Election 2008–Presidential Debate III Recap

Last night John McCain had their Presidential debate, the final debate of this campaign season. Before getting to the recap, I offer one last recap for my personal debates. I will be making the case tonight for John McCain at USC Hillel.

From Left to Right to the Middle East:

A Debate about 2008


Randy S: Democratic Strategist

Eric G: Republican Blogger

Moderated by Brad G of the Jewish Journal

Hosted by USC Chabad and USC Hillel

Thursday, October 16th

Meet and greet: 6:45pm

Debate: 7:15pm

USC Chabad is located at 2713 Severance St., Los Angeles, CA

Then on Friday, October 24th…

From Left to Right to the Middle East:
A Debate About 2008
Jonathan Z UCLA Law Professor
Eric G         Republican Blogger
Moderated by
Friday, October 24th
Dinner: 7:00 pm
Debate: 8:15 pm
Hosted by:
UCLA Hillel
The UCLA event is for students and young professionals only.

blacktygrrrr@earthlink.net for details or to RSVP

With that, I bring you the main event, or in an ideal world, the warmup to my debates. Wow, now I know how it feels to be as pompous as a liberal elitist. Back to humility. Now, for the main event.

Bob Schieffer began with Wall Street, seeing as the market dropped over 700 points today.He asked the campaigns point blank why each of their economic plans was better than their opponent’s plan.

McCain began by offering prayers for Nancy Reagan. He mentioned that we must “put a floor on the decline of home ownership.” He wants to take 300 billion of the 750 billion allocated to buy the bad mortgages. This seemed new, because initially the 300 billion was to be additional money, not part of the original allocation.

McCain empathized with the homeowners that were responsible, but pointed out that they suffer when the house next door is abandoned. It was a valid point.

Obama again claimed that this was the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Obama then went through his 4 point plan. He spoke about tax cuts, and allowing individuals to tap their IRAs without penalty. Obama considers McCain’s plan “a giveaway to banks.”

McCain then brought up the plumber in Ohio who challenged Obama. This was the moment where Obama spoke about “spreading the wealth.” McCain said that he “will not stand for a tax increase on small business income.”

Obama laughed and then said that McCain was “watching ads of Senator McCain.” He again claimed that McCain wants to give tax breaks to oil companies. He repeated the 95% claim that has been completely bunked. He claimed that “independent analysts show his plan giving three times as much tax relief.”
Obama then claimed that 98% of small businesses make less than $250,000.

McCain went after the “spread the wealth” comment. He said that “I want Joe the Plumber to spread the wealth, I don’t want you to spread the wealth.” He then said that Obama’s plan was class warfare. McCain then asked, “Why would you want to increase anybody’s taxes right now?”

This was definitely a feistier McCain than in previous debates.

McCain asked, “Why would you want to take Joe the Plumber’s wealth and spread it around to others?”
Obama, for one of the first times in this general election campaign, looked like a dear in the headlights. He spoke about Warren Buffet and Exxon Mobil, before McCain reminded him that “this is about Joe the Plumber.”

Obama then said that, “nobody likes paying taxes. I don’t.”

McCain then responded, “then don’t raise them.”

McCain finally hit the home run out of the ballpark. “America has the second highest corporate tax rates. Our corporate tax rate is 35%. In Ireland it is 11%. Where are companies going to go to create jobs? We need to cut taxes and create jobs, not spread the wealth around?”

Schieffer then shifted to the fact that neither candidate has a plan to reduce the deficit, and asked if both of them were ignoring reality. He then asked them for specific programs they would cut back.

This was a fabulous question, and a brilliant attempt to see if specifics would even be offered.
Obama began by speaking in generalities. Schieffer pressed for specifics. Obama continued saying he favored “pay as you go.” Obama said that we spend too much on “subsidies to insurance companies.” He then said that he would “go through the budget line by line to eliminate programs that don’t work.”

This is a prime example of Obama having no there there. He will not offer specifics, either because he has no idea what he is talking about, or because he is dishonest.”

He then added that “programs we need, we should make better.” This is why I consider Obama a gasbag.
McCain veered back to home ownership, and referred to a program offered by Hillary Clinton. Schieffer tried to get McCain to offer specifics, but McCain quickly began answering.

“Reducing energy independence will save us the billions we send overseas. We need alternative energy, including wind and solar. We also need offshore drilling, which Obama has opposed.”

For some reason, Obama sneered at this.

McCain then offered an across the board spending freeze. In past debates, Obama has called this “taking a hatchet to what needs a scalpel.” Mccain rebutted that assertion tonight by saying, “Yes, it is a hatchet, and I would get out a hatchet, and only after that, then I would get out a scalpel.”

This is a major difference. Obama will not cut anything. McCain will. A spending freeze slashes everything. It is better than saying “some programs don’t work.”

“Marketing assistance programs, ethanol subsidies. Obama supported them. I would eliminate the tariff on Brazilian sugar. I saved the taxpayers 6.8 billion dollars last year.”

Again, this may not be much, but unlike Obama, McCain actually answered the question with specific examples. McCain mentioned the one billion dollars in earmarks Obama has sought.

Obama insisted that we need a scalpel. He then said that “some programs are underfunded.” Obama pointed out that earmarks are 1/2 of 1% of the budget. This may be true, but it still does not change the fact that Obama will not cut a thing.

Obama blamed President Bush for the doubling fo the debt. We did have a War on Terror, but that was not mentioned.

McCain then offered a stinging rebuke to Obama’s constant comparing of McCain to Bush. McCain said, “I’m not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run 4 years ago.”

McCain then pointed out that Obama “twice voted for budget resolutions that raised taxes on people making $42,000 per year. McCain then pointed out the New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg declared a spending freeze for his city.

McCain then really got into it by pointing out that in the last two budgets, Senator Obama “voted for 24 billion more in spending than President Bush proposed. He voted for the energy bill that gave goodies to the oil companies that I opposed. Let’s look at our records. Let’s look at our ratings from the National Taxpayers Union and Citizens Against Government Waste.”

McCain then challenged Obama and asked him to “name one single time where you have stood up to your party on one single major issue.”

Obama claimed that the first bill he supported was tort reform. McCain pointed out that this was “an overwhelming vote.” Obama then mentioned merit pay for teachers, which he actually backed away from. He then claimed he supported clean coal technology, which is fallacious.

Obama disputed the $42,000 figure before getting in a dig at Fox News. He then continued to link McCain to President Bush. McCain showed where he disagreed with President Bush, offering a tangible list. He then said that Senator Obama’s “record of standing up to the leaders of his party is not very convincing.”

Schieffer then pointed to the nastiness of the campaign. The candidates were asked to say to each other’s faces what has been said over the airwaves. If Schieffer was trying to liven thing sup, he succeeded ona  massive scale. It also allowed McCain to bring up Obama’s associations without having to initiate it. The question was if McCain would do it.

McCain went after John Lewis’s comments calling he and Sarah Palin racists. He compared them to George Wallace, the segregationist.”Senator Obama, you never repudiated that. Every time there has been an out of bounds remark by a republican, I have repudiated them. I hope Senator Obama will repudiate the comments by John Lewis.”

McCain then belted Obama for opting out of public financing after saying he would take public financing. Obama raised a ton of money, so I can see why he did it. Nevertheless, McCain was right when he said, “Senator Obama, you looked the American people in the eye, and you broke your word.”

Obama stammered and claimed that polls show McCain running the more negative campaign. He never got to John Lewis’s hateful remarks.

McCain gave several examples of ads that Obama is running that are completely false. He also mentioned Joe the Plumber perhaps one too many times, before correctly pointing out that Obama never repudiated Lewis’s comments.

Obama made excuses. He then told a complete lie, saying that somebody shouted “kill him,” when his name was mentioned at a republican rally. The phrase “kill him,” was directed at unrepentant bomber William Ayres. This allowed McCain to mention Ayers in self defense.

McCain does not have the stomach to go for the jugular, but in this debate it was being handled to him on a silver platter. Obama mentioned the remark about his “palling around with terrorists.”
McCain fiercely defended his supporters, but would not correct the record about what the “kill him” reference was about.

McCain did say that “there are some awful things said at your rallies.” He also pointed out that he repudiates the bad comments, while Obama does not.

Obama seemed very flustered, but kept pivoting back to domestic issues.

McCain FINALLY went for the jugular. He claimed that Obama “must explain the extent of his relationship with William Ayers. He must explain his ties to ACORN, who is trying to pull off one of the greatest frauds in election history…”

Obama kept laughing. The guy is simply incredibly cocky. He has a mile wide grit eating grin.
McCain pointed out the $832,000 Obama gave to ACORN.

Obama actually tried to tie Ronald Reagan to William Ayers. That is what a leftist does when they get caught. They claim that Reagan did it too, so it is ok.

Obama then brought the U.S. Justice Department into the ACORN allegation. He then made a brazen statement. “Senator McCain has told you that my allegations are trouble.”

That might have been the first truthful thing Obama said during this campaign.

Obama then claimed that if he “was interested in figuring out foreign policy, I turn to my running mate Joe Biden.”

Interested in “figuring out” foreign policy? This was a gift from Heaven, and I pray news outlets pick up on it. It was better than John Kerry’s “global test.”

Obama then got desperate by saying that “the fact that this is what your campaign has become about says more about your campaign than it does about me.”

McCain then tied it all together. “You launched your career in Mr. Ayers’s living room, and you gave $230,000 to ACORN from the board you and he were on. Facts are facts and records are records.”

Schieffer then asked about the running mates, and why each candidate had a better running mate than the other one.

Obama praised Joe Biden. “He has among the best foreign policy credentials of anybody. He also fights for the little guy.” Obama then went back to platitudes, such as “invest in the future, tax cuts for the working people, etc…”

McCain called Sarah Palin a “role model to women, and a reformer. She has given money back to the taxpayers, and cut government.” McCain mentioned that she will be an advocate for special needs children, including autism. “I am proud of her,” was how McCain left it.

When asked if Palin was qualified, Obama demurred by saying that “it was up to the people.” He stated that McCain’s spending freeze “would hurt the funding for special needs children.”

McCain said that Biden was “qualified in many respects, but that he has been wrong on many foreign policy and national security issues, which is supposed to be his strength.”

McCain was clicking on all cylinders.

“He was against the first Gulf War. He had this cockamamie idea (in the most recent conflict) to divide Iraq into three separate countries.”

McCain then shifted back to Obama’s spending tendencies. “Your answer to everything is to spend more. Why not just have transparency and accountability in government?”

Obama again sneered when McCain mentioned the $860 billion in new spending.

When Bob Schieffer brought up climate control, McCain corrected him that the phrase was “climate change.” Both candidates were asked how much they could reduce foreign oil imports in their first term. Schieffer wanted a specific number.

McCain said that we could eliminate the need for Middle Eastern and Venezuelan oil. He then brought up a fabulous point about Canadian oil. He pointed out that when Obama said he would “renegotiate NAFTA, the Canadians responded by saying that they would then sell their oil to China.” It was a great way of showing the lack of understanding that Obama has about business and foreign policy.

McCain said that “we can build 45 new nuclear plants.” He pointed out Obama’s hedging on that issue.

Both Obama and McCain agreed that 10 years was a realistic time frame for eliminating our dependence on foreign oil. They would not say what they could do in 4 years.

Obama then began lying again. He said that we should implement offshore drilling, but only where there is no oil. He threatened to take away the leases that the oil producers currently have. He did not say how, or if that is even legal. He did say “use them or lose them.”

Obama is simply dishonest on the issue. You drill where the oil actually resides.

He then continued lying by saying that he believed in free trade. This is totally false. He is beholden to big labor. They hate trade agreements. That is why he wants to reject future deals with allies such as South Korea while blaming President bush for betraying our allies.

He then blamed President Bush and Senator McCain for NAFTA, even though it was enacted in 1993 by Bill Clinton. He said we had to “make China stop manipulating its currency.”

How does he plan to “make them” do this? Perhaps with “tough diplomacy,” aka doing nothing.
He then bashed South Korea.

McCain pointed out that “Senator Obama is good with words.” He said that Obama said he would “look at” offshore drilling. That does not mean he would actually do it. He then stated that he was a free trader, and spoke of how Obama “opposes the Columbian Free Trade Agreement.” He also said that Obama has “never been South of the border.”

McCain was on fire. Where was this guy in the second debate?

“Free trade with Columbia is a no brainer. Maybe if you would travel down there and visit you would understand it a lot better.”

Obama spoke of assassinated Columbian labor leaders. He tried to tie human rights to free trade. Obama wants us to “stand up to other countries.” He then shifted to the Big 3 automakers. He said that we have to “hold them responsible for producing the highly efficient cars of the future.” I am not sure how that relates to free trade, but in Obama’s world that means something.

Obama was simply rambling.

McCain pounced.

“Obama does not want a free trade agreement with our best partner in the region, but wants to sit down without precondition with Hugo Chavez, who has been helping terrorist organizations.”

Obama laughed and sneered again.

“Senator Obama wants to restrict trade and raise taxes. The last President who tried that was Herbert Hoover. We went from a deep recession to a depression.”

Schieffer then turned to health care. He then asked another fabulous question. I have to admit that Schieffer is one of the few moderators worthy of speaking at all, much less with Presidential candidates. He wanted to know if “either of the candidates would be open to controlling health care costs rather than expanding coverage?”

This was supposed to be Obama’s strong suit, health care. However, since his answer to everything is to spend more, a question about cost controlling was absolutely worth asking.

Obama said that “we have to do both.” He then went into the sob stories that do not answer the question about cost cutting and reforming the broken system. Obama said he would “try to lower costs.” It depends on what the meaning of “try” is. Obama then said that insurance companies “cannot discriminate based on preexisting conditions.” That means regulating businesses rather than allow them to avoid losing money. Insurance companies are not charities. This is the socialism that Obama endorses.

McCain spoke about putting health care records online, and more clinics. More community health centers would reduce costs. He spoke about the rising obesity rates, and physical fitness programs. Prevention does matter. I don’t agree with McCain that employers should “reward employees who join health clubs.” That is impractical easy to manipulate. I could go and just sit in the jacuzzi.

Nevertheless, at least McCain offered something. Obama did not.

McCain brought up Joe the Plumber again, which was overkill. However, he tied it in well by again reminding Americans that “Obama will raise the capital gains tax, and fine people for not buying mandated healthcare. Senato Obama still will not tell us how much that fine is going to be.” McCain also pointed out that Obama wants a single payer system, which is what is hurting Canada and England.

When pressed by Schieffer, Obama denied this. Obama said that the fine would be “0.” Obama said he exempts small businesses, but not “large businesses who can afford to buy health care for their employees but don’t.” Naturally, he would not mention the size of the fine.

Who the heck does Obama think he is to order employees to purchase health care? It is not his decision.
He then smugly said to Joe the Plumber that “if you want to do the right thing, and provide health care for your employees…”

Again, Joe is not required to do this. Obama will force businesses into doing what they are not legally obligated to do. That is bullying, and it is wrong.

Obama went after McCain’s $5,000 tax credit. He claimed that older folks will not benefit. He claimed that people would lose because the health care would cost $12,000, more than the credit.

Obama criticized companies for cherry picking and taking only the most desirable people. How dare a company make business decisions based on what will help the business grow and profit. Instead companies should take on everybody for the sake of “fairness,” which would have the company go bankrupt and nobody be taken care of.

(Grabbing a bullhorn): Barack Obama does not understand business because he has never run a business. He has no clue how businesses work.

McCain hammered away.

“My plan will allow people to decide their own futures, not have Senator Obama decide their health care choices for them.”

A moment of levity occurred when McCain referred to Obama as “Senator Government.”

He also said that “Spending has gone way up in the last 2 years, and it has been democrats in charge of congress the last 2 years.”

Obama claimed that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce attacked McCain’s plan, and that it would lead to the “unraveling of the U.S. Health Care system.

Bob Schieffer then turned to abortion. I again have to praise Schieffer because he asked the question in a creative way. He asked them both “Could either of you nominate to the Supreme Court a nominee that disagrees with you on this issue?”

This question was less about abortion than judicial litmus tests. I expected both candidates to squirm. The honest answer is that there should be no litmus tests ideologically. If the judge is qualified, that would be the end of the discussion. Nevertheless, this was one area where gutlessness was expected to reign supreme for both men.

I was wrong. McCain said that he “never imposed a litmus test, and never will.” He stated that Roe v Wade should be overturned, and that abortion should be decided by the states.

McCain hammered Obama for not joining the “Gang of 14,” because as McCain put it, Obama was “afraid of appointing conservative judges.” McCain voted for Breyer and Ginsburg “not because I agreed with them, but because they were qualified. Senator Obama voted against Roberts and Alito based on ideology. That is not how we should judge these nominees.””Strict adherence to the Constitution” was what mattered. McCain emphatically said that there would be no litmus tests.

Obama insisted that he would not provide a litmus test, but that “Roe vs Wade was rightly decided.”

Obama tried to turn the question into an abortion question. It was about judges. He reverted back though and said that “states should not have the right to decide on privacy issues.” Obama then said he wanted a justice who “understood what real world folks are going through.” That has absolutely nothing to do with interpeting the Constitution. Judges are not social workers.

Then again, in Obama’s world, every government worker is a social worker.

Obama shifted to a pay discrimination case that was thrown out on a technicality. He claimed that McCain was against that particular case. Obama wants judges that will “stand up when nobody else will.” Again, judges are not social workers.

McCain said that the referenced case was a “trial lawyer’s dream.” McCain pointed out that when Obama was in the Illinois state Senate, Obama voted against a bill to provide aid to children who survived abortions, as well as being against partial birth abortions.

McCain mentioned the “pro-abortion movement,” which could have been dicey.

Obama denied voting against the life saving treatment amendment by stating that the law already existed. He claimed that the Illinois Medical Society voted against it.

Obama then became truly Clintonesque when he said that he was “for a ban on late term abortions, partial or otherwise, provided that an exception for the mother’s health was inserted.” He knows full well that the health exception is a poison pill because any woman could claim it was a health issue.

Unfortunately for McCain, Obama succeeded in shifting the debate away from the issue of judges.
Yet McCain successfully attacked the health exception for the Trojan Horse that it is. McCain spoke of his own adopted daughter, but stated that adoption does not mean abortion is a solution that should be encouraged.

Bob Schieffer, who had been doing everything right all night, made one glaring omission in an otherwise stellar performace. He reserved the final question for education. There was not a single question on foreign policy. The campaigns did agree that the final debate would only be domestic policy, but the first debate should have only been foreign policy, and it was not. So Schieffer obeyed the rules, but at the expense of a foreign policy discussion of any kind.

This is why it was refreshing and surprising to see McCain energized and Obama rattled on domestic issues. Education ended the discussion, with Schieffer asking if our education problems were a threat to our national security.

Obama said it is. Obama said that “between more money, and reform, we need both.” His answer is always both. He wants to “raise teacher pay in exchange for higher standards and accountability.” The NEA will never allow this, and Obama takes his marching orders from the NEA. Obama aslo said that he “wants to make college affordable.” That is a platitude, and an expensive one at that. Obama proposes a $4,000 tuition credit, which is a drop in the bucket.

McCain called education the “civil rights issue of the 21st century.” He alluded to school choice, rather than “send children back to failing schools.”

The candidates were asked if the Federal Government should play a larger role, which according to Schieffer, meant more money.

Obama said that he wanted to fire bad teachers, but was against vouchers. On the first issue, the NEA would not allow it. On the second issue, he is just wrong.

Obama had an amazing line when he attacked McCain by saying, “it is unfair to offer plans but not say how we are going to pay for it.”

Perhaps Obama was referring to his own campaign, which is one big spending spree that cannot be paid for.

McCain spoke of how a failing DC school system was reinvigorated with vouchers. McCain said to Obama that “I am surprised you did not pay more attention to this example. It was vouchers.” McCain said that “I am not going to continue to throw money at a problem.” He reinforced the need for vouchers.

Obama claimed that vouchers do not work. He can say what he wants, and maybe the sky is purple in his world. He is simply more afraid of the NEA than he is of students failing later in life.

The candidates then gave their closing statements.

McCain spoke that the issue is trust. He said that people should look at his record, and his long commitment to service.

Obama again mentioned the Great Depression. He did it without laughing with glee about it. He said that we need to “invest in the people again.” He also mentioned the word “change.” He also mentioned “sarifice, service, and responsibility.”

I think he just endorsed John McCain.

This debate was a major win for John McCain. It was not close. I understand the media will somehow claim otherwise, but what this debate showed is that when a fair moderator asks tough and intelligent questions, McCain answers them, and Obama rambles. Obama cannot offer specifics because he has none. He cannot offer substance because he has none.

It took a nightmarish second debate with a horrendous moderator to show how good McCain can be when he is given a fair shake.

Barack Obama does well when he is coddled, but simply falls on his face when forced to offer tangible metrics of anything.

Obama is a socialist, and this debate will hopefully finally show the American people that Obama is a snake oil salesman who wants government to run peoples’ lives, decide what is fair, and play Robin Hood with our money.

We need a President, not a community organizer.

As awful as I felt after the second debate, this was a complete turnaround.

John McCain handily won this debate.


9 Responses to “Election 2008–Presidential Debate III Recap”

  1. I wish the public was a little more informed. The debates would be far more substantive if they were.

    Take corporate taxes. Now, while I personally am not a fan of high corporate taxes (I prefer more progressive personal income taxes), let’s be realistic here. America does, in statute, have among the highest corporate tax rates, at 35%, in the world, but in reality we have among the lowest effective rates at about 17%. That’s the average rate they pay after deductions and such. If Americans were better eductaed, and better served by the corporate media, they’d know that, and corporate tax rates would not be much of a political issue.

    Take energy. McCain continues to promote nuclear energy and more drilling. An eductaed person knows that drilling for more oil will have a negligible effect on oil prices as oil is a globally traded commodity and we have very little of it compared to the rest of the world even though we use more of it than anyone else per capita by far in a long ways. And if nuclear energy was a profitable venture, then why doesn’t the private sector engage in it? Why? Because it’s not profitable. The nations that use large amounts of nuclear energy – the Frances and Indias – use federal moneys to build the power plants. They are state endeavors. Unless John McCain is suggesting the government biuld these nuclear power plants, and he’s not, then who does he suggest will do so? We don’t know. Again, and educated and informed American would know these things.

    I could go on, but all I’ll say further is this: it’s ashame we live in such an uneducated country where one candidate has to lie (John McCain) and the other has to keep quiet (Barack Obama) to get elected. I’m very ashamed of my country.


  2. Micky 2 says:

    And its quite a shame that we are not all as educated as you although I have eductaed you on the energy/oil situation before and yet you purposly choose to avoid the facts or it just didnt retain.

    Actually I dont believe any of that.
    I believe that you as most on the left are delusional enough to think that if you just keep clicking your heels together you’ll end up in Kansas.

    McCain is a liar ?
    There you go with the “lie” thing again.
    When you are really no better for at least not acknowledging the lies of your candidate.
    In relation to that heres a little something I had to say at another blog today.
    First theres all the flips.
    Privacy for net use anyone ?,
    Sticking to fed funds for campaign ?
    Nafta ?
    Drilling ?
    Nuclear ?
    I can’t throw my pastor overboard became ” I’m a member of a church community”and then” I was never associated with the church, only with religious practices ”
    His pastor/mentor is an avid fan of Louis Farrrakhan
    Ayers did dispicable things when I was 8 but didnt know about it till the media brought it up ?
    Just a guy in the hood became..
    We did work together for a little while became..
    We worked together for a couple years.

    And then theres the ACORN/Annenberg/community organizer/citibank strong arming for sub prime loans debacle/connection.
    I gave ACORN 800,000.00 bucks but dont work with them even though I represented counsel to them in the citibank issue.

    My mom and dad were Marxist.
    My relatives in Kenya are radical muslims.
    My half brother in Kenya lives in a shoe box on less than 10.00 a month.
    Why was Corsi arrested in Kenya ?
    His association with Frank Marshall Davis. (mentor/communist)
    His association with Rashid Khalidi – Palestinian supporter/professor at C U
    His economic plans are mathematically impossible.
    He has plainly repeated the words of Carl Marx in saying “Spread the wealth”
    He has accused our forces of bombing innocent Afghanis.
    He wants to bomb Pakistan and kiss Irans ass
    Even Jesse Jackson has recently said that with Obama in office Israel is screwed.
    Obama along with Barney Frank, Criss Dodd, Harry Reid, Pelosi, Scuhmer blocked McCains attempt to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie all the while being the top recipients of donations from them.
    Everyday in congress amounts to a million dollars in spending by virtue of his votes.
    Voted against troop funding unless a timeline was attached.
    His withdrawl timelines have changed 3 times.
    Will not acknowledge the surged worked.
    Babies are “Punishment”
    Said that all 100% of McCains ads were negative when actually its only the last week they,ve been negative. Previously in the campaign the rating is about 70 % negative.
    Said that because of his position on coal the environmental groups are no big fan of his.
    Not true. All major environmental groups have endoresed him and have donated to his campaign.

  3. Eagle 6 says:

    Eric, Did you watch the same debate that our CNNi “smart” people watched? They gave Obama the 66 to 33 thumbs up…he was much more “poised” (smug) and affable (sneering) than a passionate (angry) McCain who pointed out (picked on) BO by trying to hold him accountable (being unfair)… I, too, feel it’s a shame we live in such an uneducated country that one candidate has to lie (the Oprah Dope), and the other has to wear a muzzle lest he be accused of racism (McCain). I’m not ashamed of my country, but I am disappointed in the ovine species who have a vote…Baaa Baaa Baaarack

  4. Eagle 6 says:

    Darn! it rather takes the sting away when one screws up the “point”… (i.e. McCain, who pointed to some of BO’s positions…) ;>) more experimentation…

  5. Joshua Godinez says:

    ” When Bob Schieffer brought up climate control, McCain corrected him that the phrase was “climate control.” ”

    I think you meant he corrected the phrase as climate change.

    I have a hard time observing these debates as an undecided voter because my political philosophy makes the decision easy and it’s all based on my ideology. I know what I believe in and I know who more closely matches my philosphy. So, I can’t watch this as someone who has no clue what he believes in like the undecided voters must be.

    I guess the issue is if people don’t hear what is being said. Obama says he will raise taxes on the top 5% of income earners in the U.S. By any definition, that means the rich. If you don’t think you’re rich, but you’re in the upper 5%, then you’re wrong. You’re rich. He wants to take that money and fund his increased spending programs as well as cut taxes for those who pay taxes beneath that 5% threshhold and give additional welfare for those who don’t pay taxes.

    I already know I don’t believe in that sort of philosophy so it’s not hard for me to be against a candidate that proposes it. I don’t know if the 95% and 5% figures are correct. That’s what I’d like the debate and media to clarify. All I know is that taking more money from the rich and giving it to the poor is redistribution of wealth and that will not help the economy. Almost all the rich people got that way from being smart. Without comprehensive tax reform they’ll find a way to minimize any proposed increases on them although they’ll still pay more. Because of that the programs suggested will cost more than the revenue being brought in by a large margin. By Obama’s own admission his tax policy alone cannot pay for his increases in spending. His answer to that is that he will cut existing government spending to pay for his new government spending. The only problem is he never, ever says how that will happen. Is it too wonkish to explain? How long does it take to completely retrofit the computer systems in an entity the size of the federal government? That’s where a large part of Obama’s savings are supposed to come from. Does that mean he’ll put his spending plans on hold for the 5 to 5 million years it takes to actually happen? When asked what he’ll cut he invariably talks about programs that need increased funding. What does “go through the budge line by line” mean? It has no specificity. When asked how he would be more honest to say “Trust me. I just will. I don’t know how yet, but I just will”.

    McCain has given specifics. He has talked about processes and programs that would be changed or eliminated.

    America yearns for Obama to be President. He has the look and sound of a great communicator, but his message lacks substance. He is the Coca-Cola candidate. He speaks in advertising slogans and just like that popular beverage he is enjoyable for a moment, but has no real benefit besides a temporary jolt and in the long run is actually very bad for you.

    I agree with Jersey. It is a shame that a candidate can be elected President of the United States of America by being quiet about the specifics of how he will lead. How is it possible that he can get away with that? Obama is a symbol of racial reconciliation and a tribute for the guilt felt by people who have never participated in the bigoted actions they feel remorse for. Obama softly belches the hot air that makes his supporters feel warm and cozy believing that the power of his breath will keep away the chill of an imminent winter. The economy doesn’t care about slogans; it wants real action aside from higher taxes. Iran, Venezuela, Al-Qaida will ignore the insubstantial drafts issued by Obama who won’t have a national guilt complex in their areas to assist him nor will he have a media that will carry his message in the way he wishes.

    If change was all people wanted they would get it with McCain. Some want more radical change like one of the Boy Scout dads I talked to the other night. I asked him why he supports Obama. “I don’t know”, he shrugged. “I just want a change”. Unfortunately, this dad endorses socialism so I couldn’t press him on the fact that McCain would also bring change. For him, Obama presents the more radical change and that’s his cup of tea. He even cited England as a place where socialist policies make a better government practice than ours. He just shrugged off what I told him and parroted left-wing propaganda. I offered to buy him some coffee to talk to him further, but he and I know we’re both too busy to make that kind of time. I get ten minutes to make a point with people and they seemed determined to stick with their preconceived ideas rather than debate issues.

    So, this is what I think we’re up against. We’ll get Obama because McCain isn’t as handsome and doesn’t deliver his message with rhetoric that engages people’s desire to enact radical change no matter how vague. People aren’t listening. It doesn’t matter how powerful your message is, if people won’t listen to it you can’t change their minds.

    I’m not ashamed of my country. I’m embarrassed.

  6. Yeah, I guess “embarrassed” is a better word. “Ashamed” is kinda harsh. I’ll never forget back in 2004 when a conservative British friend of mine had just flown back to the States on business right after the election. I’ll never forget as I walked up to him and he just stared at me with this look of shock on his face. All he said was this: “What happened?” He just couldn’t understand how Americans could be fool enough to vote for GHWB for a second term. And my friend is no “liberal,” at least in the American sense of the word. He’s a Tory through and through.

    And yes, McCain has truly sold his soul for this election. Any hint of “maverick” has long since been erased. McCain can not and will not bring any change whatsoever from the current status quo of the executive branch. And yes, McCain is lying and lying and lying and lying and lying. He lies about Obama’s voting record (I know, I’m a C-Span addict. I know the votes he’s referring to). He lies about Obama’s spending and tax plans. He lies about Obama’s healthcare plan. He lies about “Joe the Plumber” (a name I now officially sick of hearing). He lies about Obama’s associations. He lies about the war in Iraq and the GWOT. He lies about the current financial disaster. He lies and lies and lies and lies. And the saddest thing part is that he couldn’t keep a single promise he makes! He’d be a lame duck from day one. The House and Senate will be all the more Democratic. He can’t bring “change.” He can’t do anything. All he can do is veto and veto to the point where America subsists on nothing but four years of continuing resolutions! By definition, McCain = No Change.

    Obama, on the other hand, just says nothing. He can’t and he won’t. Heck, one of the main reasons he was groomed for the presidency is the same reason McCain picked Palin – the lack of record. If you have no record, it’s very hard to discredit it. So Obama rides this wave of ambiguity. His ace in the hole? He’s very bright. And that’s a pretty good credential, especially after years of having the country run by sleaze and arrogance. An educated and realistic voter, however, knows that the American federal government is much more than just the persona of one of its parts. When you go to vote, you should consider and weigh many different dynamics – partisan balance, current power players inside and out, foreign and intradomestic factors, the economy in general and among all the different sectors. You should be realistic about what can really “change.” You’d be an idiot to believe that somehow Obama will bring America to a socialist state, or that ululating hordes of islamist hashassins will come to conquer us should one guy or the other win a presidential race, or that all the ridiculous promises made by campaigners will ever come to pass. We have to try to be realistic here. I’m not voting for Obama because I think he’s some great savior. I just think on balance, considering all the mitigating and aggravating factors, he’s a better choice than McCain. That’s all, but it’s quite a lot.


  7. Joshua Godinez says:

    Well, JMJ. I liked that last post. I don’t agree with all of it, but I think it was well stated. I know. You hate discussions on style, but it’s a compliment on style nonetheless.

    The only criticism, putting aside characterizations of McCain’s statements, is that you held him to a higher standard than you did Obama. I saw both of them doing the same thing: redefining the other’s voting record and positions disingenuously.

    By the way, I also think Obama was groomed for the high office and surprised people by grabbing for the brass ring before they thought he would. I was surprised that people were more accepting of his lack of record instead of distrustful of it. I guess we’ll see how that plays out.

  8. Micky 2 says:

    Yet Palin can be blasted for her supposed lack of experience

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.