Liberals

Posted on '08 Election, Democrats, Liberals, Republicans

frustration

The slumping economy has become a primary contributing factor to McCain’s current struggles.  McCain hasn’t helped matters by fumbling his first response to it.   He has allowed Barack Obama to win the argument on taxes, and it certainly doesn’t help matters when every single ad we’re seeing on TV talks about Barack’s middle class tax cuts and McCain’s tax breaks for big oil and corporations.  Senator McCain has a winnable argument on his economic policies and on his health care plan.  He hasn’t effectively sold either one, and he hasn’t been able to break free from the Bush administration’s economic policies — only some of which played a part in the financial crisis we are in.  All this is good for Barack Obama’s viability as November 4th approaches.

McCain’s lack of a coherent message to counter Obama’s claims about his economic proposals is only part of the reason Republicans are frustrated with McCain.  Some of us just can’t understand why legitimate questions about Barack Obama don’t seem to affect his electability.  As I’ve said in previous posts, I think that the relationships with Ayers and ACORN matter a great deal, but the Democrats’ involvement and complicity in enabling Freddie and Fannie to do what they did is more relevant.  This should be part of the message when we are focused on the economy — the Democrats, including Barack Obama (who took campaign cash from Fannie and Freddie) are complicit in the financial mess we are in today.  It goes without saying that I believe that the Bush administration has made the situation worse by this bailout deal, but we have yet to see the full impact of Congress’ approval of that deal.

Another frustration I have is that McCain doesn’t have a problem with trashing his fellow Republicans whether or not they deserve it, but up until this point in the campaign, he has been relatively hands-off with Obama.  He criticized the NC GOP for running the Wright ad, and the media approved of that move.  He absolutely destroyed Mitt Romney in the primaries with negative attacks.  He clearly did not like Mitt Romney, so it’s no surprise that he hit Romney hard.  What we want from McCain is not to act out of character (as far as the way he normally treats Democrats), but to explain why Barack Obama is the wrong choice for our country.  We aren’t asking for scorched-earth rhetoric from McCain against Obama (at least I’m not) — we are just asking for him to keep raising questions about Obama’s record.

Continue reading →

6 Comments Posted on '08 Election, Democrats, Liberals, Republicans

why it all matters

While it would be wise for Senator McCain to focus on an economic message — and that must be his first priority —  he should not ignore the influence of Ayers and ACORN on Barack Obama’s political development.  Because Senator Obama doesn’t have much on his resume before becoming a US Senator,  we have to take all of his prior work experience into account.  If Senator Obama wants to make his community organizer days a part of his relevant experience to be president, then it’s not unreasonable to ask questions about what he did in that position and about those who helped him form his political philosophy.  I’m not accusing Obama of being a terrorist, wanting to blow up buildings,  or supporting voter fraud.  I suspect he just used their political influence to win elections, which is cynical but not criminal.  However, it does damage his image as someone who is going to change Washington and fight corruption.

All we are asking for is a little transparency here.  You know, the same kind the Democrats promised in ’06 when they won Congress.  The argument from the Obama campaign has always been that he has better judgment than John McCain and George Bush because he opposed the war in Iraq, and that all that Washington experience doesn’t matter if it leads to bad choices.  Shouldn’t we judge Obama by the same standards he uses for his opponents?  Isn’t it bad judgment to have a friendly relationship with an unrepentant terrorist, no matter what your personal views are on using explosive devices to cause destruction?  Shouldn’t we question the judgment of someone who has ties to a group that has clearly been involved in voter fraud?

There are two uncomplimentary explanations of Barack’s relationship with Ayers and ACORN.  One is that he knew about the radical stuff and it didn’t bother him.  The other is that he was completely unaware of all this, and now that he knows, he condemns those activities.  Either way, it should concern Americans about Barack Obama and his ability to serve as our president.  Do we want someone who is so incapable of recognizing a bad guy when he sees one to face off against foreign bad actors like Kim Jong Il and Ahmadinejad?  I don’t.

That’s why Ayers and ACORN are relevant to the discussion during this presidential race.

What will resonate with the American people down the stretch?  Telling them the truth about the economy.  That means not only mentioning the culpability of Chris Dodd and Barney Frank in this financial mess, but also providing a clear break from the policies that got us in the situation we are in today.  It’s much easier to find Democrats to blame for what happened with our economy than it is to find Republicans, and it’s almost impossible to blame John McCain.  But the blame game will only move the ball so far.  Senator McCain needs a better answer to Barack’s economic plan, and he also needs to propose reforms that can prevent the mistakes we made from happening again.  Right now Barack is winning on the economy.  If McCain doesn’t poke some holes in Barack’s economic plan, he loses the election.

8 Comments Posted on '08 Election, Democrats, Liberals, Republicans

where we stand

A couple thoughts on the debate — the format was awful, but I expected more of Tom Brokaw.   We didn’t get any new information out of this debate (other than McCain’s call for more bailouts, but I’ll get to that).  Neither candidate was able to challenge his opponent’s comments in any depth, and this worked great for Obama.  It drives me nuts every time I hear Obama’s claim that 95% of the people will get a tax cut under his tax plan.   As we all know,  a much lower percentage of Americans actually pay taxes.  He is never challenged on this claim.  Since we know the economy will continue to struggle for a while, it makes sense to force the government to sacrifice some of its largesse for the good of all Americans.   That’s why I believe John McCain was on the right track when he proposed a spending freeze (with a few obvious exceptions).   If we are forced to make tough budgetary choices in our own lives, then the government must make some spending cuts as well.

While I have serious doubts about many of Barack Obama’s spending proposals,  John McCain insists on proposing to spend $300 billion more taxpayer dollars on buying up mortgages.  Can’t we start this election over with two different candidates?  If there’s any other candidate who is more tone-deaf to conservatives than John McCain, I have yet to see one.  As a candidate of reform, he should have fought the bailout and the pork added to it, as well as casting a vote against it.  This bailout was eventually going to pass, so there would have been no political risk to McCain if he made a real maverick choice for once.  He also should have promised to review the bailout deal after becoming president to see if that deal is producing the desired results.  This would have put him in a much stronger position on the economy, since there was and is much public opposition to the bailout deal. 

It’s because of my opposition to Barack Obama and his plans for this country and for our economy that I am supporting John McCain and encouraging others to do the same.  One thing’s for sure…no matter who wins this election, it won’t be a fun 4 years.

1 Comment Posted on '08 Election, Conservatives, Democrats, Liberals, Republicans

the debate

The McCain campaign has to be pleased with the way Sarah Palin performed in the debate Thursday night. She went toe-to-toe with a Senate lifer. She was able to recover from those unflattering interviews, and she was also able to get a couple good shots in at Joe Biden in the process. She did benefit from low expectations, and I take that into account when evaluating the results, but she easily cleared that bar. Those who loved Sarah before the debate were validated, and those who thought she wasn’t the best choice for a VP have some ammo to make that case after watching the debate.

Sarah was great in that she spoke directly to the American people. She can connect with her audience in a way that Obama cannot. On style, Sarah easily wins this debate. But when Americans evaluate the two candidates as potential vice presidents, Biden makes the sale. Senator Biden is wrong on a great many things, but as a skilled debater, he was able to fool people into believing that he understands foreign policy and the Constitutional role of the Vice President. He gave specific policy positions on issues, and the average viewer won’t bother to check to see whether he accurately represents McCain’s positions or his (Biden’s) own. Governor Palin’s lack of specifics on policy issues hurt her case, but as she said, she has only been prepping on this for 5 weeks, so no one should have expected that she could cram 20-30 years of knowledge into her head in that short time.

Governor Palin did not change any minds by her performance Thursday night. Those who came in voting McCain will still vote for him, and those supporting Obama will still vote for Obama. There is more work to do for McCain. This election isn’t lost yet, and McCain must have a better response to the country’s economic concerns and must learn how to sell his healthcare plan. The economy is the key issue, and there must be separation from the Bush administration if McCain really wants to win this election. Sometimes we just don’t get that impression.

Posted on '08 Election, Conservatives, Democrats, Liberals, Republicans

kill the pig, rescue the taxpayer

Those who are still pushing this absolutely-must-have-right-now-or-the-world-will-explode “emergency rescue plan” aren’t all that concerned with sticking to the $700 billion price tag.  Is it too much to ask from this Congress that we have a straight up-and-down vote on whether we should bail out private industry?  Why yes it is.   They just couldn’t resist adding pork to a bill that they believe will eventually pass.

Here are some of the “incentives“:

  • Sec. 105. Energy credit for geothermal heat pump systems.
  • Sec. 111. Expansion and modification of advanced coal project investment credit.
  • Sec. 113. Temporary increase in coal excise tax; funding of Black Lung Disability Trust Fund.
  • Sec. 115. Tax credit for carbon dioxide sequestration.
  • Sec. 205. Credit for new qualified plug-in electric drive motor vehicles.
  • Sec. 405. Increase and extension of Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund tax.
  • Sec. 309. Extension of economic development credit for American Samoa.
  • Sec. 317. Seven-year cost recovery period for motorsports racing track facility.
  • Sec. 501. $8,500 income threshold used to calculate refundable portion of child tax credit.
  • Sec. 503 Exemption from excise tax for certain wooden arrows designed for use by children.

Wooden arrows?  Cost recovery for a motorsports racing track facility?  All hail to our bipartisan overlords.  We might very well get stuck with the bill for all this, and this is a very high price to pay for opening the eyes of many Americans to the failure of both parties to get our fiscal house in order.

1 Comment Posted on '08 Election, Conservatives, Democrats, Liberals, Republicans

debating biden and palin

Apparently Gwen Ifill’s writing a very complimentary book about our Democratic nominee for President, Barack Obama.  No bias here. Move along citizen.  Why in the world didn’t the McCain campaign know about this?  Are they all fast asleep over there?  With all the credit we can give that campaign for some of those clever web ads, the McCain team hasn’t been earning their paychecks in the last 2 weeks.  There are many things we can point to as far as mistakes they have made so far — the rollout of Sarah Palin, the fumbling around on the economy, the failure (until recently) to attack Barack on the issues that matter in this election — to name a few.  But even if they failed to “vet” Ifill and whether she could possibly be objective moderating this debate,  McCain is handling this correctly.

Making a big deal about this only hurts McCain.  They can’t pull Sarah from this debate, no matter what legitimate concerns they may have (internally) about this.  There are no unbiased moderators left in this country, so that’s not an reasonable option.  Sarah Palin needs to show up, tweak the media and the Democrats,  promote her candidate, and survive the gentle pokes by Joe Biden.  She can do this.  If it goes badly for her, the campaign will continue to push the extensive media bias theme, and it only advances their point on that.  Of course, if Palin does not do well here, McCain has bigger problems than a biased media.

2 Comments Posted on '08 Election, Democrats, Liberals, Republicans

draw

That’s what I thought about the McCain-Obama debate. McCain had a few good lines, but Obama did not do any obvious damage to himself when discussing foreign policy — at least not that any casual observer would notice. I don’t think either of them changed any minds tonight. I missed the part where they discussed the economy, but it probably wouldn’t have changed my opinion of this debate. McCain needed to knock out Obama, and he did not. This raises the stakes for the next two debates for John McCain, and this is a debate I believe McCain should have won because it’s an area of strength for him.

Minor point — there’s not much difference between preconditions and preparations, and Barack Obama’s explanation of this is just silly. But Barack did what he needed to do in this debate. Even though I absolutely disagree with about 95% of what Barack wants to do on foreign policy and the economy, I realize that the average American does not follow politics as closely as the bloggers and other assorted political junkies. So it’s possible that someone more detached from this than I am could see a clear winner between McCain and Obama. I didn’t.

Not surprisingly for those on the opposite side of the political debate — McCain is winning the FNC text poll 82 to 16. It was a lot closer than that.

8 Comments Posted on Democrats, Liberals

re: remove all doubt

Interesting that my buddy Chris is willing to link to Fox News, since it’s such an unreliable source. 😉 I’m not sure why he wants to classify Fox News as part of the MSM, except that a lot more people watch FNC for their news than MSLSD or CNN.  But ok…Fox News is now part of the hypocritical double standard where the MSM doesn’t call Iraq and Afghanistan socialistic enterprises, but it criticizes Obama for wanting to spend US taxpayer dollars on solving global poverty.  One of these should be under the umbrella of necessary foreign policy, and one of them should not be.  We disagree on whether the US role in rebuilding Iraq is a good investment in a positive outcome for Iraq or whether it’s just government wasting our money on useless nation-building — and thus no more useful than Obama’s efforts to finance the end of world poverty.

I’m not missing any such point.  If the MSM sees a difference between our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan and what Obama is proposing with the Global Poverty Act,  it’s probably because there is one.  If your intention is to shoot a specific messenger, you might want to get a more accurate gun.  If Barack is being misrepresented, that’s not my fault.  That’s not the fault of the MSM or Fox News.  That’s his campaign’s fault.  But I’m getting off of the subject here…

I called the bailouts socialism, while acknowledging my lack of expertise on the subject of the financial markets.  You can choose to see this as a cop-out, or as an excuse for me not to be too hard on President Bush.  That’s your opinion, and you are welcome to it.  You can spin all you want to, but even you do not know what Barack Obama will do once he’s President.  He could decide to keep troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Thus the war funding would continue.  

But let’s say you’re right — that we suddenly have all the Iraq and Afghanistan money to play with.

Continue reading →

Posted on '08 Election, Democrats, Liberals

re: forest for the trees

There is a difference between calling the bailouts a mistake and calling them one example of socialism.  I did both.  I started out by saying that I disagreed with all the bailouts, and also that I was opposed to government taking over private industry.  Not sure how I could be any more clear than I was with that.   I wasn’t excusing the Bush administration by saying that I didn’t completely understand why certain private industries got government assistance and others did not.   The bailouts are still what I said they were.   I’m just saying that it’s above my pay grade to figure out what the fallout would be from letting these businesses fail.  We have already discussed the failure of the Bush administration to limit government, and I think you know that we are in agreement that he has expanded government during his 8 years.

What are the objectives of foreign aid?  Is it to promote goodwill or to give a financial incentive to other nations to side with us in disputes at the UN?  If so, how’s that working for us?  The nations who hate us will still hate us even when we have done all we can to win their favor.  Private charities have always been able to provide financial assistance to countries who have suffered natural disasters like earthquakes and floods, and they are usually more effective in the distribution of aid  than the US government is. Maybe a freeze isn’t the way to attack this, but Obama’s going to need all the domestic funds he can get to finance all the spending he’s proposing.

Iraq and Afghanistan are necessary expenditures, and ending world poverty shouldn’t be quite as high on our priority list.   A destabilized Iraq would be a national security risk.   Leaving now could mean that at some point, we would have to go back in and fix the chaos.  We have a national security interest in Afghanistan.  Even some of your Democratic friends agree on that point.  Doesn’t Barack want to send more troops there?  So he doesn’t seem to have a problem spending money on that project.  He also appears to have some interest in delaying the withdrawal of troops from Iraq, if that New York Post story is accurate.  

Let’s review– Barack wants to spend money on some domestic programs, ending world poverty, AND continuing to leave troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Explain why his plans are so different from those of the Bush administration.  (Well…other than the raising taxes on “rich” people part of Barack’s agenda.)

We wouldn’t have to raise taxes if the federal government would use the money it has more effectively, but since this hasn’t happened during the Bush administration, it’s even less likely under an Obama administration.  We have forgotten the part of fiscal responsibility that includes cutting programs that don’t work and allocating resources where they are most needed.  If Obama or McCain have something like this in their economic plan, I haven’t seen it.  Raising taxes on anybody is not a desirable option, especially because it enables wasteful spending, and raising taxes on corporations affects everybody, not just the fat cat CEOs.

Posted on '08 Election, Conservatives, Democrats, Liberals

conservatives and the mccain/palin ticket

There are two main issues that Christian conservatives consider important enough to threaten withholding votes from any politician who doesn’t perfectly toe the line — abortion and same-sex marriage.   When evangelicals and others hold the line on principle and refuse to endorse a candidate who doesn’t agree with them on these issues, they are called single-issue voters and derided for standing on those principles.  These issues are important to me as well, but sometimes we don’t think about the consequences of withholding support from perfectly good and qualified candidates who might be a better bet to win an election. Every one of our divided conservative groups picked a different horse, and McCain got his independents and moderates — at least in the primary. That’s how we ended up with a candidate in McCain that we are still unhappy with, despite the Palin bounce.

I agree with those who say that we should stop trying to make the experience argument for Sarah Palin, even though it doesn’t seem to bother the Obama sheep that their man hasn’t closed the deal with the American people in that category.   Her appeal is a broad appeal that has very little to do with her knowledge of foreign policy or her deep conversations with world leaders.   It’s all about her personal story — moose hunting, fishing, the NRA membership, her Down’s Syndrome son.  She’s a very sympathetic figure, and she is a happy warrior, zinging Obama and the Democrats with a smile on her face. (She does need some more variations in her scripted lines, but other than that, I have no complaints.)

While she has requested and received some earmarks, it is evident that she has made some significant changes in the way Alaska does business.  She deserves credit for that.  With an sky-high approval rating in Alaska, she must have done something right in her short tenure there.  I still think that Palin can learn what she does not know,  but unless the Democrats know something we don’t know about McCain’s mortality– McCain will be President on day one, not his VP.  Why are the Democrats even worried about Palin’s readiness anyway?  All they have to do is make sure Barack overcomes his struggles and wins the election. Not that difficult, right? 🙂

Then the 80% wrong Joe Biden can run his foreign policy.  Yikes.  This can’t be what the Democrats really want.