McCain was vague on specifics last night. He insisted that he alone could fix our problems but he didn't tell us how. He tried to seem like he understood the trials of average Americans, but he seemed out of touch. He doesn't realize that when you have 7 houses and 14 cars you need to prove that you can identify the bottom 95% of America and the problems we face every day.
McCain has an empathy deficit when it comes to the middle class. Democrats give examples of the human cost, Factory workers losing their jobs, people who've gotten screwed by health insurance companies. When Democrats talk about people they've met, you can sense the empathy in their voice, you can feel that they care about the problems our families face. McCain talks about the worries we deal with around the kitchen table and it sounds like "all that stuff, of course we have to address it" But he doesn't give us specific plans that inspire confidence.
Obama was clear, specific, and direct. It was easy to follow his logic. He gave us details. He made it clear that his priority is the Middle Class. When average people do well, the entire country does well. We need to invest in Infrastructure and green technology to create jobs. We need to lower the cost of healthcare, gasoline, energy, and home heating to help people save money. We need to make education more affordable, and we need to make sure our retirement is safe. In order to attain these goals we will need to make sacrifices, we'll have to work together, and take responsibility for the health of our country.
McCain basically has no platform. The current economic problems have turned the usual Republican dogma into crap. We've tried their way, fixing the economy with tax cuts and deregulation, and we ended up in a depression. The "trickle down" economic world view has no credibility. We need a government that makes it easier for the middle class to pay their bills, we need specific plans, targeted at average Americans.
Americans are worried, and they have no confidence in the free market to save them. People saw the government spend a trillion dollars on Wall Street, now average people want to know when they are going to catch a break, when is the government going to invest more in its people, what is the plan, is it going to work? It's time for a new New Deal, that focuses on the majority of Americans, not just the rich elite.
Great points Jason. you bring up a bunch of interesting stuff. Especially that "Monopoly and corruption are not limited to the private sector" So true. What makes that even more of a problem is that we only have 2 major parties, any less and we are in trouble. The corruption in government already runs deep. That's why i freak out when I see journalists being arrested, or 'free speech zones' for protesters, or the voting machine data being privatized, or misleading information being fed to the public, or the influence of money undermining our democracy. Americans need to be aware, and outraged, while we still can vote these people out of office.
I also agree that intelligence gathering should be the focus for counterterrorism. I view them as part of federal law enforcement despite the CIA's sometimes military role. That needs to be the focus. Investigation can lead to arrests, or targeted military action. It is better to publicly humiliate someone in a trial than to kill them covertly, but every situation is unique. Either way to have good intelligence we need international cooperation. We need to share information and endeavor to eliminate violence and terrorism for everyone. Other nations view us as selfish, we need our good name back. Wars are expensive on so many levels, it sickens me how casually people treat war.
I hope you're right about the military budget, and taxes too.
OH no Tiny! How "un-academic" of you! =)
Oh man. I spelled pre-requisites wrong TWICE! :/
Surprisingly, I agree with *all* of your points and have one additional comment on Jason's quip:
"If you want to focus on law enforcement, you (we) should be serious about the gathering of intelligence and pursuing people before they commit the crime. We have to be reasonable, not foolish. If we can't take that step, we simply can't be taken seriously when it comes to protecting the public."
Those are not just the prequisites of law enforcement. Those are the prequisites of military action as well. If military action is blind invasion or annihilation based on a tottering pyramid of lies, it's as ineffective at "protecting the public" as ill-informed law enforcement.
(e:DCoffee) - You've touched on a number of things here that I want to talk about.
First of all, I think that despite what any candidate tells you in a stump speech or debate, taxes will go up. Maybe not in the short term, but in the long term, barring an economic miracle, this will be the case. Nobody will say to the public they are going to raise taxes outside of possibly Kucinich or Bernie Sanders.
My sense of humor and general outlook on government dictates that I don't believe anything will change. You're right, this isn't a partisan thing. Whether it's the GSEs or the investment banks, the people in charge are and have been on the take, resulting in us having to wipe all of their asses and suffer in the process. I'm sorry, I don't believe those people are going to change one damned thing! The tar and feather treatment should be their reward.
The military budget is a sacred cow. If it were not the case certainly a liberal of Obama's stature would advocate such a thing. Ten bucks says it would be death to his candidacy, but if he does get elected I get the feeling that is where he will look.
I agree that the blood and treasure we've spent on the war has given us little in return. I'm not ready, however, to talk about arresting and processing people who blow themselves up. What are we going to do, reanimate them? Yeah, I think that if we spot a terrorist camp, and if our information is solid, we should martyr them immediately. The military do have a role to play, although I do agree that prevention encompasses much more than military strikes.
Policemen I've spoken with tell me that you can't ask for tough law enforcement and then complain when you get it. You can't demand weak law enforcement and then complain when someone gets away with a violent crime. You don't get it both ways because they aren't going to stick their necks out for a boss that is going to turn their backs on them.
If you want to focus on law enforcement, you (we) should be serious about the gathering of intelligence and pursuing people before they commit the crime. We have to be reasonable, not foolish. If we can't take that step, we simply can't be taken seriously when it comes to protecting the public.
Last bit here, I promise: Monopoly and corruption are not limited to the private sector, that much has been proven. We are experiencing a failure of government as well, which should make us even less confident than we are already. If the people we elect to look out for our interests refuse to do so, who do we look to for protection?
Hey D - I'll answer when I get home. The official end of day scramble is on. I'm not covered, btw.
PS, no comments are too long or too short for my journal :)
wow, that's an amazing example Drew. I don't understand why more businesses aren't complaining about healthcare. Small business owners have to worry about their family's and their employee's health. So we shop around for health insurance and try to figure out the fine print. But what we really want is to go to the Doctor of our choice, and not have to worry so much about the cost. My former employer has a business of 3 full time people, and 4 part time event photographers. He agreed to 'help cover the cost' of private Healthy NY insurance, he gave me a raise of about $25 per week, the insurance was $200 per month. The burden of Health Insurance is crushing our economy.
I guess that shoulda been a post (or 3) and not a comment.
Jeez guys, I can't possibly respond to all of this right now even though I want to. Maybe later..
My father owns a small business (go to blumen.com if you want to see it) and this year was one of his best. Profits approached 250,000 this year, but he was not taxed on that amount, because a portion was re-invested in the business (once upon a time that portion was 50% or more, but things are in pretty good shape right now) and a large portion is returned to employees in the form of bonuses (and then are taxed as personal income, not business income).
Thus the effect on the tax is that more money ends up re-invested in the shop or in the hands of employees, both of which are good for the economy.
Of course, the most frustrating expense my Dad faces is health insurance. Our plan tended to change every year, because we had to constantly shop and even then,m rates went up. Also, my Dad had to pick his insurance carefully, as he did not want to leave any of his employees un-insured for their diabetes or heart condition, or whatever they had when he switched.
I know that a slight tax increase and an elimination of health care costs (and time!) would be a welcome change, but my parents are single issue republicans (abortion, thanks for asking).
Well, they were once single issue republicans. Now that politics are so polarized, it seems that one party can do no wrong, and the other can do no right. I don't think there is a single issue where my parents would agree with the Dems. My Mom, a Roman Catholic, is sometimes with her church (and therefore progressives) regarding war and the death penalty, but more and more they believe what's right (conservative) is right (correct).
Democrats have failed too, I don't deny that. The economic problems started in the 70's when Carter started believing that the market could regulate itself. His administration originally privatized Fannie Mae and most of Freddie Mac. Bill Clinton's administration supported Phil Gramm's bill to deregulate investment banks. I don't put much faith in politicians, we have to constantly hold their feet to the fire, and we need a media that digs for the truth, so citizens keep Washington accountable. But I'm also not so cynical to think that nothing will ever change. I think Obama has the more realistic way forward.
If we can't raise taxes how can we balance the budget? Half of the federal budget goes to military spending. Even McCain has acknowledged waste and fraud there. Will Republicans let us cut the military budget? We could have our cake and eat it too if we had a more peaceful world, and some international law. Diplomacy is cheaper. Do we really think Islamo-fascists are going to take over the US and make us all wear burqa's? Instead of spending billions each month on war and occupation, we should treat terrorism as a crime, lawyers, and legal institutions are cheaper than war.
Small Businesses have a tough time. I'm a sole proprietor, the economy directly effects me. So do gas prices and insurance payments that take money out of my clients pockets. Josh, do you get healthcare? What if taxes on your employer went toward a national healthcare plan, and relieved them of the burden of healthcare expenses? That would help their bottom line. Or you can have McCain tax your healthcare like income, and pretend that some tax writeoffs will make it bearable.
I have more faith in the Obama plan. Where's the evidence that the Free Market has worked? Wages have decreased, and inequality has grown. People in the 1950's - 60's after the New Deal era, didn't need 2-3 jobs to raise a family. Deregulation increased, and the New Deal was dismantled, as that happened the middle class shrunk, and our trade deficit increased. I don't see great reasons to continue the conservative's economic agenda. I do believe in competition. The free market encourages monopoly and fraud, that's the dirty secret that Friedman and Adam Smith left out. The government should intervene in the markets to encourage competition.
PS jason, you have a point. I'm not viewing things through the McCain lens, he made some points, but he glossed over them without explaining much detail or backing up his assertions. I was left with a lot of promises on the McCain side, but little indication of how he would do it. Maybe he expects his logic to be obvious, but he has to start getting his ideas across to a non-republican audience too.
The problem with the New Deal was that it ultimately prolonged the economic recovery of our country - the real savior of our nation was actually the economic production during WWII. The idea that the New Deal saved America was a falsehood.
Obama was about as engaging as he'll ever be to normal folks. The ONLY human element during the debate was the moment where McCain was speaking to the Navy vet.
"McCain has an empathy deficit when it comes to the middle class. Democrats give examples of the human cost, Factory workers losing their jobs, people who've gotten screwed by health insurance companies. When Democrats talk about people they've met, you can sense the empathy in their voice, you can feel that they care about the problems our families face."
That is ludicrous, Dave. Empathy deficit? You can sense the empathy in Democrat voices? That is romanticized BS. Not to mention that Democrats have failed regular people and have taken the middle class for granted for a very long time. If you think the Democratics are for the working man, there is 25+ years of Democrat AMBIVALENCE, not empathy, Dave, on the record to contend with.
This is the same Democrat Party that forced lenders, with the threat of legal action, to provide "affordable" (aka subprime)loans to low income people. Barney Frank was caught red-handed, on video, in addition to several other Democrats, attempting to brush aside concerns about these loans in 2004 when a whistleblower moved in to highlight this growing problem. Now look at us! Barney Frank should be wearing Federal property and his lashing out at Republicans is a laughing stock. Only a Democrat could have a viable political career after such a stunt. It is just one example of liberal dogma sneaking into legislation, while a parochial liberal cries foul while getting caught fanning the flames. I don't care about their intentions - that naive crap, in combination with terrible regulation in the financial markets (a Republican concern) is going to be our doom.
Oh, and by the way, Barack Obama got slaughtered on the economy last night although liberals haven't the foggiest idea that it occurred. Liberals never have, and never will, understand how to make sure the American economy is working properly. Barack Obama is going to solve the middle class problem by raising taxes on the rich and on corporations. His plan: raise the top income bracket to 39.6% (the rate prior to the Bush tax cut), raise payroll taxes from 37.4% to 52.2%, raise capital gains taxes from 15% to 39.6% and raise the estate tax from 0% to 55%. He wants to pursue this while increasing spending on the order of $900B, on top of what we are currently going through. If BO gets elected we aren't going to have Jimmy Carter on our hands - we are going have Jimmy Carter, Herbert Hoover and Woodrow Wilson rolled up into one. You think we are going to initiate health care for all Americans and expand government while all of this is going on? If he does it, he'll all but guarantee a deep depression, not "save" the middle class.
Bill O'Reilly, bless his arrogant heart, contends fervently that after speaking to Obama he felt that he was a pragmatic man that wouldn't be so foolish as to raise taxes during our economic calamity. I take him at his word and expect economic annihilation, exacerbated by liberal-propagated suicidal economic policy. Job losses will be rampant and anybody with a retirement plan should be concerned even more than they are already.
$250,000 in income for a small business is a joke - that kind of revenue for a small business is nothing. His contention that most small businesses make less than that is absolutely ludicrous. My small, piddly company brings in over $500,000 a year. We spend more than $250,000 just on operating expenses and believe me, we are a tiny company operating out of a small rental office in Williamsville. We have no more than 4 people in our office at any given time, in addition to no more than a dozen contracted employees worldwide. You'd be shocked how little I actually make and how thin the company's margins are.
Barack Obama is flat out dangerous when he's talking about taxing businesses. If BO gets elected, I may very well lose my fucking job Dave, even with my low salary! So are a lot of other people. Maybe I'll see you in the bread line?
Lets contend with this "95% of Americans are going to get a tax break" business. That is a demonstrably false concept, as 47% of Americans already pay ZERO income tax. What Barack Obama is about, first and foremost, is socialist economics. BO supports robbing from Peter to give to Paul, while simultaneously neutering the primary engine of our economic growth. If you want to celebrate that, feel free.
The concept of shared sacrifice - this is liberal doublespeak for tax increases as I've described already. Anyway, if elected Obama will get unintended shared sacrifice. Taxes will go up and the middle class will suffer because their employers won't be able to afford to keep them anymore during this economic climate. But to hell with it, Obama wants to give free healthcare to all, so who cares? Sooner or later, there won't be any successful people in America anymore. If I were rich, my money would be in Switzerland.
Well, if you go into a debate knowing that anything McCain says is going to sound like "blah blah blah" to you, then it isn't much of a surprise that you didn't hear anything he said.
Let's co-opt my favorite Republican and call it The New Square Deal.