world

Obama mocks McCain's call to fire SEC chairman

89 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 This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

89 Comments
Login to comment

"Barack Obama promised new ideas"

He sure is promising a lot of stuff.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Yesterday, John McCain actually said that if he's president, he'll take on the, quote, old boys' network in Washington," Obama said in Elko.

/

"I am not making this up. This is someone who's been in Congress for 26 years - who put seven of the most powerful Washington lobbyists in charge of his campaign - and now he's the one who will take on the old boy network?" Obama continued. "The old boy network? In the McCain campaign, that's called a staff meeting."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

what's new or hasn't been done already?

The true fallout is yet to come. We are looking at 1 Trillion(just for this bailout) and the Gov has inflated the currency already =How much further down can the dollar go.

The next few years will be rough.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge, well if the guy is talking change then you would expect some promises and new ideas with that, wouldn't you?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Buddha - Yeah, but in Barack's case, he doesn't actually have any new ideas, he's just promising them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge, newsflash this is called a campaign where promises are made. The doing happens after he's sworn in - at least in theory.

Now let's look at McCain's new ideas and promises. He's against big government but is for strict regulating of the financial sector. He claimed that the "fundamentals" of American business were sound and when challenged by reality he offered a new definition of "fundamentals". To appeal to the women vote he trots out Sarah Palin and then keeps her under wraps from the voting public and media as if she is a "kept woman" - while not necessarily new hisorically, a rather unexpected response to American women.

Yeah, you are right to doubt Obama when McCain clearly has new ideas.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge,

Just because you don't want to believe in something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/EconomicPolicyFullPlan.pdf

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McCain got it right when he said, "The issue of economics is not something I've understood as well as I should."

He also said to WSJ.

"I'm going to be honest, I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated"

Later he says over and over that he did not make these statements!

McCain is caught lying by the late, great Tim Russert; called to the carpet if you will, had his nose rubbed in. Then John did a whole lot of name dropping. It does not erase the fact that he lies his ass off and gets clocked for it.

Look at this video and watch this bold faced liar keep a straight face. That is the face you continue to see lying on the campaign trail.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_APdK9fgDM

I think the best think we can say to McCain after his constant lying during this campaign is a quote from the hearings Joe McCarthy (Republican) used to defame good Americans.

You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hmmm...was it only last month that Mitt Romney declared "John McCain would take a weed wacker to excessive regulation"? Now the aging Senator's preaching the virtues of regulation with only the zeal a (false) convert can muster. And also reassuring the public "he's taken on tougher guys." Does he really believe Wall Street's problems can be set right by cleaning a few clocks? Even if that were what the situation called for, he's hardly the best man for the job.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just my guess, but I think McCain is still calling for smaller government, but with a better way to operate. Instead of creating a bigger and bigger Fed govt. with more rules, how about making one with a more common sense approach and better regulations. Instead of the bloated Byzantine system that we have in place in some area now.

As far as the campaign, it has been proven that you can't correct these types of changes in the economy with higher taxes. Obama has all ready said that if elected he would raise the capital gains tax, back up to almost past where it was under Clinton (he did say that he would not go as high as 30% but in the 20's from the current 15%). If this is done, you will see more and more investors take their money out and a massive sell off on Wall Street would happen. Afterwards, more people would be less willing to invest, since they will have an increased tax on their investment returns.

If McCain were smart, the first thing he should do when they meet to debate is to say to Obama based on past experiences, when captial gains taxes were high, people tended to invest less. Are you still willing to increase the capital gains tax on investors when you become president? If he back peddles out of this, after he said he will do it, then he will be seen as a "flip flopper." If he says yes, then he will be seen as a tax and spend president.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Alphaape, perhaps you are too young to remember the 90s, but I do not recall anyone crying to the bank for lack of money or the potential to make money. And don't forget the budget surplus which could have helped to pay down the national debt and other financial obligations.

Before you start on how a surplus is excess tax money, how do you expect America to pay down its debt? Having the Chinese and other foreign parties owning America is a matter of national security.

In order to lower America's vulnerability, that debt has to be paid and the money for that is through taxation - all that talk about grandkids paying for excesses of the boomers is real and those grandkids are now voters.

Or is meeting one's financial obligations no longer a foundational ethic of the GOP? Just cut taxes and hope the tooth fairy comes and makes everything OK.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just my guess, but I think McCain is still calling for smaller government, but with a better way to operate.

Maybe he is, and the time-tested Republican way to sell that to the electorate is through tax cuts. But that requires cutting spending to balance the books, something the Republicans have failed at miserably. There's no evidence John McCain is any different.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge: "Yeah, but in Barack's case, he doesn't actually have any new ideas, he's just promising them."

This doesn't make any sense, even for you. 'He's just promising them', with them being, what exactly? That's right... the new ideas you contradict yourself by saying he doesn't have. You're losing it, my friend.

Obama shows here that he can taunt and jeer with the best of them, and his jabs are extremely clever, unlike McCain's out and out lies and fear tactics. The 'even Bush had to distance himself from McCain' was hilarious, and poignant. Meanwhile, all McCain and Co. can do is make up lies about tax increases with an image of a shadow creeping over a baby (fear tactics and lies), while hiding Palin from any kind of questions.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

B4B, I was a grown man in the 90's as well as the 80's and I do remember. I did not say anything about the surplus. What I think needs to happen is that spending gets under control, better regulation and oversight (look at the airline industry, we stepped in to save them, and they are still screwing us with excess baggage fees and the like to make up for money that they are losing after we bailed them out).

If you need to raise taxes after better spendig measures are in place, then I am for it. But don't just raise taxes and continue on the path that we have been on.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What I think needs to happen is that spending gets under control,

Very difficult to do as the baby boomer generation approaches retirement. But this was a "known known" to use Donald Rumsfeld's words. Does McCain, for example, intend to roll back GWB's prescription drug program for the elderly? That was the biggest new entitlement program in several decades.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So firing the Sec chairman will do what exactly. Who will replace him, more over isnt that shutting the barn door after the cows left. Yup sounds like maverick talk to me. How about standing up to his party and waving his little fist about what they have helped to destroy.

Why didnt Mcsame come out and ask why dubya had no comment. But I guess this is just a figure of all our imaginations, why just last week sarge and all his alter egos said this was just a hiccup and the US would pull threw. So tell us sarge with the world tanking what makes you sure the US will pull threw.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So firing the Sec chairman will do what exactly.

In fact it can't be done. The president doesn't actually have the authority to fire the SEC chairman.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Alphaape said: If you need to raise taxes after better spendig measures are in place, then I am for it. But don't just raise taxes and continue on the path that we have been on.

No argument from me on that. I am just amazed that conservatives in office have such a difficult time doing just that - record deficits galore and Wall Street meltdowns while the so-called MBA president was in office. Little wonder McCain can't find a coherent message regarding the economy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/109/states/az/ Mccain

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/ Obama

Based on these numbers Obama votes more for his party then McCain does. It also shows what they voted for....

Enjoy

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nippon5 thanks for that. I will remember that when Obama starts wearing McCain's "maverick" mantel.

Also, as a Bush critic would anyone expect Obama to vote against his party? Again, when Obama starts criticizing the Dems as McCain has with the GOP then these stats become interesting.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What a dumbarse thing to say anyway?? if elected you`re going to fie the head of the SEC.. And that will do what do you think?? muppet...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taka313 - Under a President Barack Obama, most Americans' taxes would go up. You know it and I know it.

"sarge"

It's Sarge.

smithinjapan - "you contradict yourself"

How so? I said Obama doesn't have any new ideas. He's only promising new ideas. The ideas in his economic plan are old, liberal ideas.

"You're losing it."

You're the one who's losing it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What a dumbarse thing to say anyway?? if elected you`re going to fie the head of the SEC.. And that will do what do you think?? muppet..

Get you elected

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I love it when Barack goes negative. Its what we do best. The Clintons couldnt stop us, what makes mccain think he can?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge: "You're the one who's losing it"

Ah, the old school-yard, "I know you are but what am I" sarge favourite! Nice comeback!!

Obama is promising a change from the tried and died ways of GWB, which all failed, in case you didn't catch the 'died' part. Now we have McCain saying simply he'll fire someone who's already failed, which would do nothing to prevent anything, and who'd probably be replaced by another stooge. McCain can't come up with anything good here, and the economy, and his 'I don't know how many houses I have' and inability to relate to the average Joe as such could well tip the scales even FURTHER in Obama's favour. Hence, Obama's ideas are indeed 'new', my friend, particularly since they are completely different from the failed policies and choices of the Bush administration (and now BOTH Bush and McCain are stepping away from each other! HAHAHAhahahahaha!!!).

We are starting, now that the bogus convention speeches are over, to see the true colours or McCain/Palin; a pair so full of lies that they can't answer questions (McCain because he's confused, Palin because she's been told not to or else it might prove cases of illegal power use, etc.) for fear of driving the final nail in their coffins.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge,

You know nothing of the sort.

Here is a graph showing how the Obama and mccain tax plans work out:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html

Once again, sarge, not letting the facts get in the way of a good rant.

Imagine my utter lack of surprise.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am going to take a guess that quite a few of you either don't own your own business of a medium size and many of you are not even moderate investors. I am not making fun, 80% of the American population doesn't own their own business nor play markets as a means of income or perhaps the business you are in doesn't ride on market trends.

Without going into specifics, if you thought the market was bad due to GWB administration, wait until the next president comes in and that does include either one, does exactly what is being promised.

I am not going to try to convince anyone here who to vote for but looking at average American desires today vice four years ago, to me its scary what the average American wants.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bloomberg is reporting that Congress, following Harry Reid's sage advice, is going to let bush struggle with the problems that our economy faces. Haahahahahaaa.Too funny!

The Democratic-controlled Congress, acknowledging that it isn't equipped to lead the way to a solution for the financial crisis and can't agree on a path to follow, is likely to just get out of the way.

Lawmakers say they are unlikely to take action before, or to delay, their planned adjournments -- Sept. 26 for the House of Representatives, a week later for the Senate. While they haven't ruled out returning after the Nov. 4 elections, they would rather wait until next year unless Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, who are leading efforts to contain the crisis, call for help.

One reason, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said yesterday, is that ``no one knows what to do'' at the moment.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipthesong what does the "average American want"? How about a roof, a job, and 3 squares and after that an opportunity to succeed?

Now what exactly scares you?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

buddha: Well, if that is all you want, you can go almost anywhere in the world for that. Why so little?

Lately, those who got loans for that house you mentioned got the loans knowingly that they could never really afford them. Now, they want the slate cleaned free, for starters. The advocates for these people want that too.

Do you really believe either candidate gives a damn about whether you succeed or not? If the above is your picture of success you are not American of late.

The opportunity you mentioned, yeah well, it gets more difficult as more government gets more involved.

I will make a bet with anyone here willing to accept. I will give you 10 cents on every dollar you earn through trading under Obama and 5 cents on every dollar you earn through trading under McCain. What I want is this, you give me 2 cents on every dollar I lose in increased taxes under that same conditions.

wait more to come in a bit

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I will give you 10 cents on every dollar you earn through trading under Obama and 5 cents on every dollar you earn through trading under McCain. What I want is this, you give me 2 cents on every dollar I lose in increased taxes under that same conditions.

Ummm, you sure you want to do this with a FOREX trader skipthesong?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

mccain was calling for less financial regulations before he started calling for more.

Add this to the list of John McCain Flip-Flops.

No wonder his ratings are sliding.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“I think that’s all fine and good but here’s what I think,” Obama said. “In the next 47 days you can fire the whole trickle-down, on-your-own, look-the-other way crowd in Washington who has led us down this disastrous path.

I seem to remember that everyone was up in arms when Bush told Brownie that he was doing "a heck of a job" after Katrina and the politicos wanted his head. So Bush sent him packing after that. Is it a matter of closing the barn door after the cows have left, I guess you could say that. But, so it was with Brownie. And I guess what makes this all the more important for McCain to say he would fire the SEC Chairman, I would think that unlike Brownie, the chairman was supposed to have "known" what he was doing, and not just there because he gave to the party to get elected. So when McCain calls for someone who obviously had the "right stuff" to be there but screwed it up, I think shows that accountability must be kept. If Obama wants to fire the whole trickle down crowd, I hope that he is ready to let go some of his supporters in that group, and start with having Rep. Barney Frank from MA replaced on the Banking committee.

As for Obama's comments on raising taxes, let's just take a simple look at the captial gains tax increases. I am a small time investor. I try to maybe put at least $100-2000 a month in some stocks online. Not much, but hey it beats wasting it in a buy me drink bar. Now when the market is good, I have seen some good returns. More than the interest I would see if I kept the same amount in the bank. However, with an increase in capital gains tax, my increases would diminish. This money that I put in is from my net income. All my obligations to the governments (federal and state, and local) have been met. I understand that I would have to pay taxes on it, but an increase in taxes for such a small time investor like me would take away my tiny profit, and I may as well stick it in the bank and get a smaller amount of interest.

In my example, I am but just a small time investor, but multiply small time investors like me, who decide not to buy stocks any becuase of higher capital gains tax, and you would get a ripple effect of millions of people who would no longer look to invest. Yes my paltry $200 is not going to hurt Wal-mart stock, but is millions of people took my attitude, they would see a drop in income from stocks. Look at it this way, Obama prides his campaign on not taking huge donations from lobbyist groups. It is the "regular" people who are donating $50-$100 a month for him. Those regular people are giving him donations that reach at least $20 million a month. So if the "little people" can give donations that get him that kind of money each month, just think of the effect of the "little people" deciding not to invest their little amounts due to higher capital gains tax. But the Dems don't present it that way, they make it seem like the really wealthy are against this "rich people's tax" when in essence, it will hurt small time investors like myself.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Before you bust me on it let me correct that statement.

You sure you want to do this with a successful FOREX trader?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The McCain-Palin celebrity Ticket are destroying themselves.

mccain with his ongoing policy reversals on

offshore drilling repealing bush's tax cuts regulating the financial sector, et el,

and now Palin with her stubborn refusal to appear in the dock over the 'Troopergate' scandal - after she clearly said she would, now her husband is refusing to testify and mcain is keeping her chained inside out of the public eye so that she cannot make any more collosal stuff ups.

And now mccain - a man who once deserved real respect but who has now turned into one of the lowlifes who destroyed his own campaign in 2000 - is saying he would fire the SEC chairman even when he wouldn't haev the power to.

And it gets better!

mccain keeps promising to "reform Wall St" while conveniently offering next to no specifics regarding how.

With mccain non-existant strategy to reshape the economy now beginning to become clear, it's no wonder Obama is moving ahead in the polls.

But at least mccain has stopped blabbering on about his all time favorite topic - WAR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Obama mocks McCain's call to fire SEC chairman"

This is awesome - just when mccain's strong point - foreign policy - is becoming less and less relevant in this election, it turns out he has black-and-white, point blank admitted that he is an airhead on the No. 1 issue of the election - the economy.

I'd call that bad luck, ha ha.

But still some Republicans out there support him! Too funny!!

Taka - thanks for posting the link to that graph in your 01:58 post - really interesting.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Under a President Barack Obama, most Americans' taxes would go up. You know it and I know it.

Sarge, for your edification:

http://alchemytoday.com/obamataxcut/

Use the above link to let us all know how much your taxes will go up under Obama. I'd really like to know the results.

More here:

http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2008/09/11/tax-calculator-for-how-your-taxes-would-change-under-obama-or-mc/

Using numbers from the non-partisan Tax Policy Center, the website AlchemyToday came up with a calculator to see how much Barack Obama would raise your taxes. It's a nifty device that should help clarify for people the big differences in economic policy in this election.

Are you making less than $603,000? If so, Obama isn't going to raise your taxes, the data show

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Looks like Obama's plan would save me almost $1000 per year in texes. Not exactly the "increase" I keep hearing about.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

$1000 saved per year in texes is nothing to sneeze at, and neither is $1000 per year in saved taxes. :D

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taxes, now there's an interesting concept. These past few days the US government has used billions of dollars of taxpayers money to bail out some of its biggest financial institutions. Taxes used to be used to be spent on improving public transport and this and that to enable the institutions of state for its citizens.

Now taxes rescue Wall Street.

Yee-up, this time next week its lower living standards for the majority of Americans, destruction of their jobs, gutting of their social security, Medicare and whatever else it will take to ensure that corporate CEOs will still be able to rake in their 8 figure salaries.

Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama promised new ideas Thursday to calm America’s financial meltdown Well, that's just sweet isn't it. That's coming from the candidate who's number one campaign fund provider is Goldman Sachs. Hey, lets say it like it is, Wall Street you own that man.

What a choice for candidates, eh?

On one hand, here is dishonest Barak who postures for the workers, and on the other hand there is honest but confused John who jumps from seeing the economy as fundamentally "strong" one day to it being just one big "casino" the next.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just to clarify. I call him 'dishonest Barack' because he is just not being upfront at all about his motives.

Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama promised new ideas Thursday to calm America’s financial meltdown.

Well, that's just sweet isn't it. That's coming from the candidate who's number one campaign fund provider is Goldman Sachs. Hey, lets say it like it is, Wall Street you own that man.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taka313, Nessie, LFRAgain and anyone else who thinks most Americans' taxes wouldn't go up if Obama gets in the White House and especially if the Democrats continue their control of the do-nothing-extremely-unpopular Congress -

History is not on your side. Check it out.

Taka313 ( i:58PM ) - "sarge"

It's Sarge. Your refusal to use my proper handle "Sarge" with the capital "S" is gonna reflect.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taniwa: Now taxes rescue Wall Street." Well, look at it like this, if a corp is considered a person, and it is, and is taxed to the hilt, but recieves nothing in return, why not call on the government to pull you out?

The government sets prices and regulations these days. They increase not only what should be market generated wages, minimum wages for jobs that were designed for temporary purposes. If people, who don't even work, people don't pay a dime in taxes can get together and start marching down streets and demanding more from the government, why can a corp?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama hosted a dinner with Barbra Streisand - $28,500 a plate! But to be fair, that did include all-you-can-eat salad buffet.

Jay Leno
0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taka313, Nessie, LFRAgain and anyone else who thinks most Americans' taxes wouldn't go up if Obama gets in the White House and especially if the Democrats continue their control of the do-nothing-extremely-unpopular Congress - History is not on your side. Check it out.

It's a valid point that evaluating the candidates' plans is different from evaluating the realities of their potential presidencies. Anyone with a shred of honesty will concede this, and so I do.

I think the candidates should be evaluated first on their plans. In this case, Obama clearly calls for lower taxes on the majority of Americans. If you have at least the slightest bit of intellectual honesty, you'll admit that. It's a matter of public record.

The second consideration is the history of their parties in terms of spending. This is a better indication of what they WILL do, rather than what they SAY THEY WILL DO. And here again, we see that Republicans are the party of big spending.

http://www.slate.com/id/2199810/

http://handshake.newsvine.com/_news/2007/07/08/824914-the-tax-and-spend-myth-a-look-at-the-evidence

So I guess the question is, do you have any intellectual honesty?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Alphaape writes:

If this is done, you will see more and more investors take their money out and a massive sell off on Wall Street would happen. Afterwards, more people would be less willing to invest, since they will have an increased tax on their investment returns.

Wow, how embarrassing. You mean to say that a person with $10,000 would rather hide it in a matress and let inflation eat away at its value, than putting it into an investment where he'd get at least $900 more each year because he wouldn't want to pay a few extra dollars on the gains when he eventually sold the investment?

I don't believe you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This money that I put in is from my net income. All my obligations to the governments (federal and state, and local) have been met. I understand that I would have to pay taxes on it, but an increase in taxes for such a small time investor like me would take away my tiny profit, and I may as well stick it in the bank and get a smaller amount of interest.

No it wouldn't. You'd still have to declare the interest payments on the savings account. Meanwhile, you don't declare capital gains on an investment until you actually go to sell the stock, right?

You actually believe that people are going to turn away from an investment that they believe will net them a 10% return in favor of a paltry 2% because of a few extra dollars paid on the capital gains? When Warren Buffett started on his road, capital gains were taxed at a much higher rate than what is being proposed now -- and that didn't dissuade him a bit.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Skip You don't make a scrap of sense.

Well, look at it like this, if a corp is considered a person, and it is

A 'corp' as in corporation is a company its owners and its shareholders.

When the government steps in and bails out a failed corporation like AIG (and it wasn't even mentioned in any of the above) it is the taxpayer who is paying for the loan or the bailout. Meanwhile the owners and the very top of management have their financial rumps saved from the kicking the majority of Americans who pay for receive instead, that is everything they thought their taxes were supposed to be paying for, i.e. public services.

Look at it this way, what has happened over the last few days is just this, profit has been privatised and losses have been socialized. Great to see how the "free market" Obama enthused over in his speech in Nevada on Wednesday, has actually accomplished, isn't it?

Those people you mention who will be without a job, not paying taxes, and marching down the streets protesting will soon be a sizable portion of the population. What you are about to witness is the Great Depression all over again. Only this time things will be likely be worse.

Hope you are ready for it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

My guess is that if the Chairman of the SEC had been undecided, Obama has picked up a vote.

What I've read recently is that polls suggest that Americans tend to trust Democrats more than Republicans when it comes to the economy. I don't think that the latest spate of bankruptcies and panic sales has changed that, especially with Paulson assuring us over the last 5 months that we've seen the worst of things.

Somewhat quixotically, McCain seems to be running against Bush's record with Bush's policies. And if Obama has not unveiled his new policies yet, McCain has not yet explained how giving the markets greater freedom is going to solve the problem.

McCain did explain, however, how the fundamentals are sound. It seems that the workers of Ohio are the most productive in the world and it seems that they are the fundamentals. That's what Marx said, even if he wasn't thinking specifically about the workers in Cleveland and Youngstown.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sez,

I noticed that too. candidate mccain's stance morphed from "the fundamentals of the economy are sound" to "the fundamentals of the economy are the workers and the workers are sound." We can only hope that candidate mccain is right. Because if he is, those Cleveland and Youngstown voters will see that for the empty political pandering that it was.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Okay, since "the fundamentals" have been bought into the discussion.

Fundamentally, it would be easier for the US to find a way to shrink itself so it could fit the entire country and its hollowed out economy into the Large Hadron Collider and hope the time machine potential of that device was able to zap itself back forty decades at least to pay back all the debt when it was able.

Better still go all the way back to 1934 and convince president Franklin D Roosevelt to ditch the '2nd New Deal' in favour of a 'Real Deal' that instead of saving Capitalism as even then it was beginning its slow death, and begin to work on a rational planned world economy by starting with the US. Then it was that Socialism had a very strong following not only amongst America's intellectuals but also the public itself. Perhaps we never would have gotten to where we are heading now.

Because we've tried Capitalism without the "free" market and with it. This is the result. What has been the dream of the very wealthy has always been the nightmare for the rest.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What I've read recently is that polls suggest that Americans tend to trust Democrats more than Republicans when it comes to the economy.

Really got to hand it to Barack, eh comrade. He has completely won over the fourth estate.

How times have changed! The New York Times was once firmly in the grip of the big multinational corporations. Those days are gone.

As recently as 2003 they still published articles like this - - -

"September 11, 2003 New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae By STEPHEN LABATON The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

"Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry."

Luckily, Barney Frank and our reps in Congress shot that one down.

mccain (voted with bush 95 percent of the time) wants, but can't get the message out. Drowned out by all the reporters Barack has won over.

Too funny!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Barney Frank and our reps in Congress shot that one down.

What party had the majority in Congress at the time?

Too funny!

Well...I'm laughing, but I doubt for the same reason.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's almost sad watching Barack mock fuddy old mccain, who can't get the message out beyond faux news and limbaugh.

Biggest Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008

Top Three:

Dodd, Christopher J S CT D $165,400 Obama, Barack S IL D $126,349 Kerry, John S MA D $111,000

watch the repubs howl about those figures.hahahahahahaha. too funny!

Saul

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"the fundamentals of the economy are the workers and the workers are sound."

...unfortunately, the workers are in China.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And so we go on in ever tighter little spirals.

Hey guys, its like a Punch and Judy show.

There's the punchy Republicans and there's the Democrats, probably they are ones with their white gloves forever in front of their horrified faces. Not ever having seen a one of those puppet shows I can't say which of the political parties best fits which puppet. But you probably get the picture without me needing to explain it any further.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But you probably get the picture without me needing to explain it any further.

The stupid proles need it spelled out as clearly as possible.You sound like you could be the one.

I often think False consciousness is stronger than ever...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

yabits, people are funny about their money. Some may see the rate in captical gains tax as just another tax that they don't want to pay besides their income, state, property, local, sales and other taxes that will probably increase over the next few years.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Has anyone heard what mccain's rock star running mate has to say about this economic crisis?

Or is she still being kept tightly under wraps despite mccain claiming only last week "She stands up for what’s right, and she doesn’t let anyone tell her to sit down."

except if it's in a tightly locked cupboard in McCain HQ...
0 ( +0 / -0 )

a corporation is a financial entity. Ownership would convey liability --> you would be liable for these losses.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Has anyone heard what mccain's rock star running mate has to say about this economic crisis?

Ugly rumor is they gonna use her to attack like we will use Joe 'Sock Em' Biden. Apparently she wants to go after Charlie Rangel publicly. She thinks that just because he accepted donations of 10 million dollars from AIG just last year she thinks he is now fair game. But everybody knows she is only attacking him because like Barack Obama, Charlie is black.

Real smart. Good luck with that , hockey mom.

Charlie is only like the third most powerful guy in our Democratic contolled Congress.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think it's astounding that when john mccain has admitted he's an economic airhead, he picks as his top economic advisor Carly Fiorina, who, under her tenure as CEO of Hewlett Packard, the market halved HP’s value and the company incurred heavy job losses before she was asked to leave by the Board of Directors in 2005.

It's telling that after her departure, the company quickly prospered.

And she's telling mccain what to do????

Yet again, what is john mccain thinking????

I hate to say this, but is Fiorina - like Sarah Palin, just another token women mccain has placed on his team to pander to female voters?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushi,

Actually, Fiorina isn't telling candidate mccain much these days.

Here's why:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/16/fiorina.mccain/index.html

And here's what happened after:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/16/fiorinas-comment-called-biden-like/

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

he picks as his top economic advisor Carly Fiorina, who, under her tenure as CEO of Hewlett Packard, the market halved HP’s value and the company incurred heavy job losses before she was asked to leave by the Board of Directors in 2005.

The Board of Directors sweetened the deal by offering her a golden parachute (42 million to be exact). This is exactly the sort of thing McCain claims to be against. Anyway, she's following in the footsteps of Phil Gramm, a big proponent of unfettered markets, and been muzzled. She was quoted as saying "John McCain is unqualified to run a major corporation." Needless to say, he wasn't too pleased.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cool thing is Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are going to see to it that Congress does not and cannot act on this problem before adjourning Sept 26.

I'm so proud of my party. They know Barack is gonna win. So just wait til January.

Screw the little people.

repubs will get all the blame.

Hahahahahahaha. Too funny!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

She thinks that just because he accepted donations of 10 million dollars from AIG just last year...

Research on the total amount in donations from AIG to Rangel's non-profit indicate that the number given above is off by a very large factor.

From OpenSecrets.org: "Rangel has collected $9,000 from [AIG] since 2007, all from its PAC, and $53,600 since 1989."

Republicans want to lie about things like this because they hope it will deflect attention from their own weak candidates.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taka, thanks for those links about Carly.

For those who missed them -

McCain adviser Fiorina: Palin not ready to run a corporation

Fiorina: "Well, I don't think John McCain could run a major corporation," Fiorina said.

And the fallout?

"Carly will now disappear," this [top McCain campaign] source said. "Senator McCain was furious." Asked to define "disappear," this source said, adding that she would be off TV for a while."

LOL!

I just don't see why john mccain was so angry when Carly Fiorina was just telling it like it is.

Heh, another nail in the coffin of the mccain campaign.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Heh, another nail in the coffin of the mccain ( McCain ) campaign"

Heh, keep tellin' that to yourself, Sushi.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge,

The wheels are coming off mcain's campaign, especialy now that his post-convention bounce has evaporated and his rock star running mate remains locked up in a darkened cupboard in mccain HQ to prevent her from making herself appear even more pug dog stupid than she already is.

McCain's call to fire SEC chairman is just another reason he is going down faster than many of the planes he crashed.

Gotta say - besides a vote count machine rigging, Obama is going to get this.

And you can quote me on that after November :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The wheels are coming off mcain's campaign, especialy now that his post-convention bounce has evaporated

The important things to keep in mind about those polling numbers: They do not take into consideration first-time voters. Nor do pollsters call cell phones. Young first-time voters, and twenty-somethings are massively for Senator Obama. Also, there are lots of African-Americans as well as Hispanic voters who are registering to vote for the first time, just in order to take part in this historic election.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

can we just fire the whole lot and start over, please?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Skipthesong,

I will take you up on that bet as you said

I will make a bet with anyone here willing to accept. I will give you 10 cents on every dollar you earn through trading under Obama and 5 cents on every dollar you earn through trading under McCain. What I want is this, you give me 2 cents on every dollar I lose in increased taxes under that same conditions.

There is no need to get nasty, as I don't think you and I need to resort to that.

We can call it a gentlehandle's (as I don't know your gender) agreement.

Starting the day the newly elected president takes office I will adhere to your 5 cent or 10 cent to the dollar wager depending on if Obama or McCain wins. I will pay you 2 cents for every dollar you must pay on losses for increased taxes.

Following the new office I will post what I made for the day/week when I post. If I post once with my positive trade for the day I will not re-post the profit.

I trade currencies and usually trade no less than 5 lots per trade.

Let us say after 4 years we tally up who made the most money, eh? We then can econgratulate the winner without any negative bashing. Sound fair?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Xennon,

I think the loser should buy a drink for the winner to boot. And I think I should be invited and get a free drink as well for suggesting it. ;-)

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

americans voted for bush/cheney and bush/quayle. even in the face of all the indicators to the contrary. i see very little reason/evidence as to why americans won't vote mccain/pailin. history WILL repeat itself again, come november. my sympathies to the american middle & lower classes who will bear (for another 4 years) the brunt of this (inevitable) folly. my kudos to the rich/privileged who will have dodged another bullet ... ha ha ha.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I can't wait for the debates. It's not going to be pretty. Obama's in over his silly head, and Biden's going to get bitten by the Barracuda.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Its like Barack says -

" I'm skinny, but I'm tough. "

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Yes, I can see the debates now:

MODERATOR: What do you see as the future direction for American foreign policy in the next 4 years?

OBAMA: Mending and maintaining relationships with traditionally loyal and reliable international partners.

MCCAIN: America's unsafe! War on Terror!™

MODERATOR: The economy?

OBAMA: Tax relief for the bottom 80% of least-wealthy Americans and a top-down review of economic principles that have brought us to the current problems.

MCCAIN: America's unsafe! War on Terror!!™

MODERATOR: Education?

OBAMA: Redirecting focus on...

MCCAIN: America's unsafe! War on Terror!!

MODERATOR: Abortion?

OBAMA: Ensuring tha...

MCCAIN: America's unsafe! WAR ON TERROR!!

MODERATOR: Energ...

MCCAIN:America's still unsafe, damnit! WAR ON TERROR!!!

Yes, should be a wonderful debate. I imagine Palin vs. Biden will go about the same, with Palin towing the party line nicely.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge

I can't wait for the debates

I love it when McCain sputters. I expect him to sputter a lot. It is even better when he sputters and shakes his tiny little fists. Add the McCain blinking and his tempestuous little temper and I am sure McCain will put on quite a show for us. While McCain will provide the amusement we will be fervently listening what our next president, Obama, will have in store when he takes the oath of Office next year.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama is bad guy who should shut his face about war veteren hero Mr McCain.

McCain is capable of making the good choice for world ecomomies.

But anyway many American will never vote for non whit man, and Obama loses.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Alinskey4prez,

Don't forget, Bill O'Reilly has also stated several times he thinks Obama is a tough guy. This was after their interview during the republican convention. He has said it on his show and an interview on a Fox news show.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Don't forget, Bill O'Reilly has also stated several times he thinks Obama is a tough guy.

Look, oreilly is a purveyor of hate.Even if he says something that SEEMS positive about Barack you can be sure there is racism encoded in his words. Join me in refusing to capitalize his name and maybe we can bring them down.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You sure you want to do this with a successful FOREX trader?"

Xenon, if you are an Obama supporter I am willing to take this up. We can set a place of meeting, preferably in Tokyo (roppongi hills, Kamiyacho, Otemachi, Tokyo Sta area....) FOREX, so you probably in the Toranoman Sta area, no? Ok, I just looked at your post, I am talking much shorter, as I am considering ditching the US citizenship. If I am wrong, you can make out with in one cycle and mind you, we are only talking about US income from gains and profits (I don't get a "salary"). It will not include what I make in Japan or elsewhere because I am only recently dabbling)

Taniwah, a public company counts as a person in the US. I don't what other countries do, but a company is considered one person and it is not owned by its owners, but by its share holders. A corporation has its on SSN and it is subject to all laws just like any human is as well. http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2469/how-can-a-corporation-be-legally-considered-a-person So, next time you shout at me, don't shout so loud! I can hear you you know,..

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Skipthesong,

I am just talking a friendly agreement. And yes, I do support Obama over McCain. I do not wish to try and take real money from you and I hope you do not want to take real money from me (because in all possibility you would probably win). I am in Fukuoka now and trade from home.

I am considering ditching the US citizenship.

Interesting. I have been thinking the same on occasion.

Overall, I just think this would be a fun learning experience as I don't have any idea on what assets/businesses you own in the states and this will have to be based on trust and trust alone.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Skip

a public company counts as a person in the US. I don't what other countries do, but a company is considered one person and it is not owned by its owners, but by its share holders.

The 14th amendment might have been used to allow corporations the same rights as citizens, but that doesn't mean individuals and corporations reaped the same benefits as a result. Clearly this has not been so except for the most part in the case of very rare and well celebrated class action suits.

The US Constitutions applies to US citizens not to "persons", and we are talking about the very same Constitution that has been dismantled in good part by the Bush Administration. When you are talking about the rights of US citizens lets remember these are now subject to removal by executive decision.

A company is indeed owned by its shareholders, in principle, until the government steps in and nationalizes it! Then, in theory, it ought to be owned by the nation.

BTW, this is what has just happened. Right?

The Capitalist concept of a 'free market' has been proven to be ideology, and Capitalism itself deserves to be put to rest, before in its death throes it destroys us all.

No idea what 'shouting' you are on about. You are still not making sense.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think the loser should buy a drink for the winner to boot. And I think I should be invited and get a free drink as well for suggesting it.

Good idea, Taka. I volunteer to be the designated driver. On the condition that everyone comes by subway.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Advice to Obama, the truth about mccain and his campaign based on lies.

BARTLET GET ANGRIER! Call them liars, because that’s what they are. Sarah Palin didn’t say “thanks but no thanks” to the Bridge to Nowhere. She just said “Thanks.” You were raised by a single mother on food stamps — where does a guy with eight houses who was legacied into Annapolis get off calling you an elitist? And by the way, if you do nothing else, take that word back. Elite is a good word, it means well above average. I’d ask them what their problem is with excellence. While you’re at it, I want the word “patriot” back. McCain can say that the transcendent issue of our time is the spread of Islamic fanaticism or he can choose a running mate who doesn’t know the Bush doctrine from the Monroe Doctrine, but he can’t do both at the same time and call it patriotic. They have to lie — the truth isn’t their friend right now. Get angry. Mock them mercilessly; they’ve earned it. McCain decried agents of intolerance, then chose a running mate who had to ask if she was allowed to ban books from a public library. It’s not bad enough she thinks the planet Earth was created in six days 6,000 years ago complete with a man, a woman and a talking snake, she wants schools to teach the rest of our kids to deny geology, anthropology, archaeology and common sense too? It’s not bad enough she’s forcing her own daughter into a loveless marriage to a teenage hood, she wants the rest of us to guide our daughters in that direction too? It’s not enough that a woman shouldn’t have the right to choose, it should be the law of the land that she has to carry and deliver her rapist’s baby too? I don’t know whether or not Governor Palin has the tenacity of a pit bull, but I know for sure she’s got the qualifications of one. And you’re worried about seeming angry? You could eat their lunch, make them cry and tell their mamas about it and God himself would call it restrained. There are times when you are simply required to be impolite. There are times when condescension is called for!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Let's look at the educational background of your two options:

Obama: Occidental College - Two years.

Columbia University - B.A. political science with a specialization in international relations.

Harvard - Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude

& Biden: University of Delaware - B.A. in history and B.A. in political science.

Syracuse University College of Law - Juris Doctor (J.D.)

vs.

McCain: United States Naval Academy - Class rank 894 of 899

crashed 5 airplanes

& Palin: Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in journalism

Remember, 8 years ago we elected another underachiever (Bush was a C&D student) and look where the country is now.

Now, which team are you going to hire ?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I voted Republican in 2004 and Democratic in 2006. I believe my mother, sisters, aunts, daughter, etc... should be in control of their own wombs (to me, the issue is a no-brainer personal choice). This year I will vote for McCain. In 2005 McCain was one of three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that would have avoided the current Financial crisis. However, S.190, the bill that would have placed regulations on 'Mae and 'Mac and Banks was blocked by the Democratic congress ("too partisan"). I enjoy reading all your posts and prefer to stay out your arguments.

Everyone have a good day.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

jwills79,

I've been asking this question since Bush made it into his second term. Where along the way did American's decide that absolutely mediocre from our national leadership is the best we should shoot for?

I don't want a "hockey mom" running the country. I don't want a "good ol' boy" running the country. I don't want an "average Joe just like you or me" running the country. You and I can be stupid at times. I want intelligent, qualified, and yes, elite individuals to do the job.

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