADICTION? DOES ANYONE SEE THAT?
According to Obama's plan for our economy, we're going to add, in 4 years, 10 trillion dollars to the national debt.
Yeah, why is Bush the worst president in history? I'm pretty sure one of the biggest ammunition stockpiles in the Lib left wing is to blame Bush for deficit spending more than any other president in history. Okay, Barrack is well on his way to surpassing Bush in this regard. In fact, it’ll make Bush look like a peon. Cause he’s only raised the national debt by 5 million. How does 20 trillion dollars in national debt sound to you? Pretty good right? I mean, why not? If we’re already 10 trillion in the whole, what’s 10 trillion more? We don’t have to pay for it after all…
Oh but Obama will end the war in Iraq which will save billions...okay, that's approximately 120 billion dollars a year that he'll cut. So we'll give Obama the benefit of taking the 1.3 trillion extra down to 1.18 trillion extra new spending. This brings us to 2.28 trillion in deficit spending...approximately. And the military spends about 550 billion…although it could be more in black funds. But you can compare that to Social Security and Medicare which is approximately 700 billion…if it’s not 1 trillion that is. I don’t know, I can’t remember the figures but I know that SS and medicare/Medicaid spends nearly 1 trillion all together.
So here's the deal, and my argument is this...Obama wants to cut taxes for everybody except for the Rich man and big corporate businesses who make more than 250k a year. (incidentally I didn't know that big business was defined as making more than 250k) 95% of the people in America gain a tax cut, 47% of whom don't even pay taxes. That's all good, it seems like a very conservative idea to me. Cut taxes yeah...except, wait a minute, he wants to spend 1.3 trillion dollars extra in new government programs!
SOMETHING DOESN'T ADD UP!
And I’m totally not even talking about the fact that a hundred percent of government tax revenue goes to paying the interest on the national debt! Our government takes money from us, and then pays interest, TO THE FEDERAL RESERVE, on loans that they’ve taken from the FED and continue to take from the fed. Our national debt consists of all the loans that we’ve taken so far, and totally ignores the interest on that debt. If we were to focus our tax money on paying off the national debt, it would take about 15 years of doing nothing but paying off the loans. And Obama WANTS TO INCREASE GOVERNMENT SPENDING THAT FORCES THE GOVERNMENT TO TAKE ON MORE OF THESE DAMNED LOANS.
Here's what I think, and you can crucify me for all I care, but this is how I see it. Obama will say, and has said, ANYTHING to get into the good graces of ANY voter he possibly can. He kisses ass to anyone even if it goes against his agenda. And his agenda is written in his new government programs. This is masked of course by all these promises of tax cuts, and practically giving money away. This is money that the government doesn't have. So either Obama is going to deficit spend like Bush has only dreamed of, or he’s going to, you guessed it, RAISE TAXES! And he will! He’s promised a federal income tax, but that’s just a sideshow so that you don’t notice that he’s raising taxes in like 10 different areas. Capital gains, death tax etc… Look it up for yourself, I’m sure you’ve heard of it.
So what's going on here, it's totally contradictory. Everything the man has said he has contradicted himself in another part of the United States. It's ridiculous. Yet, again, he is the messiah, the chosen one, and the sun shines out of every orifice of his body, so what he says he must be able to bring about with supernatural ability. Obama can create money out of thin air to spend on new programs, and money to give to the poor or less fortunate or the middle class... He MUST be the messiah. Or, as he said, superman.
I have a challenge for you, a simple challenge. I want you to tell me what you think are Obama's faults. I want to hear you criticize Obama and not praise him. I want to hear something that you have to say that you don't like about Obama. I just want to hear you do this once. But I want to see a list of things that you can come up with about Obama that are not so good. Stuff that you question. Because it is self-evident that due to Obama's humanity, if he is human and not supernatural, that he is not perfect. Yet he has been portrayed as perfect in every way possible. I'm not sure I've heard a critical word on Obama anywhere except on the radio.
And because he has not received the criticism that someone like Joe the plumber has had, I don't trust him one iota. Someone who receives nothing but praise is, by nature, not to be trusted. You have to know his faults. And by god, we know Joe the plumbers faults, but not Obama's. How can we trust someone whose campaign is for the middle man, but attacks a middle man like a plumber?
I'm done ranting here for now.
-You know who
Herm...I didn't realize that the new 2009 budget had been put out. Seems my figures are a little off. But the principle stands the same. We already defecit spend, and Obama wants to spend more. I can do some more research to see what his new spending will do to us...It may not be 10 trillion over 4 years though...but in my opinion, going 1 dollar more into national debt is not what we need.
Boon, I love you. That's why I'm going to tackle this one, which is something like trying to stop Brandon Jackson at the 1 yard line, but I'll give it a go.
Yes. To say something is about race, makes it racist. And I'll tell you why Powell has never endorsed any white liberals. He was too busy (a) being a general in the military, where you can't endorse anyone and (b) endorsing white conservatives. This is only the second presidential candidate he's ever endorsed, and the last one was George Bush.
Not considering the fact that he could have endorsed Obama months ago if it was only about race, I find it interesting that only the black side of him matters. You do realize he's half white, too. Are we back to the one-drop theory?
How about it being INCREDIBLY offensive that Rush would suggest that Republicans "gave" Powell the honors he's received over the years (like, yet another uppity negro disrespecting his betters). He EARNED his general's stars. Bush WANTED him to serve in his administration as SOS, and then promptly threw him under the bus when the wind changed direction.
Let me correct one of your statistics. It's not "97% of black people are voting for Barack because he's black," it's "97% of people are voting for Barack." FYI, 90% of people vote Democrat anyway, so you really only have a tiny few who might have switched sides because of Barack's ethnicity, and more likely, what you have is simply more people voting...people who would have voted Dem anyway, but never bothered, finally finding something worth getting off their asses for. I say that's a victory, no matter who they're voting for.
I always find it funny when the oppressive majority gets a taste of their own medicine, and then can't stand it.
Okay, on to the economy. Look, I'll admit, I don't love Obama's plan. I think it's too costly (same goes for McCain's plan). But I don't understand all the angst about the spreading the wealth around. You do realize that's exactly what McCain wants to do to, right? Only he wants to tax the poor and middle class, giving big tax cuts to the wealthiest 20%. So, if one group has to pay more in order to give another group a tax break, voila! Spreading the wealth around. Obama wants to tax the wealthy, so that the poor can get a break. What's the problem with that (keeping in mind, of course, that you're poor. Me too).
Historically speaking (look it up), the country has almost always fared better economically under modern Democrats than Republicans. We've had less spending and less debt under every Democratic president since the 40s.
So you want me to criticize Obama? I'm not sure why I should do that, since I don't see you criticizing your candidate (whoever that might be, unless it's Obama, and then you've done plenty of criticizing for the both of us). But okay, here's some thing I don't like. I don't like his stated stance on gay marriage, even though I suspect it's the PC version of what he actually believes (I'm for it, in case you wondered). I don't fully agree with his stance on abortion, although I do believe it should be legal, and I do believe that any limitations on it should have health of the mother exceptions.
I am for nuclear power, as long as we can find a safe way to dispose of the waste. His health care plan doesn't really apply to me right now, but having been without health care, I know how scary that is, and I'm glad someone is trying to look out for those people. I'm okay with taxing the wealthy, and trying trickle-up for a while ('cause trickle-down sure as hell ain't working). Hey, maybe you're right, and it won't work. That's the beauty of our country. Congress can change it if it doesn't, and we can kick them out if they don't.
Okay, maybe there's not much I disagree with him on. Did it occur to you that I support him BECAUSE I agree with his policies? And to be fair, I do like him, as a person, too. I think he's about as honest of a politician as I've ever seen. I think he's a great family man, who pretty much never calls his wife profanities, and as far as I know, has never cheated on her. I love that he was a community planner, and I love that he didn't take a job at a big money firm after he graduated law school, deciding to teach, instead. I like that he's resoled his shoes instead of getting new ones. I like that he won't embarrass me in front of world leaders by pronouncing their names wrong, or acting as though he's bored talking to them. I like that he's calm and cool, and not erratic.
So, since I agree with most of his policies, at least their foundations, and I like him as a person, remind me, what are the legitimate issues that have been raised about Obama that should make me not vote for him? Given all the choices before me (and no, I don't consider Ralph Nader or whoever that other woman is to be viable choices), I would probably vote Obama through process of elimination. But actually, I choose him because I believe in him.
I really hate to say anything about Joe the not-exactly-a-Plumber, but I can't resist. I don't feel bad for him. He injected himself into this debate by doing half a dozen interviews. That took him from being a private person to a public one. I do think it matters how much money he makes (and how much money the business makes) because he was griping that Obama's tax plan wouldn't save him money; that it would punish him. Well, if he only makes $40k per year, he's wrong. His business would have to PROFIT 250K per year for it to have a tax increase, and if that's the case, I'm sorry, but he can afford it (btw, if his business makes 280k per year, he'd see a 3% tax increase. That would return his taxes to the level they would have been during the Clinton years, which, like or not, were pretty damn good economic times).
Taking from the poor and giving to the rich: not exactly sound economic policy either.
I always love it when people get up in arms about socialism. Why? Which socialist country is the bad one? Sweden? Nope. Canada? Also nope. Tell me, what's the evil in socialism? Personally, I think they're confusing it with communism (farther left) or fascism (farther right).
wow. great comment dj. i'm exhausted after reading it. need a little time to recover before i can respond.
okay. first, the Patriot Act. there were several congresspersons who read the patriot act before before they voted it. one of them - a Democrat - actually voted against it, and was ridiculed for it. any of them who wanted to read the act could have read it. some of them even drafted it. they CHOSE not to read it because they felt like they had to look like they were doing something quickly, and they couldn't be seen as questioning anything called the USA Patriot Act. No one kept it from them.
second, let's just agree to disagree on ron paul.
third, limbaugh and powell. colin powell has made two presidential endorsements in his lifetime. g.w. bush an inexperienced white conservative) and barack obama. one white, one black. so don't be surprised when he comes back and tells you he didn't find any other endorsements.
you're right about the semantics. you said that voting for someone because of their race is racist. rush said that powell endorsed obama because of race. therefore, rush said that powell is a racist. correct?
i don't have the endorsement in front of me, so i don't remember him using the term "republican supreme court nominees", but it is clear to me that he was referring to conservative supremem court justices. i have no doubt that powell is uncomfortable with alito, scalia and thomas at least. he has never been a strong social conservative, just a steady economic conservative - like many republicans used to be prior to the evangelical movement.
and are you suggesting that reagan and bush and bush elevated him to those positions of four-star general and secretary of state et.al. simply because he is black? wouldn't that make them racists? any chance he attained those positions because he was the best man for the job?
please explain to me how obama has "made this campaign about race."
let's talk about race and voting, shall we. your statement that "97% of blacks will vote for obama because he is black" is just false, and a little disturbing that you think that. in 2000, 90% of blacks voted for al gore. a white man. in 2004, 92% of blacks voted for john kerry. a white man. black voters generally overwhelmingly support the democratic candidate, regardless of who it is. so, if 97% of black voters vote for obama in this election, maybe 5% of them will be voting for him because he is black. what percentage of white voters do you suppose will vote against obama because he is black?
nobody here is calling you (or anyone else) a racist because you don't support obama. but don't pretend that his race is not a factor causing some people to vote against him. as for people voting for him because he is black; i work with a middle-aged guy (fifties) who had to drink at separate water fountains and ride at the back of the bus when he was growing up, not that long ago. this country has done terrible things to people of color for a very long time. if six white people in georgia feel they are helping repair that legacy by voting for a black man, i'm not going to hold it against them.
the question is always just as important as the answer. always. you can get any answer you want if you ask the right question. "joe" was not investigated by the media because he asked a question. "joe" was investigated by the media because mccain made him a (willing) participant in a volatile political campaign. he wasn't "caught in the political crossfire," he walked into it with guns blazing. "joe" could have asked his question, received his answer and gone home like everyone else. instead, he chose to do every interview he could possibly get to to make a name for himself, and allow himself to be used as a tool for mccain's campaign. if you want to be in the spotlight, don't complain when the spotlight highlights some things you don't want people to know.
regarding taxes. i'm a little tired of this bogus argument that increasing taxes on rich people and businesses forces businesses to close and rich people to wither and die. every single time the subject of a tax increase or a wage increase comes up, republicans spout this tired old line that business cannot afford any increases of any kind and will be forced to shut down. you know how they could "make up" that revenue? sell more stuff. they're pretty good at that. or, instead of making 40 billion a year in profit, they could make 38 billion a year in profit. two years ago in indiana we went through a huge debate about a minimum wage increase. the republicans told us that if the minimum wage was increased by 30 cents an hour, the restaurants that i love downtown south bend would be overwhelmed with the cost and have to shut down. the minimum wage increase passed. restaurants closed, right? wrong. there are more restaurants downtown now than there were before the increase. somehow, they found a way to deal with the increase and still turn enough profit to open additional businesses.
let's be honest. obama doesn't have a monopoly on spending programs. the other candidate in the race desires to spend almost as much on his economic rescue and social programs as obama. except that he claims he pay for his programs by cutting trillions of dollars of waste from the federal budget. there simply isn't that much waste. obama is telling voters he's going to pay for his tax cuts by raising taxes on wealthy people. mccain is telling voters he's going to pay for his tax cuts by pulling money out of his ears. who should i believe? obama's not hiding his tax plan, he's told me where he's going to cut taxes and where he's going to raise them. mccain has told me he's going to cut taxes all over the place and balance the federal budget in four years with the money he's pulling out of his ears. i would argue that it is not obama who is being disingenuous.
we have a fundamental disagreement on the roll of taxes in this society that we aren't going to resolve here. you feel taxes are evil and do nothing but destroy countries and their citizens. but please allow me to point out that oppressive, stone-aged, back-woods third-world countries like canada, sweden, england, australia, singapore, germany and japan all pay considerably higher taxes than either presidential candidate is proposing for american, yet they don't seem to be any worse off than we are. as a matter of fact, canada turned a budget surplus this year. imagine that, a surplus in this crappy economy.
finally, obama's faults. haven't you heard enough about obama's faults? i'm assuming you're not listening to npr on the radio, so everything you hear about obama all day long is negative. don't say no one is talking about his faults when the highest rated cable news channel and the entire medium of talk radio is dedicated to ranting about his faults. in fact, you spent twelve paragraphs relating criticism you've heard of obama. but in the spirit of civilized discourse, i'll indulge you anyway. obama is inexperienced, he has not been a part of national politics very long. he often has difficulty expressing himself concisely, tends to ramble a little. sometimes his demeanor can be interpreted as aloofness and arrogance. he has a tendency to over-analyze some issues. oh, and he should probably consider putting on a couple pounds. does that help? i hope you feel a little more comfortable with him now that i've humanized him a bit.
until next time.
Again, the point was that Joe's personal life didn't matter because it was what was said between the two that mattered.
In any event, at this point, the best I can hope for, the very best is that McCain gets in and dies after taking the oath of office. Palin, in all her imperfections, would be free to act as she has in Alaska which has been exemplary. Not perfect, by no means has it been perfect. I'm sure that 13% of alaskans would agree with me on that. :P
Forgive me my fiery outburst of earlier. That was nearly 2000+ words of long tenuous thought. I'm thinking of posting that on my own blog. :P
In any event...I've read the discussion that Joe the plumber had with Barrack, and I've read and heard what Rush was saying when he said it. And it was totally different from what you said was in the blog in the first place. So I decided to leave a comment and then I got sidetracked as I am wont to do.
However, still, the biggest issue to me in this campaign has been government spending. Sadly, McCain just HAD to win our nomination. I've been plenty critical of McCain, but I suppose I haven't told you my opinions of him. In any event, he's not my favorite person, and that's why I would rather him get sworn in and die of natural causes before he can do anything. And maybe, Palin would take up her conservative agenda and slash wreckless spending.
When I first heard of Obama running for president, it was on the Jay Leno show. At the time, my issue was campaign contributions. I wanted a candidate who didn't take campaign contributions from private interests. Obama said that he wouldn't be taking these contributions, and so I at first liked him for that reason alone.
Anywho, many moons later, guess what? That's right, Obama rescinded on his word. He also changed his tax plan 4(or more) times. So as I said before, he'll say anything, do anything, try anything to get your vote.
And again, you can say whatever you will about Ron Paul, call him a crackpot...whatever. However, he was the only presidential candidate to say he would repeal the patriot act that I know of. At least from the republicrats and democans. I, at this point, don't care how whacky his ideas sound, he was at least brave enough to come outright and speak against that particular legislation, and I'll also point out that he has been the tip of the spear speaking against the patriot act from it's inception. Him and a few other conservative colleagues. True conservatives that is.
Btw...is it not interesting how Barrack has championed a historically conservative cause(cutting taxes) when he is obviously not conservative? Huh...
Basically, it's this. I want government to get out of our lives and stay out. America can never prosper with the oppressive heel of the ruling class holding them down. The only role that government should have is that of protecting the citizens, not providing them with the luxuries of life. I'm against big government, and I'm against income taxation.
Sadly, none of my favored candidates who support these ideas have a chance of winning the election, therefore I am reduced to settling for the lesser evil McCain.
We can argue the Palin point until the cows come home, but I will never like her, and her being president would virtually ensure our being in Canada. I don't like her statement that she would expand the powers of the Vice President over what Cheney has already done (in the debate), I find her hypocrisy stomach churning, and her constant harping about "real America", "elites are bad" and "this is the most patriotic place in America" to be unnecessarily divisive. I grew up in a small town (as did you) and I didn't find it any more patriotic than South Bend, or any realer. And you know what, I am an elite, and I'm damn proud of it. I worked hard to graduate with two degrees, and I'm not going to let anyone tell me that it somehow makes me less patriotic, less American, or less real because I did.
Actually, Obama said he wouldn't take funds from lobbyists, and he hasn't (McCain, on the other hand, has several lobbyists on staff, including one of Saddam's former lobbyists). And he hasn't really changed his tax plan, he's added to the specificity of it. It's pretty much the same thing: higher taxes on the most profitable 5%, lower taxes for everyone else.
You can vote McCain if you want to. You live in Texas, so it's kind of pointless, but if that's what you feel is best, that's what you should do. I think you should vote your conscience, even if your candidate has no hope of winning, but that's just me.
I always find libertarians intriguing. If you think government should stay out of our lives, then how do you suggest we solve social and legal differences? How do we solve the gay marriage question? What should be done about abortion? I don't think you can have a civilized society with complete government non-intervention. Sometimes, the government has to step in and say, this is wrong, and you must stop, even when the majority of people think differently (case in point: segregation). Sometimes the government has to make laws for our protection (case in point: murder, assault, burglary, etc.). I just think there have to be some limits. Otherwise, it's just anarchy.
Ron Paul has not declared himself libertarian since he ran for President the first time. He's claimed conservative republican blah blah blah...
Anyways, I'm quite certain that we could have these social programs without the government taxing us through our bowels...
“How?” you may ask.
Take the power to print money away from the FED and give it back to the department of the treasury.
The FED prints the money, and then loans the money to us with interest. Hence, the creation of national debt.
Take away the need for loans and thus the interest, and guess what...the government can pay for its programs with the DEBT FREE money that it prints on its own without the central bank.
Oh and you can pay off the national debt that way too.
But wait DJ, that's not possible, it's never been done!
Uh, yeah actually it has been done.
Lincoln paid the troops during the Civil war with Lincoln Greenbacks that were printed in government mints. There was no central bank back then because Andrew Jackson had killed it and after doing so had paid off the national debt. The only president to have ever done so.
Incidentally, during the civil war, there was no IRS or income tax. They paid for the war through debt free money, and government bonds.
I know that this is an example of different times different measures blah blah blah... However, how different is it really?
What use does the FED have? How is it able to print money, and lend it to the government when the constitution gives the government the right to print its own money and thus be free of paying for its own money. Sound circular? It kind of is…that’s how the FED and the IRS have gotten away with this swindle…
Oh and the government never pays down the national debt. Even Clinton didn’t pay down the national debt he only balanced the Budget, at the behest of conservatives, and thus didn’t accrue any more debt. Of course, that was only towards the end of his terms that he did that.
Since they never pay down the national debt, it keeps growing every time they deficit spend. And then they use the taxpayer money to pay the interest on that debt. A committee commissioned by Reagan found that after all adjustments, not one penny of government income accrued by income taxes went to pay for any of the programs. Instead, all of it went to paying he interest off on the national debt. Hmmm…that was like 20 years ago.
So why am I against income taxes all together? Because they don’t pay for anything except the interest on the national debt. Why am I against the FED? Because they make money off of lending money. Remember how Jesus reacted to the money changers? Herm…these are the same people that Jesus kicked out of the temple.
So, abolish the FED, and abolish the IRS. That’s the only thing that will get us out of national debt.
And since you believe in entitlements (government social programs) guess what. The government can pay for those programs without taxing anybody. They just use the money that they print and don’t have to buy. Of course, we probably wouldn’t NEED entitlements since everybody would be able to have a job because businesses would be booming all over the place because they’re uninhibited by crippling taxes. Wow…I could only dream.
And by the way, people criticize Ron Paul for wanting a gold backed currency. However, right now our dollar has no value. None! The only thing that gives it value is the fact that it’s an accepted means of trade. For all that it’s worth, we could use paper clips as currency, and it would have the same worth that the dollar has. This is, ridiculous to say the least.
So yeah, I’m against taxes, and I’m against the fed and I’m against fiat currency. Although, fiat currency can be used if it’s debt free. But I would prefer that our dollar had some kind of worth.
Oh and by the way, we only have national debt and inflation because we use debt money. That and we have a fractional reserve banking system. So yeah, I like Ron Paul a lot cause he has those same views. So do many well educated and studied people who have spent time doing research on the subject. Of course, it will never happen because we keep getting a candidate from the same two parties who have gotten us into this mess in the first place…I mean, seriously…
So, do I like Obama or McCain? No I don’t because they are from two parties who have never even openly addressed this issue, except through people like Ron Paul who have acted independently of their party.
Seriously, if you don’t believe a word I’m saying, just watch the money masters. Google federal reserve. Look around. There’s a ton of research out there that can be read. Lots and lots of materials on the matter.
And I gave the simplified version of my argument, there’s allot more to be said on the issue. A lot more.
Oh and how can we live our lives without uncle sam there to help us along? Uh.... Without being insulting, I point to the seperation from Great Britain. Why did we seperate in the first place? Because they had their grubby hands in our affairs. Government was running their lives, and I dare say that our forefathers had a different opinion as to the role that government should play.
Social programs, through their ridiclous cost, have run up the national debt faster than defense spending has. So thank you Wilson, FDR, Carter, Clinton. We are literally indebted to you now and your legacy. We really do appreciate you and all that you have done to bring a huge debt over our heads. Thank you so much.
Cartier is a admired to abounding humans and that is why we accept brought our replica Cartier catchbasin Replica Panerai just in case you cannot allow the aboriginal design. You just accept to attending at the alternative we accept for you and you won't even be able to analyze them from the aboriginal brands.
Post a Comment