world

Obama, McCain prepare for final debate

124 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2008/9 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

124 Comments
Login to comment

"the image of a strong leader"

Well, as far as image goes, Barack Obama will beat John McCain. As far as their records go, John McCain beats Barack Obama hands down. Unfortunately, image counts for a lot. I see Obama is now leading McCain in the polls 53-39. I know Ralph Nader is getting around 2%. I guess the other 12% are the "independents" who can't make up their minds. They're the ones who have a "Obama-Biden" bumpersticker on their hybrid, and a "McCain-Palin" bumpersticker on their Hummer.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Read 'em and weep... Oct. 14 (Bloomberg) — Barack Obama is likely to pick up 364 Electoral College votes, far surpassing the 270 needed to claim the presidency, . . . ”

Meanwhile, the National Journal says: “Barack Obama now leads the Hotline’s Electoral College projection with 361 EVs to John McCain’s 177 EVs. On Fri., Obama led 349 EVs to 180 EVs, while 9 EVs were toss-up.

Even more striking than Obama’s 184 EV overall lead is his total among solid states. The Dem nominee holds a 297-143 EV edge in states where a candidate has a statistically significant advantage. Obama crosses the 270 EV threshold necessary for election without even accounting for states he leads within the margin of error.”

The National Journal, by the way, is “the leading source of nonpartisan reporting on the current political environment and emerging policy trends”

Stick a fork in it, it's over baby!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge: "As far as their records go, John McCain beats Barack Obama hands down."

You're right! Obama has no record of junking five aircraft and singing to the enemy; no record of racuous fights with elite when he didn't get his way; no record of mysogyny and infidelity; no record of siding with bush on 95% of the latter's policies, then declaring himself a 'maverick'; no record of outright dissing his own party; no explosive fits of anger and disease-like pacing around the stage, etc. In short, Obama has none of the qualities that a leader should NOT have, and that McCain has plenty of.

I agree with you on image, though, and that Obama has that one in the bag. 53-39, eh? Way past your 'Obama should be leading by 10 points!' comment way back when, and nearing your later revised 'Obama should be leading by 20 points' comment. Not to worry... Obama's got it.

As for this debate, I'm not expecting anything special, aside from an even more panicked and distraught McCain, who may very well explode this time. Obama's got the advantage and need only keep pointing to McCain's lapdog following of bush and his lies about being a 'maverick', etc. In other words, I think it'll be more of the same; no knock out for Obama, but no win for McCain, which he DESPERATELY needs to even bother staying in the game.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smith: "Obama has no record of junking five aircraft and singing to the enemy..."

How low can you get, smith? Even your hero doesn't say anything like that.

"... no outright record of dissing his own party"

Translation: No record of taking on his own party.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Here's some neutral advice for John McCain. One, do NOT start babbling on about William Ayers. As smear campaigns go it is just not in the Swift Boat league. You are trying to win an election Johnny, and the only people who care about Ayers are going to vote for you anyways. Think of William Ayers as a piece of rope. I know you really want to put him around your neck, but show some military discipline and don't. Two, stop doing the Doctor Evil thing with your fingers like you were doing during your speech last night on CNN. Like Sarge said, "unfortunately,image counts for a lot", and that can't help.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

seeya John-boy! Obama all the way.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge said:

They're the ones [Independents] who have a "Obama-Biden" bumpersticker on their hybrid, and a "McCain-Palin" bumpersticker on their Hummer.

Not bad sarge. Not bad at all. Those dang Independents.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama is not there yet. To elect a black man regardless of competence is an unpalatable pill for some white Americans to swallow. They will say in the polling that they will vote for Obama but that may not be the case on the day of the election.

Race continues to remain a deep concern that characterizes the pathology of white America. A recent polling is suggesting that over 40% of whites believe that there is no racism in America, while 85% of minorities hold a contrary view.

It is against that background that the election will be held. And this makes it all the more difficult to accurately assess the outcome.

Perhaps the Democrats will find more confidence in the numbers of new potential voters they have been able to register, but in the final analysis whites as a group are very much in the majority.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McCain will not turn it around in this debate.

Palin is just too frightening to be a heartbeat away from the presidency. She's a scary redneck flat earther and just about everyone can see that now. McCain's policy concepts just don't read as making a difference. His previous debate performances leave people feeling like he doesn't care or is just making political stump speeches. Likely to see more of this in the next debate. Fear doesn't sell anymore. He keeps trying to play Bush's fear of evil terrorists and national security card. But people are tired of the war, tired of being on edge and far more afraid of the evil at the local bank than the evil in Afghanistan. So this will hurt McCain too. Ayers. If he plays this card too much the whole "guilt by association" thing will rub most Americans the wrong way. We don't like having goverment or anyone else telling us we're bad just because some guy we work with is. This is a bad tactic for the McCain campaign. Rabid followers are also something that doesn't sit well with us. Especially when they come across like a bunch of racist neo-nazis at a 1936 rally. McCain's fans are just a little too rabid, racist, reactionary and conservative for most of us. Change. People want change. Even if it is a bit uncertain. The whole stay the course thing worked in 2004. Won't fly now. The course is just too bumpy and uncertain. Change at least offers the hope of things being different. Personal appeal. Let's face it, McCain's "My friends" reads as insincere non-sense when he clearly fails to sound like he cares about what Joe and Jane average are up against. Obama speaks directly and to the point far better than McCain. So expect another floor wiping by Obama leaving McCain looking old, out of touch and insincere.

Victory is just a around the corner and we can get on with sorting out the mess the GOP have left us with.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tkoind2: That was a good post. I am now off to the white house to start measuring up the curtains for President Obama. That sure has a ring to it

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ladies and Gentlemen, I hear that the Fat Lady was seen at the Ear, Nose & Throat Specialist.

She's got a song to sing on November 4th. And it's got a democratic tone to it.

Sounds smooth. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Interesting comment by Sarge to start up the debate here, especially the first 2 sentences How do these sentences read if you exchange the names Curious George for Barack Obama, and John Kerry for John McCain. Jut a bit of alternate history to think about.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Must watch the debate. I like to see McCain getting a good thrashing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Good analysis of the situation by tkonind2, lot's of things to think about.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A good opportunity for Obama to finally kill off any lingering prospect of a McCain-Palin victory.

My only concern is that there are still so many people who can't see Palin for the ludicrous joke candidate that she is

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mccain’s strategy relies on keeping Florida, Missouri, North Carolina, Virginia, Indiana and Ohio in the GOP column

According to RealClearPolitics.com:

Florida-

Obama - +5.0

Missouri

Obama - +2.2

North Carolina

Obama - +1.0

Virginia

Obama - +6.5

Indiana

mccain - +3.8

Ohio

Obama - +3.4

That's not a very promising strategy, my friends.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You know things are bad for McCain when even the son of the late great conservative William F. Buckley endorses Obama:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/10/14/entertainment/e140045D34.DTL

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge: "How low can you get, smith? Even your hero doesn't say anything like that."

I admit to mudslinging, but when you ask me 'how low can I get' I must also point out that I am not nearly as low as the candidate you support; you see, ALL the things I mentioned are based on fact, all the things McCain/Palin attack Obama for are either out and out lies, or a truth so stretched it can't possibly be called the truth any longer (you know, things like Obama once met a terrorist at age eight = Obama is a terrorist himself).

Anyway, it's funny to watch you condone said attacks on Obama but call people 'low' and decry how the comments on this board are 'lowering the level' of the board overall, etc., if the comments don't fit your limited agenda. THAT's called hypocrisy, and I'm more than happy to point it out to you guys. If you can show me somewhere where you called McCain's comments inappropriate and low (as well as Palin's), I'll take back the 'low' comments on McCain... the only difference, again, being that what I talked about is true.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge: One more thing I thought I should mention; even though you 'cleverly' (haha!) take my use of the word 'hero' for your feelings towards Bush and McCain... and proclaim Obama therefore to be my hero, I just thought I should clarify that he is not my hero at all. I like him, whereas I dislike the moron bush and rageaholic McCain, and I KNOW for a fact that Obama is the better choice for President (not to mention the only one between him and McCain fit to lead.... physically AND mentally!). That doesn't make him my hero, amigo.

The better choice?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"ou know things are bad for McCain when even the son of the late great conservative William F. Buckley endorses Obama"

So he is the son of conservative William F Buckley.

Bill Ayers is the son of a capitalist who made it all the way to CEO and Chairman of the Board for Chicago's Con Edison.

Buckley pals around with Arianna Huffington and Markos Moulitsas, founder of DailyKos.

photo

http://www.jamd.com/image/g/81317767

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ol' man McCain is backed into a corner - what sort of maverick move is he going to pull off in tonight's debate?

Making a dramatic entrance by crashing a fighter plane into the building, perhaps?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Pretty low blow Altria, or should one say a low bombing run.

Actually, I think the argument of McCain being a great leader based on his experience as a naval avaitor is greatly overblown. As a pilot of single-seated aircraft, what leadership skills do you need? The aircraft are prepared for you by ground crew, who answer to their own superiors. Being a pilot is not the same a being an infantry commander, pilots basically drop iron and nip back to the officers club equipped with airconditioning and serving gin and tonics. It has to be remembered that McCain only received his command experience after the war (as a squadron commander). In Vietnam before he was shot down, he wasn't issuing orders under fire on the ground (or even on a swiftboat for that matter), he was floating around in a big gray war canoe off the coast eating real food. He wasn't issuing orders after he was captured either, he (and others) were just trying to survive in the most trying of circumstances (and he must be greatly admired for doing such).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

According to common sense, the correct choice here is McCain-Palin.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

According to common sense, the correct choice here is McCain-Palin.

.....if you like bush and hate america

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If McCain is using fear to sway voters, then what is Obama doing trying to link a president most fear to McCain?

Both are using fear tactics to get their idea out. One is trying to use fear of terror, the other is using fear of the same..

Both are blowing smoke out ther rears and neither is actually talking about the problems of the US...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What racist attack did McCain do?

What racist attack did Obama do?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Great, After the Democrats achieved both the House and Senate due to people tired of Bush and Republican policies they ended up with a Congress that managed to achieve even worse popularity ratings than Bush. Now it is very likely that we'll end up with a Junior Senator whose resume for the top job if you really look at it doesn't really give a person a real warm fuzzy that he is going to be up to the job and get Congress back under some sort of fiscal sanity. Were going to get change alright because after Reid and Pelosi and Obama really get to run the country a dollar will be worth about 5 cents in change. But what the hey, I at least get to hear pretty speeches with no real substance behind them the next 4 years as I watch my retirement fund evaporate further, as Obama taxes me even more to pay for an even bigger nanny state.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Its open knowledge the GOP is in complete disarray now and the only thing they can do is spew racist hatred out into thir audience and hope it sticks in their tiny heads. Shamefully (for the US) a lot of it seems to stick, particularly at the palin rallies - well documented racist reactions in the audience is easy to find on google etc.

Todays racist act of GOP desperation is limbaugh claiming that angry black have been in a 30 year plot to train black children as militants

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rINTuGofGT0

0 ( +0 / -0 )

leitmotiv.. I asked what racist attack has McCain done, or even Palin... Please educate me Im a little lost on how you can link it to McCain when its a supporter doing it... If that was the case then Obama is as prejudice as McCain and more Racist... but we dont judge the man by who follows him we judge him by what he does and says..

show me were McCain or Palin issued a racist statement..

Im Waiting.......

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Ol' man McCain is backed into a corner - what sort of maverick move is he going to pull off in tonight's debate?

"Making a dramatic entrance by crashing a fighter plane into the building, perhaps?"

Too European.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge: "According to common sense, the correct choice here is McCain-Palin."

Well, fortunately, most of us in the real world do not judge 'common sense' as McCain/Palin; in fact, clearly they are against common sense in every respect of the term. Your idea of 'common sense' seems to be limited to something like 0.0002% of the world's population (how many people still support bush, based on the world's population? I mean, you claim to be speaking on behalf of humanity's common sense, so just curious), and even THAT is being generous.

No, on the contrary, McCain/Palin is the choice for morons and dufuses like themselves. Call it a 'low-blow' if you like, sarge, but your nation seems to agree, with all polls and public opinion pointing very favourably to Obama.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McCain vows to kick that one's you know what. America really needs such an honorable man as McCain who knows how to show respect to a fellow presidential candidate. Go McCain! Let's see you do it!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

coulrophobic: "Too European."

Not sure about European... perhaps 'friends of bush' might be better, since he was so friendly with Saudis even after a bunch of their nationals flew planes into buildings (hey... if Obama is friendly with terrorists because he met one long ago, then you have to admit bush is, too!).

But anyway, you're right, McCain would be more likely to clip the wings of his plane by running through high-tension power lines around the debate center, causing a long blackout to swaths of areas.... all so he could appear flashy to some women, or nearby hookers if said ladies turned him down... well, at least that's what he's done in the past. Might be a bit too old to do it now.

Okay, okay... I'm straying from the point of the thread in pointing out facts from McCain's past, but still -- shows why he would never be a good leader, and that'll show in Wednesday night's debate as well.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No, on the contrary, McCain/Palin is the choice for morons and dufuses like themselves.

Your a real class act smith, I truly hope you are on the fringe on not your typical Obama supporter. It's statements like yours that is what is really frightning. People that don't agree with your politics are dufuses and morons. Whats next smith after folks like you get in-charge re-educating camps for the rest of us that don't agree with you and your brand of politics.

Sad truly Sad.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Good to see that McCain has not lost the support of the mainstream media. Rush Limbaugh is a name that has repeatedly come up in this election. What a fine and impartial "journalist" this man is for exposing harsh realities that many Americans are too scared to address.

Let's face it, Limbaugh was right on it when Curious George took his flight to an aircraft carrier (in sight of the coast) to announce that major combat operations were over in Iraq (thank god our soldiers are now safe).

Ol' Rush has also been very helpful in telling Bubba and me that the "liberal communist wackos" are going to take over the country.

Rush has also been a solid supporter of US troops despite not having served himself due to certain medical issues. He has also warned us about those phony "troops," you know the ones that don't support the current administration and are only suffering from serious combat-related head wounds, etc.

And he has done all this despite being such a tortured soul, so tortured that he has had to go to Florida to shop. So let's here it for Rush, his pet chickenhawk, and his cysts!!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You dont have to issue a direct racist statement to make a racist attack. Just like you dont have to directly say that sadam and al qaeda are directly linked to get (highly-suggestible) people to spontaneously internalize and think it. You just have to use suggestive marketing techniques and constant repetition of the ideas in a strategic sequence and context. This is the GOP's racist attcks to which I refer. If you think the racist violent remarks from the crowds ("Sit down boy!", "Hang him!", "Bomb Obama!") are some sort of unexpected artifact that just spontaneously erupted from nowhere....youre delusional. There is probably nothing more strategized, scripted and message-managed than a US pres campaign. To the mcsame planners, these racist reactions are deliberate. They are planned. They are desired.

I suppose you would claim that limbaugh is just a side show act, marginal little GOP supportee.....spouting his own private backward racist diatribe. But he has an enormous audience of suggestible ill-informed robots and has shown himself historically to want to deliver his audience votes to particular candidates. Hardly just a supporter. But according to your view that the poor GOP is so innocent, I should perhaps wait for mcsame to jump up to denounce limbaugh's disgusting racist attacks that were uttered on behalf of mcsame. Something tells me i would be waiting a long time for that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smithinjapan sure can spot em:

"...McCain would be more likely to clip the wings of his plane by running through high-tension power lines around the debate center, causing a long blackout to swaths of areas.... all so he could appear flashy to some women, or nearby hookers if said ladies turned him down... well, at least that's what he's done in the past. Might be a bit too old to do it now."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sailwind, if you vote McCain you will find yourself praying for a nanny state when the economy is dust and we are at war with Iran as well as bogged down in Afghanistan and Iraq.

And that is after you've already had time to adjust to the flat earth thinking that their administration will bring to the Supreme Court and increased violations of privacy and civil liberties.

Why is it that Americans are so afraid of socially responsible policies? We are supposed to be a moral nation, yet we have a problem taking care of the elderly, making sure people have access to affordable health care, that kids can get an education and people who are out of work don't end up on the streets.

Instead the GOP followers, who by the way constantly play the "I'm a good Christian" card are the first to back policies that let the poor, elderly and unemployed sink. Not very good Samaritain of you is it?

A society can be at one time both socially responsible and open to opportunity and rewards for hard work. The concepts are not mutually exclusive. On the contrary, they are mutually essential. Why? Because social responsibility makes money sense in the long run.

Taxes invested in healthcare will improve the overall well being of our society resulting in improved productivity and reduced strain on local systems. Money invested in education makes America more competitive. Taking care of the weaker members of our society makes us moral and compassionate. How do you put a price on doing the right thing?

Money put into programs generates more money and comes back to us in time. We need more of this not less. It isn't 1860 and this isn't the wild west where everyone is on his or her own. We are unified society with strong interdependencies on everything from health to crime and ignoring this will no longer work.

A vote for McCain is a vote for 1860. A vote for Obama is a vote for moving the right direction for a rational society.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nippon5

I asked what racist attack has McCain done, or even Palin... Please educate me Im a little lost on how you can link it to McCain when its a supporter doing it... If that was the case then Obama is as prejudice as McCain and more Racist... but we dont judge the man by who follows him we judge him by what he does and says..

show me were McCain or Palin issued a racist statement..

Im Waiting.......

You dont have to issue a direct racist statement to make a racist attack. Just like you dont have to directly say that sadam and al qaeda are directly linked to get (highly-suggestible) people to spontaneously internalize and think it. You just have to use suggestive marketing techniques and constant repetition of the ideas in a strategic sequence and context. This is the GOP's racist attcks to which I refer. If you think the racist violent remarks from the crowds ("Sit down boy!", "Hang him!", "Bomb Obama!") are some sort of unexpected artifact that just spontaneously erupted from nowhere....youre delusional. There is probably nothing more strategized, scripted and message-managed than a US pres campaign. To the mcsame planners, these racist reactions are deliberate. They are planned. They are desired.

I suppose you would claim that limbaugh is just a side show act, marginal little GOP supportee.....spouting his own private backward racist diatribe. But he has an enormous audience of suggestible ill-informed robots and has shown himself historically to want to deliver his audience votes to particular candidates. Hardly just a supporter. But according to your view that the poor GOP is so innocent, I should perhaps wait for mcsame to jump up to denounce limbaugh's disgusting racist attacks that were uttered on behalf of mcsame. Something tells me i would be waiting a long time for that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

leitmotiv...

Then based on that Obama must hate America, whites, and rich people.. Because those who support him say that...

What I said was very simple.. You said he was using racist attacks, and that is not correct..

If we allow a flow through system to work in accusing people of racisim then everyone is a racist....

If you meant that McCain has some supporters who yell dumb racist remarks then you should say that instead of trying to spin it to him personally..

Also why do those who make prejudice statements like you try to talk your way away from that statement, take a lesson from Smith.. hes prejudice as hell and he doesnt try to say other wise....

Just to help you out in trying to label me, I think Limbaugh is an idiot, just like all the poitical analyst and talk show people (and supporters)who dont look at the facts and say a political party sound bite.. "Like Mccain has done racist attacks"

You stated your opinion and I stated mine that your statement was prejudice and maybe racist in its self...

Moderator: Readers, no more talk of racism on this thread please. It has no place in an exchange of views among mature readers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McCain called Obama "that one" and pledged "I'm going to kick his 'you know what'". that's as bad as being outright racist.

Moderator: Readers, no more talk of racism on this thread please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I can't imagine what kind of president Obama will be but it will be a good thing that he wins. America's low image will take a huge jump and that is a good thing for everyone. I don't expect any real change but with the sun shining on the US, everyone from France to Afghanistan will be more co-operative.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In a speech, talking about being behind in the polls, McCain said, "My friends, we've got them just where we want them." He's not the first military man to say that. I belive General Custer also said that.

Jay Leno

Actually, a more accurate statement would be, "We've got them right where they want us."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You cant have it one way and not the other...

If McCain is to blaim for his supporters then Obama is to blame for his..

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/02/obama-mccain-camp-cynical-not-racist/

“In no way do I think that John McCain’s campaign was being racist, I think they’re cynical” Obama told CNN during a Saturday morning press conference. “I think they want to distract people from talking about the real issues.”

Ok so you and Obama dont agree about McCain....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Buckley pals around with Arianna Huffington and Markos Moulitsas, founder of DailyKos.

Attending a bookfair no less! We thank you, comrade-citizen, for reporting the whereabouts and potential dangerous contacts of Mr. Buckley. There's nothing like guilt by association.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Gallup Poll says "Registered voters prefer Obama over McCain, 51% to 42%;" which would only be 9% and down 1 point from yesterday unlike sarge's posted 14 point lead. realclearpolitics has the electoral vote tally at 313 electoral votes for Obama and 158 electoral votes for McCain. That is also significantly lower that the 361 - 177 respectively, that was quoted earlier. Actually I like the Karl Rove electoral map better than any other one because it is such a kick in the head for Republicans. Rove has it 313 Obamaa and 174 McCain; I don't care if McCain has a full 16 more electoral votes by Rove's prediction. It is just so sweet to be able to use his name and then claim victory (for the moment).

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/

http://rove.com/election

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Elect Obama - "...everyone from France to Afghanistan will be more co-operative."

Uh, hate to rain on your parade of magical Obama unicorns and all but if France is already in Afghanistan and fighting the Taliban alongside our soldiers I'd have to say our relations with our traditional allies are doing okay.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Were going to get change alright because after Reid and Pelosi and Obama really get to run the country a dollar will be worth about 5 cents in change. But what the hey, I at least get to hear pretty speeches with no real substance behind them the next 4 years as I watch my retirement fund evaporate further, as Obama taxes me even more to pay for an even bigger nanny state.

You don't really fool anyone. Your greatest fear is that Obama working with a Democratic Congress will make some solid achievements.

After the Democrats achieved both the House and Senate due to people tired of Bush and Republican policies they ended up with a Congress that managed to achieve even worse popularity ratings than Bush.

What a flawed observation! As if people who form their opinion about Congress change it on a quarter-by-quarter basis. No, Congress's low ratings are LONG in coming and it will take a long time to build them back up. Getting Bush out of the way will be a key step, since many Democrats and independents deplore Congress for not taking a stronger stand against Bush and his failed policies. The culture of corruption typified by Jack Abramoff and folks like Ted Stevens, Duke Cunningham, William Jefferson (D), Tom DeLay and others also presented a stain that will be long to remove.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Your greatest fear is that Obama working with a Democratic Congress will make some solid achievements."

What solid acievements do have Dem mayors and governors have to show for lately?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What solid acievements do have Dem mayors and governors have to show for lately?

LOL! Check out what Tennessee governor Phil Bredesen inherited and what he's accomplished with the state budget, education and health care in the state, for starters.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

CNN not long ago ran a story about the ten poorest cities in America:

"...Detroit, whose mayor has been indicted on felony charges, hasn't elected a Republican mayor since 1961. Buffalo has been even more stubborn. It started putting a Democrat in office back in 1954, and it hasn't stopped since.

Unfortunately, those two cities may be alone at the top of the poverty rate list, but they're not alone in their love for Democrats. Cincinnati, Ohio (third on the poverty rate list), hasn't had a Republican mayor since 1984. Cleveland, Ohio (fourth on the list), has been led by a Democrat since 1989. St. Louis, Missouri (sixth), hasn't had a Republican since 1949, Milwaukee, Wisconsin (eighth), since 1908, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (ninth), since 1952 and Newark, New Jersey (10th), since 1907.

The only two cities in the top 10 that I didn't mention (Miami, Florida, and El Paso, Texas) haven't had Republicans in office either -- just Democrats, independents or nonpartisans.

Over the past 50 years, the eight cities listed above have had Republican leadership for a combined 36 years. The rest of the time -- a combined 364 years -- they've been led by Democrats."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry - the link for the above stats is

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/20/beck.cities/index.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

uh,,,da....that wasn't literal...da...da...da

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Going into the final presedential debate, john mccain might want to consider the words of Christopher Buckley, the son of the late conservative icon William F. Buckley, who said Friday he's decided to back Barack Obama's White House bid, the first time in his life he will vote Democrat.

Buckley, who has just resigned from the conservative National Review, had praised McCain in a New York Times Op-Ed earlier this year and defended the Arizona senator's conservative credentials against wary talk-radio hosts, said McCain is no longer the “real” and “unconventional” man he once admired.

"This campaign has changed John McCain," Buckley wrote. "It has made him inauthentic. A once-first class temperament has become irascible and snarly; his positions change, and lack coherence; he makes unrealistic promises, such as balancing the federal budget 'by the end of my first term.' Who, really, believes that?

"Then there was the self-dramatizing and feckless suspension of his campaign over the financial crisis," Buckley added. "His ninth-inning attack ads are mean-spirited and pointless. And finally, not to belabor it, there was the Palin nomination. What on earth can he have been thinking?"

But Buckley made clear he's not just voting against McCain, praising Obama for his "first-class temperament and first-class intellect."

Source: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/10/a-buckley-endorses-obama/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What solid acievements do have Dem mayors and governors have to show for lately?

LOL! Check out what Tennessee governor Phil Bredesen inherited and what he's accomplished with the state budget, education and health care in the state, for starters.

Funny Yabits, You should check out what Governor Palin did for Alaska for starters also.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sailwind - "But what the hey, I at least get to hear pretty speeches with no real substance behind them the next 4 years as I watch my retirement fund evaporate further, as Obama taxes me even more to pay for an even bigger nanny state."

No mention of the $6 trillion Bush and co. have wasted of your and other Americans' retirement funds?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I honestly believe that a democratic administration could do no worst with the economy than what is happening to day

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Funny Yabits, You should check out what Governor Palin did for Alaska for starters also.

Bredesen's been in office nearly six years. Palin, not even two and already considered to be in violation of state ethics laws. Any state receiving as much in oil revenues as Alaska does, and with so little population, does not face nearly the challenges as states with greater populations and more limited resources.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"My friends, we've got them just where we want them." He's not the first military man to say that. I belive General Custer also said that.

Did custer not say that at Little big Horn?

Palin should lead the debate,we need some more good saturday night live material

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Everton2 - I couldn't agree more.

The bush administration has been a complete and utter disaster, and its effects will be felt for decades. We've seen close on a $trillion spent (or planned to be) in the last 4 weeks alone, the federal deficit has spiked, there's stil no end in sight to the $10-20 billion that is being blown on Iraq each month, not to mention economic stimulus packages and who knows what else.

Those debt servicing costs - currently running at $200 billion a year - are only going to rise.

bush has already implemented a spending freeze on all non-military/veterans-related budget areas.

What Republicans don't seem to understand is that money doesn't grow on trees. No matter who is elected president, taxes will be raised.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

re: cities and poverty..

According to the US Census Bureau, the two richest cities are Seattle and San Francisco, where we also find years of Democratic leadership.

Glenn Beck needs to revise his theory. It's pretty obvious that no Republican has much of a clue how to revive rust belt cities like Buffalo and Detroit.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Palin should lead the debate, we need some more good saturday night live material"

Yeah, they should get those two guys back who were so hilarious in telling why they got housing loans despite the fact that they had zero credit, a police record, etc.

"No matter who is elected president, taxes will be raised"

Yeah, that's what Walter Mondale said, and then President Reagan cut taxes, leading to an economic boom.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge, $6 trillion has been spent under president bush.

Where will money come from to fund the US budget?

I bet you can't answer that, but you WILL continue to support policies that will only make US national debt worse.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Governors and Mayors are not good examples to determine if a party is good for national office or not. There are too many variables that drive a local economy. Such, for example, the GOP opening of globalization that sent the jobs of the cities you mentioned abroad where labor is cheaper and corporate profits higher.

I have to ask it again. All you poor working class GOP followers out there. Don't you want to have healthcare for your families that doesn't cost you an arm and a leg? Don't you want to send your nice white middle class kids to university? Did you know that your class strata are one of the key groups kept out of college by the current situation but who would be opened to going if DEMS have any say about it?

Don't you want your Wyoming and Utah roads fixed so you drive without worry about your bridges falling in? And what about granny? You really don't want any help making sure she's provided for? I mean after all you need that money to make up for your falling wages from all those good old red blooded American jobs.

I just don't get the GOP core followers. You guys need the help more than any minorities you like to point at when arguing against benefits. And yet you seem blind to the fact that DEMs have helped your strata more than any GOP president in history. The GOP just helps out the wealthy and the corporate strata, who, as we've seen lately make piles of money while paying you less for a lot more work.

Wise up middle class GOP followers. You are being severely screwed by your own voting.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yeah, that's what Walter Mondale said, and then President Reagan cut taxes, leading to an economic boom.

More ignorant conservative dogma.

The fact is that Reagan raised taxes in every year of his presidency except for 1981 and 1988. Source: The National Review

http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_bartlett/bartlett200310290853.asp

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Governors and Mayors are not good examples to determine if a party is good for national office or not. There are too many variables that drive a local economy. Such, for example, the GOP opening of globalization that sent the jobs of the cities you mentioned abroad where labor is cheaper and corporate profits higher.

I have to ask it again. All you poor working class GOP followers out there. Don't you want to have healthcare for your families that doesn't cost you an arm and a leg? Don't you want to send your nice white middle class kids to university? Did you know that your class strata are one of the key groups kept out of college by the current situation but who would be opened to going if DEMS have any say about it?

Don't you want your Wyoming and Utah roads fixed so you drive without worry about your bridges falling in? And what about granny? You really don't want any help making sure she's provided for? I mean after all you need that money to make up for your falling wages from all those good old red blooded American jobs.

I just don't get the GOP core followers. You guys need the help more than any minorities you like to point at when arguing against benefits. And yet you seem blind to the fact that DEMs have helped your strata more than any GOP president in history. The GOP just helps out the wealthy and the corporate strata, who, as we've seen lately make piles of money while paying you less for a lot more work.

Wise up middle class GOP followers. You are being severely screwed by your own voting.

Tkoind2

Who's going to pay for it? Betcha, it's going to me the middle class GOP supporter that was raised that you had to go out and earn a living instead of being owed one just because you where born on this planet. Since when is going to college some sort of right? And why do I have to pay for some other parents kid to go? Why should I have to pay more taxes in Federal Highway pork funds to go to Wyoming and Utah, shouldn't that be the local states responsibility to take care of their infrastructure instead of lobbying Uncle Sugar to fork out the money through earmarks. Why should I have to fork over even more of my hard earned money for national healthcare? I get to reward smokers and other people who have unhealthy lifestyles with free medical now? Ever hear of personal responsibility? I have loads of it and it seems since I do I get also to get to be responsible for all others that don't through being taxed even more. We need fiscal responsibility in the next President not big spending Government.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"...the GOP opening of globalization that sent the jobs of the cities you mentioned abroad where labor is cheaper and corporate profits higher."

Poor libs still think it's a zero sum game.

How many jobs will be going to places like English-speaking Ireland (corporate tax rate 11 percent) because our Dem-controlled Congress wants to keep America's corporate tax at 39 percent or even higher under a tax and spend Obama Reid Pelosi administration?

Which party wants instant citizenship for the 12 to 20 million illegals in America? How many jobs will that take? How does Obama plan to suddenly accomodate all those illegals in a health care system already faultering badly.

Worst of all the Democrats are poised to rob from the American worker the right to privacy on a union vote in the work place. This one absolutely amazes me. Under Obama union employess will see the secret ballot disappear from the workplace.

When they aren't buying votes with welfare and blanket amnesty the Democrats are stealing them via ACORN or denying them in the workplace.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Where will money come from to fund the US budget?"

U.S. taxpayers. This is not rocket science.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SushiSake3 - "Where will money come from to fund the US budget?"

Sarge - "U.S. taxpayers. This is not rocket science."

ROFLMAO!!!!!!

Sarge, then why is the US government continuing to sell more govt. bonds to China and Japan?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushi - Because they requested them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge - NEWSFLASH! Taxpayers in China and Japan are helping fund the US government budget, in no small part because expenses are so insanely high and US taxpzyers' taxes just don't cover the bill.

But no need to worry - john mccain dones't care either - his policies will only make the already huge US national deficit even bigger.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushi - You left out Saudi Arabia.

"john mccain dones't care either - his policies will only make the already huge US national deficit even bigger"

No, they won't, because President Obama's policies are going to make the already huge U.S. national debt even bigger.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No, they won't, because President Obama's policies are going to make the already huge U.S. national debt even bigger.

More conservative nonsense. McCain's proposed plans will make the deficits FAR larger than Obama's.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/a_new_stitch_in_a_bad_pattern.html

A survey of hundreds of economists by The Economist magazine brought extremely poor ratings for McCain's economic proposals. And The Economist is no left wing journal; not by a long shot.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/23631.html

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411741_updated_candidates.pdf

But your link yabits didnt apply the candidates expected spending, which is a very important part of how deep in debt we go...

http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=141 McCain around 92 billion Obama around 300billion in new spending..

And why are we planning to spend more when we cant afford what we have going on now...._??

Truthfully why are we cutting taxes when we owe money?? Both of them are idiots...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But your link yabits didnt apply the candidates expected spending

Obama, like most Democrats, believes in and proposes "Pay AS you Go." You do know what that means, right? (For those who don't, it means that spending increases are matched to revenue increases, making them deficit neutral.)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

yabits - "McCain's proposed plans will make the deficits FAR larger than Obama's"

More liberal nonsense. Read this: "McCain's economic plan boosts middle class":

www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/10/04/INOA13B2ND.DTL

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yabits, thats not true according to his budget and numbers... Its imposible to do that in the situation we are in, in the figures I have seen on Money and Investor news sites is that McCains increases present spending by 238Billion and Obama by over 300Billion...

Can you show me something tht has either one going neutral_?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge: wow... you are really taking a licking on this one. I'd stay out of affairs you don't know a thing about (clearly you know NOTHING on this one!).

coulrophobic: "Which party wants instant citizenship for the 12 to 20 million illegals in America? How many jobs will that take?"

It won't be taking ANY jobs away from Americans if they are American citizens, now will it? Or was your question, how many jobs will it take away from 'real' Americans?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think it would be a big mistake to sell McCain short (hmmmm....) in a sit-down debate with a moderator. That seems to me to play best to a conversational style that McCain likes and denies Obama the lectern which he likes. I would expect this to be a very close debate and might even expect McCain to emerge the winner.

I'd use a basketball analogy. Basketball is a game of adjustments and it's unusual for a team to lose all 4 quarters. I think the big question is whether, after getting whumped in the first 3 quarters, the McCain team can take the 4th quarter by enough of a margin to convince any undecided voters (and there can't be many) or uncommitted voters (and there might be more of those) that McCain could win if he could just keep on playing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"I'd use a basketball analogy."

While you still can.

Think what Obama and ACORN - style 'true diversity' and 'social justice' is going to do to the game at the pro level, where so few have so much.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

coulrophobic: "Think what Obama and ACORN - style 'true diversity' and 'social justice' is going to do to the game at the pro level, where so few have so much."

Give it up, buddy. You have never ONCE talked about what McCain could do for the country; you've only shown us you buy 100% into the rubbish McCain/Palin spew forth about their opponent. Sadly for you, it smacks as much as their desperation does to try and shift the focus from just how badly they've been beaten.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smith - McCain could save us from Obama.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smith... Wow, you really didn't read that article I gave a link for, did you?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Read this: "McCain's economic plan boosts middle class"

Written by:.... an economic advisor to John McCain's campaign. LMAO! What did you expect him to say?

More Republican nonsense.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Can you show me something tht has either one going neutral_?

Obama-Biden are publicly on record for a reinstatement of PAYGO rules. What more evidence do you require?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Give it up, buddy. You have never ONCE talked about what McCain could do for the country; you've only shown us you buy 100% into the rubbish McCain/Palin spew forth about their opponent. Sadly for you, it smacks as much as their desperation does to try and shift the focus from just how badly they've been beaten.

An indicator of the sad, bitter lives many of these Republicans have led and will face. Tonight's debate will do little to change that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge writes: "McCain could save us from Obama."

Obama's rise could only have happened amidst the reality of the completely inept, corrupt, and incompetent leadership of the Republicans.

You find yourself preaching to a choir that is rapidly becoming a duet.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

coulrophobic,

You know, I don't even know what you are trying to say. I got that you don't like Obama. Aside from that your comment is a mystery.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama's rise could only have happened amidst the reality of the completely inept, corrupt, and incompetent leadership of the Republicans.

Even Republican pundits and apologists are finding the McCain/Palin ticket embarassing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think it would be a big mistake to sell McCain short (hmmmm....) in a sit-down debate with a moderator.

As long as McCain got a phone book to even things up.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You have never ONCE talked about what McCain could do for the country;

"McCain could save us from Obama."

In his 2005 book, "Democracy and Populism," conservative historian John Lukacs expressed his fear that democracy is degenerating into ersatz populism, which tends to unite people more on the basis of whom they despise rather than what they believe in. Contemporary conservatives, he wrote, have learned to muster majorities by evoking disdain not against foreign but domestic enemies. He suggested that the movement is in the hands of two contending factions: those whose "binding belief" is their contempt for their enemies, who hate them more than they love liberty, and those who love liberty more than they fear their enemies.

If McCain loses, it will provide an opportunity for conservatives to look inward and redefine their movement in a different age. Christopher Buckley, borrowing an analogy from Ronald Reagan, stated "I didn't leave the Republican Party, it left me."

Sarah Palin, who's run a populist campaign against elitists (like Buckley), in some ways represents a radical extreme given that conservatism emphasizes respect for tradition, stability, etc. While taking back the government for its rightful owners may have some appeal, there's the question of whether anyone can really do that, after all that was the basis of GWB's campaign as well, and moreover whether it's really desirable to jettison expertise, especially in a financial crisis? I don't think most Americans will find that appealing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So increasing the debt by lowering taxes and spending more is neutral....

Ok..

got me a bridge in NY city Id like to sell ya too... either you know something the budget experts dont or your just repeating a sound bite.... Actually read the link its just hard figures from their plans......

The PAYGO or pay-as-you-go rule compels new spending or tax changes to not add to the federal deficit

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411750_updated_candidates_summary.pdf

Including interest costs, Obama’s tax plan would boost the debt by $3.5 trillion by 2018. McCain’s plan would increase the debt by $5 trillion on top of the $2.3 trillion increase that the Congressional Budget Office forecasts for the next decade (see Summary Deficit Table)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McCain/Palin is the choice for morons and dufuses like themselves.

Now, now. Not for morons:

For people who graduate in the bottom ten percent of their college class (McCain) or for people with journalism degrees who can't name a single newspaper they read. But not for morons.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

yabits - Can you refute anything in that article "McCain's economic plan bnoosts middle class"? I didn't think so.

Here' another good article: "An argument against Obama's tax plan"

www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11670.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That's "McCain's economic plan boosts middle class"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Now, now. Not for morons:

For people who graduate in the bottom ten percent of their college class (McCain) or for people with journalism degrees who can't name a single newspaper they read. But not for morons.

Agreed........Next thing you know people will vote for a guy with a whole two years in the Senate as President as some sort of great qualification for the top job, but he has that Havard degree......I am sooo in awe of that sheepskin meself.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sailwind - Dom't forget the little squirrel was also a community organizer.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

About experience:

He who has seen one cathedral ten times has seen something; he who has seen ten cathedrals once has seen but little; and he who has spent one-half hour in each of one hundred cathedrals has seen nothing at all. Four hundred pictures on a wall are four hundred times less interesting than one picture; and no one knows a café till he has gone there often enough to know the names of the waiters.

--Sinclair Lewis

The quality of the experience matters. McCain is sometimes confused about the names of the waiters. Palin never knew them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Better that than an old guy who has been corrupted by the same team that destroyed his campaign in 2000, who claims to want to clean up Washington and yet has packed his team with lobbyists, a person who has an overrated "war hero" status that includes some supposedly good things he did 4 decades ago, whose ideas of being a 'maverick' is playing follow the leader for 90% of senate votes, and who simply has nothing of note to offer except the selection of a vice president candidate who is so out of her league it's just not funny any more.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

About the only thing john mccain can offer here is his war experience.

But how the heck does flying a plane 40 years equip someone to run a nation?

And Joe Biden torpedoed any claim mccain may have thought he had to being a maverick.

And now when Americans are scared of losing their jobs, seeing their retirement savings go up in smoke and their houses being foreclosed from under their feet, it seems mccain wants to change the subject and talk about Ayers.

I hope he does, because no one is listening.

If mccain wants any chance at all of clawing back into the lead, he MUST start talking about the economy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Republicans can forget the breathless hype of thier convention.

Forget all the red states that were shoe ins just a month ago that they are now having to defend doggedly. All their bright young new selections are being abandoned as they are forced to defend encumbent Congressmen.

This election has all the signs of becoming a Republican bloodbath.

And with Palin going off like a loose cannon at the moment. Who know's who's speech notes she's reading? mccain certainly doesn't.

It just gets better :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Heck, the way this campaign is unfolding is almost surreal - Obama has whumped The Clinton Machine and it's looking like he will torpedo McCain's 10-year quest for the White House tonight.

And it's only Obama's first serious attempt.

You've got to give it to the guy - that's pretty impressive.

But as somone said earlier, the GOP only have themselves and Bush/Cheney to blame for destroying their economy, prestige and national strength in the last 8 years.

The chickens are coming home to roost. :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge writes: "Can you refute anything in that article "McCain's economic plan bnoosts middle class"? I didn't think so."

Wow. It would be so much better if Republicans could manage a little in the way of critical thinking skills. You can't boost the middle class by taxing their health care benefits, or incenting employers to rid themselves of providing health care benefits to employees. You can't boost the middle class by adding over $4 trillion to the debt load they're already carrying. Which is what McCain's plans will do.

Both campaigns have had the opportunity to present their plans to the American people and, judging by the percentage of middle class voters in the states, those people have responded as to who they think will serve them better.

If Republicans believe that what it means to be middle class is to have an income greater than $200k per year then, yes, it can be argued that McCain will provide a boost to the top 5%. But trickle down has never shown to have worked, and we're certainly in one helluva mess now thanks to decades of supply-side and deregulation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge writes: "An argument against Obama's tax plan"

Written by Grover Nordquist, a supply-sider.

Really, Sarge, I think you fall into that category that Lincoln described when he said "you can fool some of the people all of the time."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The dam is bursting

How's McCain's "reboot" coming along?

CBS/NY Times.

McCain (R) 39 (45) Obama (D) 53 (48)

McCain's campaign strategy may be hurting hurt him: Twenty-one percent of voters say their opinion of the Republican has changed for the worse in the last few weeks. The top two reasons cited for the change of heart are McCain's attacks on Obama and his choice of Sarah Palin as running mate.

The wingnuts that 1) urged McCain to pick one of their own, rather than a Romney or Lieberman, and 2) urged McCain to go viciously on the attack have doomed his chances.

And the crazy thing is, this poll hasn't gone out on a huge limb.

Other polls have also shown big Obama leads:

dKos/R2K: 52-41 Gallup: 53-43 Battleground: 53-40 ABC/Post: 53-43

Not every poll the last few days shows the huge lead. Those with tighter, more traditional "likely voter" screens are showing this race still in the single digits (Obama up 5-7 points).

But regardless, the lead is growing big time. Every time you think Obama has reached a ceiling or McCain has found a floor, the numbers widen further.

These numbers are like a rising tide lifting all boats, putting states like North Dakota, Montana, and Georgia into increased play. Pretty soon, Arkansas will be in play (if not already).

(Source: KOS)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McCain's campaign is really starting to nose dive. They've given all they're plans and they just don't help the average person on Main Street.

McCain's plans of continuing to give tax breaks to the rich don't help the ones that are hurting. It just continues increasing the divide between the haves and have nots and people are seeing through his plans.

And John McCain's earmark speaches are so full of crap. Pork barrel earmarks include things like AmTrak. McCain believes that money to AmTrak is an earmark. Money that is added to a bill for levees he considers pork barrel earmarks. And he'd refuse to sign a bill and make someone famous because of an earmark, but he would continue the george bush tax breaks. John McCain has his priorities mixed-up.

Good-bye george..er..John. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How's McCain's "reboot" coming along?

He's getting a reboot all right -- a reboot right in the tookus.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McCain's plans of continuing to give tax breaks to the rich don't help the ones that are hurting. It just continues increasing the divide between the haves and have nots and people are seeing through his plans.

We can call the nosediving Repubican philosophy "the end of an error."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I see yabits can't refute anything in the Nordquist article either. All he can do is tell lies about McCain's eoonomic plan: "You can't boost the middle class by adding over $4 trillion to the debt load"

Now that's a load, yabits.

Looks like someone messed with coulrophobics's 9:50 PM post.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge - I'll take you up on a rebuttal. In Smart Money's article of 1/25/2008 it says that this tax rate game played by corporations is crap. There are loopholes and places that they hide it that individuals don't have. So your 30+% tax rate is poppy-cock. < :-)

http://www.smartmoney.com/investing/economy/high-corporate-tax-rate-is-misleading-22463/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I see yabits can't refute anything in the Nordquist article either.

Nordquist has been thoroughly refuted by the events of the past two years. Perhaps you weren't paying attention.

I'll bet you voted for W twice, didn't you? (See Lincoln's quote above.)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Heh, I see yabits STILL can't refute anything in either article.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

To the educable, refutation abounds.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm looking forward to seeing tonights debate. Supposedly McCain is supposed to start dishing it out to Barack tonight. His supporters are pissed off because he's not bringing out the big guns.

Problem is, John McCain is all used up. He has nothing to go after Barack about except the William Ayers stuff and you can only scream Bill Ayers name so many times in a debate.

His "My friends" has totally become a piece of sandpaper to most. They don't believe that he's sincere when he says it.

His swinging his little fist always makes me smile. Just beating the air, just beating the air. Almost like a cartoon character, maybe Popeye even.

Have a great day. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

will the U.S. be prepared if McCain actually wins? the closet racist vote is much more pervasive than it seems.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Come on, yabits, surely you can find at least one lie/falsehood in at least one of those articles?

daydreamer - "He has nothing to go after Barack except the William Ayers stuff"

Oh, he's got a lot to go after Barack. Barack's campaign has approximately four more hours of life. He had a good run.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yabits Im still waint on the answer of how his plan is a neutral paygo plan when it increses the debt? Maybe you just misunderstood what he said, maybe he said he will get paid in gold....

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411750updatedcandidates_summary.pdf

Including interest costs, Obama’s tax plan would boost the debt by $3.5 trillion by 2018. McCain’s plan would increase the debt by $5 trillion on top of the $2.3 trillion increase that the Congressional Budget Office forecasts for the next decade (see Summary Deficit Table)

Both Candidates are going to increse the debt, not lower it.. Both are going to lower taxes and decrease the amount of income the goverment makes, while both plan to increase spending...

Vote Barr he at least has a mathimatical correct plan that shows a decrease in spending and a decrease in the debt... But hey why vote for a guy who isnt in one of the two moron parties...

http://www.bobbarr2008.com/issues/spending-economy/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

under a tax and spend Obama Reid Pelosi administration?

The alternative, of course, has become “spend and borrow” which is much worse. If people aren’t being asked to pay for it, there is no need for extended public discussion about the merits of whatever public money is going to be spent on. Such was the case with GWB’s prescription drug plan for seniors. Given the speed with which it was rammed through Congress, few noticed it was the biggest new entitlement program in several decades. Or that it was written by someone who immediately returned to the private sector as a lobbyist for the drug companies. Having been implemented, it’s going to be very hard to change; but surely Uncle Sam should be able to get a discount rather than paying retail for bulk purchases of an item which will be in increasing demand as the US population ages?

How many jobs will be going to places like English-speaking Ireland (corporate tax rate 11 percent) because our Dem-controlled Congress wants to keep America's corporate tax at 39 percent or even higher?

Such comparisons take us down a slippery slope. Specifically, this sort of thinking encourages corporations to play off localities in search of the best tax deal. Hollywood has attempted to do this; asking the state of California to match the subsidies offered for location filming by various Canadian provinces (as well as Australian states).

Filming creates a lot of jobs; the crew needs to be feed and housed, for example. But should taxpayers have to offer tax rebates to an industry where those at the top earn megabucks to ensure whoever gets the catering contract is a member of our community? We said “No,” a decision I agree with.

More generally, the situation the US confronts was identified in a book published in the early 1980s entitled The Rise and Decline of Nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation, and Social Rigidities by Mancur Olson. In essence, the North Dakota native argued the longer a society enjoys political stability, the more likely it is that powerful special-interest lobbies will emerge seeking benefits for some sub-set that makes the whole less efficient economically. Translation: more energy goes into getting a bigger slice of the pie than enlarging it. Because it’s an indictment not only of corporate lobbying but labor unions as well as groups like the AARP, the book is non-ideological. Not to mention, right on the money.

At the time this was written it painted an accurate picture of Great Britain. I don't think the US has reached this point yet; but our high level of both public and personal indebtedness certainly has opened the door to economic decline wider.

The silver lining of this financial crisis, from the vantage point of one who is largely insulated from its effects, as well as the prospect of an Obama victory, is that it offers the prospect of overturning a lot of dated assumptions.

We will be reappraising the proper role of the state in the marketplace for some time. I don't think anyone has the answers, or at least I would be suspicious of anyone who claimed to. But we will be able to ask a lot of questions which formerly would have been dismissed. I look forward to that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yabits Im still waint on the answer of how his plan is a neutral paygo plan when it increses the debt?

Go back and read the thread. In it, you'll see that I said that McCain's plans increase the deficit FAR greater than Obama's plans. One of the main reasons that Obama's plans don't contribute as much to the debt as McCain's is because of PAYGO.

Obama is inheriting a massive deficit from Bush, and it will take far more than four years to bring us back to anything close to the surplus that Bush inherited and then squandered away.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yabits said: More conservative nonsense. McCain's proposed plans will make the deficits FAR larger than Obama's.

I know you said this but you also stated he is a paygo

yabits at 09:20 PM JST - 15th October

Can you show me something tht has either one going neutral_?

Obama-Biden are publicly on record for a reinstatement of PAYGO rules. What more evidence do you require?

So if we make statements that he is PAYGO and Neutral then we now must admit he isnt PAYGO and neutral since his plan increases the debt...

Yabits said.

>Obama is inheriting a massive deficit from Bush, and it will take far more than four years to bring us back to anything close to the surplus that Bush inherited and then squandered away.

who ever wins is getting a debt created by all of goverment and if they wanted to they could create a budget that doesnt increase the debt, but they dont want that...

You also realize even under Clinton we had debt right, we never had a suplus he used the extra moeny above the budget for other items and not debt reduction, during Clinton the Debt actually increased.. . Date--------------Amount in debt 01/04/1993 4,167,872,986,583.67

01/04/2000 5,758,316,426,486.15

that seems to be a trillion six increase during Clinton....

Heres a link for ya to the info.. http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nippon5 writes "that seems to be a trillion six increase during Clinton."

Why don't you list the yearly deficits starting with the one Clinton inherited in 1993? I think it will prove my point. Why did the level of federal debt decrease by just over 2% in 2000, if there was no surplus? You actually seem to believe that Clinton could have turned the whole thing around in his first term so that actual deficits turned to surpluses earlier. (Incredible.)

You claim that whoever wins is getting a debt created by "all of government." Sorry, what you say appears to deny the fact that one party has been responsible for turning the surplus situation achieved in 1999-2000 -- and the projected future surpluses -- back into deficit spending. You can believe whatever fantasy you want to otherwise.

Lastly, PAYGO is an effective way to try to achieve budget neutrality for any proposed programs. If you can't understand that, I'm not sure what more I can do for you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nippon5 writes: "who ever wins is getting a debt created by all of goverment and if they wanted to they could create a budget that doesnt increase the debt, but they dont want that.."

LOL!! Oh yeah? With GDP growth headed towards negative territory and the financial world melting down around us, you actually think such a thing is achievable? What economists are you listening to? Besides Bob Barr, that is, who is no economist.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/features/budget_hero/

Here so you can try to balance it.

Its a game

0 ( +0 / -0 )

yabits...

you defend the undefendable and thats cute, but trust me if you think you cant balance a budget you cant do anything for anyone...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites