Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Mum's Not the Word, Despite McCain Claim

By Howard Kurtz
The Ad: In crisis, experience matters. McCain and his congressional allies led. Tough rules on Wall Street. Stop CEO rip-offs. Protect your savings and pensions.
Obama and his liberal allies? Mum on the market crisis. Because no one knows what to do. More taxes. No leadership. A risk your family can't afford.

Analysis: This John McCain ad is accurate in one key respect: He has offered a plan to deal with the Wall Street crisis, and Barack Obama has not.

But it is simply not accurate to say that the Illinois senator has remained "mum" on the market meltdown, as a Washington Times headline put it. Obama has repeatedly spoken out about the crisis, criticized both banking executives and the Bush administration for allowing it to develop, and offered principles designed to prevent any rescue plan from amounting to a "blank check" for the Treasury.

The spot also ignores criticism about McCain's shifting rhetoric, from declaring that "the fundamentals of our economy are sound" to warnings about the severity of the crisis to a vow to fire the Securities and Exchange Commission chairman, which the president lacks the power to do. And it omits the Arizona senator's history as a self-described deregulator, who has generally supported a loosening of the rules on the banking system.

McCain repeats a misleading description -- that Obama stands for "more taxes" -- while ignoring the fact that Obama would cut taxes for 95 percent of Americans and raise levies only on those earning more than $250,000.

McCain's advertising is increasingly painting Obama as risky, the usual charge that an incumbent makes against a challenger. This spot bets on the notion that voters will see a Capitol Hill veteran as better prepared than a freshman senator to deal with a financial crisis, even if he is a longtime supporter of the administration that allowed the problems to spiral out of control.

By Web Politics Editor  |  September 23, 2008; 11:16 AM ET
Categories:  Ad Watch , John McCain  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Biden Walks Back Comment on 'Terrible' Obama Ad
Next: Obama Ad Mocks McCain Bermuda Trip -- and Donors

Comments

demoWOOOOSIES

you are so utterly out of touch and devoid of character, insight or logic

none of you had the guts to even try and take on my DIRECT CHALLENGE to your emperorOBAMiden's lies - NONE

the reason; because obamiden is lying - he's the biggest liar in the history of politics

since you cannot defend his lies with facts because they are ------ lies - lies told to the American people to con them into their vote, then you have only one strategy when someone points out the lies:

attack

when you attack jennifer as not being intelligent, you should spell her name correctly or else you look ................. stupid (jennifer, could run circles around all of you demoCRITES intellectually even on a bad day)

when you compare me to jennifer, you complement me (you do not really pay her a complement though because she is SO much nicer than me - I admire her patience with your demoCRITICAL ignorance)

anyway

THE CHALLENGE REMAINS - DO NONE OF YOU OBAMIDEN WORSHIPPERS HAVE ANY GUTS AT ALL ??

I CALL YOUR DEITY A BOLD-FACED LIAR AND DARE YOU TO PROVE ME WRONG - YOU DO NOT EVEN TRY - YOU JUST ATTACK AN AMERICAN HERO AND A WONDERFUL LADY BECAUSE THE TRUTH IS THAT YOUR BELOVED OBAMIDEN IS A LIAR

COME ON PROVE ME WRONG - IF YOU CAN

SO FAR, YOU'VE ONLY PROVEN ME RIGHT WITH MY PREDICTION THAT YOU'LL WIMP OUT AND SAY NOTHING TO ATTEMPT TO DISPROVE THESE STATEMENTS SHOWING WHAT A LIAR YOU WANT IN OFFICE - AND INSTEAD RESORT TO MORE ATTACKING OF MCCAIN & PALIN

I BET YOU'LL CONTINUE TO DO SO

HERE ARE THE SEVEN LIES AGAIN - I CHALLENGE YOU TO FACTUALLY DISPUTE EVEN ONE

LIES OF OBAMA;

LIE NUMBER ONE - BREAKING PLEDGE TO FINANCE CAMPAIGN ETHICALLY

LIE NUMBER TWO - TYING MCCAIN TO BUSH AFTER DEMOCRATS HAVE APPLAUDED MCCAIN FOR YEARS AS BEING DIFFERENT THAN BUSH

LIE NUMBER THREE - TAX CUTS FOR 95% OF AMERICA - OVER 30 PERCENT OF AMERICANS ARE NOT PAYING FEDERAL INCOME TAX, SO THIS IS A MATHEMATICAL IMPOSSIBILITY

LIE NUMBER FOUR - SARAH IS A FRAUD - THE FACT THAT SARAH HAS MADE SOME REFORMS IN ALASKA IS INDISPUTABLE


LIE NUMBER FIVE - I WILL BRING NON-PARTISANSHIP BACK TO WASHINGTON (BY PICKING THE MOST PARTISAN SENATOR AS YOUR RUNNING MATE AND BY TAKING ON YOUR OWN PARTY ZERO TIMES ???)

LIE NUMBER SIX - THE SEX ED IN KINDERGARTEN BILL WAS ALL ABOUT PREDATOR PROTECTION AND NOTHING ELSE - SIMPLY NOT TRUE - GO READ IT YOURSELF

LIE NUMBER SEVEN - I RESPECT THE DIGNITY OF HUMAN LIFE - RRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT - YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT BABIES BORN ALIVE DIE IF THEIR MOM WANTED IT THAT WAY - DISGUSTING


I COULD GO ON - BUT LIE NUMBER ONE (or 7) WAS BY ITSELF ENOUGH TO TURN THIS INDEPENDENT into an unapologetic REPUBLICAN


how can you tell when obama is lying ??


answer;

his lips are moving

MCCAIN PALIN 2008

Posted by: tojoley | September 24, 2008 9:27 AM | Report abuse

looks like this country can stick capitalism where the sun doesnt shine, it takes socialism to save this economy, I always thought that socialism was a dirty word

Posted by: j | September 23, 2008 8:59 PM | Report abuse

Then, Biden spoke of President Franklin Roosevelt's having gone on television after the stock market crash of 1929. But Roosevelt was not president in 1929, and television was not present

Who cares, I thought this was a race for the White House not a race for the house down the street.

It means nothing to me to see this in print. I dont need a history lesson what difference does it make that Biden never took a history leason. Just give it up the race is lost to the dweebs of the earth

Obama for Pres. piece out

Posted by: Really?? | September 23, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE

Posted by: George | September 23, 2008 8:39 PM | Report abuse

Please stop posting such long articles from 1980's.. We get it you are on their side now try using your mind and think think .

Posted by: Mcwhat | September 23, 2008 8:38 PM | Report abuse

McCain: The Most Reprehensible of the Keating Five

The story of "the Keating Five" has become a scandal rivaling Teapot Dome and Watergate

By Tom Fitzpatrick
Published on November 29, 1989

You're John McCain, a fallen hero who wanted to become president so desperately that you sold yourself to Charlie Keating, the wealthy con man who bears such an incredible resemblance to The Joker. Obviously, Keating thought you could make it to the White House, too.

He poured $112,000 into your political campaigns. He became your friend. He threw fund raisers in your honor. He even made a sweet shopping-center investment deal for your wife, Cindy. Your father-in-law, Jim Hensley, was cut in on the deal, too.

Nothing was too good for you. Why not? Keating saw you as a prime investment that would pay off in the future.

So he flew you and your family around the country in his private jets. Time after time, he put you up for serene, private vacations at his vast, palatial spa in the Bahamas. All of this was so grand. You were protected from what Thomas Hardy refers to as "the madding crowd." It was almost as though you were already staying at a presidential retreat.

Like the old song, that now seems "Long ago and far away."

Since Keating's collapse, you find yourself doing obscene things to save yourself from the Senate Ethics Committee's investigation. As a matter of course, you engage in backbiting behavior that will turn you into an outcast in the Senate if you do survive.

They say that if you put five lobsters into a pot and give them a chance to escape, none will be able to do so before you light the fire. Each time a lobster tries to climb over the top, his fellow lobsters will pull him back down. It is the way of lobsters and threatened United States senators.

And, of course, that's the way it is with the Keating Five. You are all battling to save your own hides. So you, McCain, leak to reporters about who did Keating's bidding in pressuring federal regulators to change the rules for Lincoln Savings and Loan.

When the reporters fail to print your tips quickly enough--as in the case of your tip on Michigan Senator Donald Riegle--you call them back and remind them how important it is to get that information in the newspapers.

The story of "the Keating Five" has become a scandal rivaling Teapot Dome and Watergate. The outcome will be decided, not in a courtroom, but probably on national television.

Those who survive will be the sociopaths who can tell a lie with the most sincere, straight face. You are especially adept at this.

Last Friday night, on The John McLaughlin Show, which features well-known Washington journalists, the subject of the Keating Five was discussed. Panelist Jack Germond suggested that three of the Keating Five were probably already through in politics.

So you spend your days desperately trying to make sure you will be one of the survivors. You keep volunteering to go on radio and television stations to protest your innocence. Last week you made ABC's Nightline.

Not long before that you somehow managed to get James Kilpatrick, the national columnist, to write a favorable paragraph about you. Last Sunday morning, you made it to national television again; this time on ABC's This Week With David Brinkley. You smiled at the panel with your usual studied insouciance. Sitting next to you was Senator John Glenn of Ohio.

Brinkley, Sam Donaldson, and George Will were the interrogators.
It was a sobering scene. There you sat with Glenn, both sweating before the cameras, waiting to answer questions: two badly tarnished American icons.

No one forgets that Glenn was the first American astronaut to orbit the Earth. You won't let anyone forget that you were a prisoner of war. But you have played that tune too long. By now your constant reminders about your war record make you seem like a modern version of Arthur Miller's tragic failure Willy Loman.

Clearly, both you and Glenn sold your fame for Charles Keating's money.

It was a Faustian bargain. It was also a bad joke on the rest of us and a disaster for many old people who lost their life's savings to Keating.

The money was never really Keating's to give. But he never would have got his hands on it if you and the rest of the Keating Five didn't halt the government takeover for two long years while Keating's people continued their looting.

And now, the tab for the Savings and Loan heist must be paid from taxpayer pockets.

On Sunday, Senators Dennis DeConcini, Alan Cranston, and Riegle refused offers to appear on the Brinkley show. What must we make of that?

You, the closest of them to Keating and the deepest in his debt, have chosen the path of the hard sell. You may even make it out of the pot, but to many, your protestations of innocence taste like gall.

You are determined to bluff your way. You will stick to your story that you were acting to help a constituent and intended to do nothing improper. The very fact you attended the meeting makes you guilty, just as every man who entered the Brinks vault went to prison.

Posted by: McNEVER | September 23, 2008 8:37 PM | Report abuse

Someone is handing out the coolaide on this site. I can not even cry cause if you guys make it to the polls to vote I would be very surprised. You all sound like talk.

Just Think

Posted by: Cool | September 23, 2008 8:36 PM | Report abuse

lost,

ok ok turn it down. I got no reason to argue with you except you sound like you are on crack (I am sh%^&ing you) Just tell it like it is sister.

If you want the man then hes you man for 2008 vote for the only guy thats not McCain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: underdog | September 23, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

All I said was I like the guy. That is first for me. And really it takes no brains to figure out we only have one choice to vote and one chance to get it right. I know what I am doing. Obama is my man he is right for my people and then he is right for America and in that order.

Posted by: Lost | September 23, 2008 8:31 PM | Report abuse

Presidential rivals Barack Obama and John McCain warily addressed the nation's financial crisis and a proposed $700 billion response Tuesday, demanding changes in the Bush administration's plan without specifying exactly what would trigger their outright opposition.

The financial meltdown is bedeviling both candidates, who know the Nov. 4 election could turn on voters' sense of who can best keep the country from a deep recession. They have acted cautiously so far, avoiding the intense debate in Congress and offering similar calls for greater oversight and taxpayer protections, which rank among the less controversial criticisms of the plan.

Neither campaign has changed its tax or spending proposals even though the country suddenly faces the prospect of much higher deficits, an overhaul of key financial institutions and the essential nationalization of the country's largest insurance company. Whether they deal with it now or not, economists and analysts say, the next president may find it extremely difficult to keep all his promises because of the worsening fiscal environment.

As Congress nears a showdown over the proposed $700 billion bailout, Sens. Obama and McCain almost surely will have to take a stand. Obama said he would return to Washington to vote if the outcome is likely to be close.

Both men know that many voters dislike the proposal, but that lawmakers who oppose it risk blame if congressional inaction leads to even deeper economic calamities.

Within a few hours of each other, the two nominees faced cameras and reporters Tuesday to amplify their reactions to the financial mess, reading from texts before taking several questions. Given their stark differences on many issues, their proposed changes to the Bush plan were remarkably similar.

Both called for greater oversight; for ensuring that taxpayers benefit if repackaged loans are sold at a profit or the bailed-out companies recover; and for limiting the pay of executives at firms covered by the bailout.

McCain, the Republican, called for putting the proposals online for the public to see. Obama, the Democrat, called for helping homeowners in danger of foreclosure. He also renewed his call for a stimulus package of tax cuts, which McCain has opposed.

Both men sidestepped questions on which of their demands were nonnegotiable, or "deal breakers."

Neither McCain nor Obama has modified his tax and spending proposals despite a dramatically changed financial landscape.

Obama said his proposed middle-class tax cuts remain "absolutely necessary." He repeated his assertion that he has found ways to pay for his proposed boosts to subsidies for health care, education, retirement savings, renewable energy and other priorities, and he said they would not be affected by the bailout.

On Monday he had suggested he might delay implementing some lower-priority spending plans. The furthest he went Tuesday was: "It would be irresponsible to say I am not going to take into account what things look like" if he assumes office in January.

McCain says he still plans to extend President Bush's tax cuts for high-income people, even though the proposed bailout would add hundreds of billions of dollars to the federal deficit. He also favors increased federal spending for nuclear power and to combat greenhouse gases.

McCain's agenda is built "around policies to create jobs in America and get the economy going," said his top financial adviser, Doug Holtz-Eakin. "The recent budget news has made clear that the challenge is greater, and the importance magnified. But it does not undermine the soundness of the overall strategy."

Keeping these promises won't be easy for whoever wins, say several economists familiar with Congress and the White House.

Although the financial landscape of early 2009 cannot be fully known, it's highly likely that it will "crowd out tax changes and other changes" that Obama and McCain are promising, said Bill Gale, chief economist at the Brookings Institution. Assuming Congress approves a bailout of about $700 billion, he said, there will be "less money around to play with," and "only a limited amount of attention they can pay" to other priorities, including health care, Social Security, foreign policy and fighting terrorism.

Vincent Reinhart, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and former director of monetary policy at the Federal Reserve, agreed.

"Their ambitions are going to have to be tempered by the incomplete work" of cleaning up the mess on Wall Street, Reinhart said. There will be "less scope for tax cuts and spending increases," he said.

On the Net:
McCain: http://www.johnmccain.com
Obama: http://www.barackobama.com

Posted by: Rise up | September 23, 2008 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Lost,

do us a favor and vote for McCain. We don't want you lowering our collective IQ level. If you vote for Obama just because he is (in your words) "your people" then I think you missed the whole point. The real reason to count on Obama is not his race (even though I am Black). It is because he is from the African culture in America and he will bring a place of pride. He will return the White house to a place of pride. The fact is is that he is smart and he came from my hometown but that is not why I vote for him it is because he changes America.

Posted by: underdog | September 23, 2008 8:27 PM | Report abuse

What are the selling points for Obama? I want to seriously read up on this guy some more but so far he sounds great to me. I know he has little to no experience but if I were to choose the other candidate I would be turning my back on my own. I mean what is wrong with just voting for my people. Someone has to. So if I can find no real dirt on Obama then I guess the choice is made

Obama is my guy

Posted by: Lost | September 23, 2008 8:23 PM | Report abuse

I think it is a cool idea to think about not having a governement. Just look around and think how things could be better.

Ok, now that we hit that lets get back to talking about this stupid commercial. $%^&*$^ just forget it it is no use we are all doomed . Back to reality. Obama is the only choice I have but he is better than no choice right?

Posted by: omar | September 23, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Lame,

I have to go with you. We don't have much choice do we? Although I think both candidates believe they are d oing something for their country they are too bogged down in POLITICS. I want to see a candidate like Mr Smith. I want to see a candidate who will read the telphone book to the congress until he is horse(SP?).

Of course good luck with that idea. Maybe we need to start thinking about a third party. Start working on this cause time is running out.

Posted by: Joe F. | September 23, 2008 8:18 PM | Report abuse

Lame ar you really expecting someone to agree with you??

We need the government it serves us when we are down. OKAY it does not serve us when we are down which is always. I think I will move to Europe although I need to learn a new language. I can do this and move there and live without a President

Posted by: notlame | September 23, 2008 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Wow!!! I see the promise of having no government. What a great idea except what would we do without taxes and programs. What would we do without money to pay the police and fire. Who would keep society safe and who would do all the other things that make our lives so much better?

Oh, I get it a real solution to our problems is always the one we ignore. maybe we should look to the ideas we missed when we were thinking of ourselves and seek the solution for everyone!

I agree best post of the day goes to :

What is with this website. Is everyone nuts? I never read so much junk in all my life. I think this blog needs to be shot and put out of its misery and quick.

If everyone on this site wants to save some time just read my posting and here it is.

Pure and simple Vote for the candidate that supports your views. Do you want more of the same old or are you ready to jump into the unknown unproven..

Well there you have it. You have no choice this bad or that bad. We would be better off with a King.

Posted by: Anarchy | September 23, 2008 8:13 PM | Report abuse

Lame,

Best post of the day.....even if you did post THREE TIMES!!!!

Originally, God ruled and then Man was not satisfied. Then God made a King and he served God for a while.....Then the Kings pronounced themselves as "King by the will of God..." Then , of course the people were not happy and made the King a lame Kind and made their own darn government. Then the people were unhappy with this and they asked themselves what the heck do we do now???? So they decided they needed no government at all and they prayed for "no government at all..."

Posted by: Easytosee | September 23, 2008 8:09 PM | Report abuse

What is with this website. Is everyone nuts? I never read so much junk in all my life. I think this blog needs to be shot and put out of its misery and quick.

If everyone on this site wants to save some time just read my posting and here it is.

Pure and simple Vote for the candidate that supports your views. Do you want more of the same old or are you ready to jump into the unknown unproven..

Well there you have it. You have no choice this bad or that bad. We would be better off with a King.

Posted by: Lame | September 23, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

What is with this website. Is everyone nuts? I never read so much junk in all my life. I think this blog needs to be shot and put out of its misery and quick.

If everyone on this site wants to save some time just read my posting and here it is.

Pure and simple Vote for the candidate that supports your views. Do you want more of the same old or are you ready to jump into the unknown unproven..

Well there you have it. You have no choice this bad or that bad. We would be better off with a King.

Posted by: Lame | September 23, 2008 8:05 PM | Report abuse

What is with this website. Is everyone nuts? I never read so much junk in all my life. I think this blog needs to be shot and put out of its misery and quick.

If everyone on this site wants to save some time just read my posting and here it is.

Pure and simple Vote for the candidate that supports your views. Do you want more of the same old or are you ready to jump into the unknown unproven..

Well there you have it. You have no choice this bad or that bad. We would be better off with a King.

Posted by: Lame | September 23, 2008 8:04 PM | Report abuse

remy

Did you say that you believed the people would put up with that though?

Obama makes me think he can finish the job in Iraq. I want the troops to come home. Just remember when we last saw a really great President. Obama for President. I want to see you guys at the polls don't forget to vote and the Republicans can take that to the bank there is no reason to worry we are strong in numbers this is the right way to be.

Freedom in America Freedom to be and American Now, I am finally proud to be in the USA. We will be more at piece with the world. Europe will again be a real pleased to great us. No more idiots for McCain

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 7:59 PM | Report abuse

I read that Biden said the same thing. I was hoping I would have something to believe in. I guess I will have to vote for Obama cause I cant vote independant not for a million dollars . There are a couple of points to be made here. I am not connecting that to the economy. I mean what you said about the bailout makes me think we ARE dead in the water.
what was this about--it doesn't matter

Posted by: Funnybit | September 23, 2008 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Remy,

I thought you were reading that but you got a problem with that too?????

I told you to put that in your letter to the President and ask him what you wanted to do. Just call me when you get off the livingroom computer you nerd.

I want the best and I hate the rest !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I want the best and the other cant past a simple test

OBAMA
Obama
OBAMAAAAA

Obomb

Cure the problem ghive us the Obama!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Love that guy and all he stands for Obama for the futre

Posted by: To Remy | September 23, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Forget,

This is a question for you. Are you ready? What is the reason for that then? If you were going to make a point of that then put it together so we know you are talking about the same thing. I neve want to see you post something like that a gain (just kidding bro I got your back). Anyhow I think Powell was like that too! So, it is not just the Republicans it is the Democrats who have that . Points to the Democrats. OBAMA ALL THE WAY

Posted by: Yolinda Heights | September 23, 2008 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Why waste your time? They have nothing to offer for our trouble. their is no arguement that suffises. We should just meen up and beet that guuy with a stick. At least BO has a good eductation. I know I mispell but that is why I am not running the country or am I. You would never know looking at the rest of the artwork here. Score me some Obama for President!! 08

Posted by: Remy | September 23, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

Dont forget this ad came out after the first Obama ad saying McCain was anti Mexican American. It really doesn't matter that Mccain adopted a Mexican Girl or if he might know some Spanish. I don't know why you put that quote up.

and whatis that about anywhays ?

Posted by: Forget | September 23, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

There are a couple of points to be made here. First, while I agree that there should be some emphasis on National Security, people aren't yet connecting that to the economy. The latest numbers out have just shown that for the first time in memory (and perhaps ever, I'm not sure, I'm not an economist) we've had economic expansion without increases in median wages for employees. This is not a minor issue. It means people can't afford to live the same lifestyle that they are accustomed to living. If we want to worry about national security perhaps we should worry about the fact we are faced with either a) the government bailing out the economy or b) everyone in the country going into massive amounts of debt to keep up their current standard of living or c) many people moving out of the middle class into the lower class, and the lower class slipping into poverty. None of these are good for the dollar, and thus neither of them are good for foreign investments in our heavy debt load. Russia is already, supposedly, threatening to sell off it's American debt in response to our pressuring them on Georgia. If we continue to push people with the last 'big stick' that we have (since we've definitely decided to give up walking softly) we're going to face more and more economic threats like the ones Russia are providing. This is after GW Bush has been cuddling up to the Russian to try to get them to buy more of debt. If we can no longer obtain cash from foreign countries by having them buy our debt how are we supposed to continue to fund our war on terror? How is the government to bail out it's citizens during this recession? Raise taxes? When was the last time you heard a republican push for that? If you want national security think not just about military strength - remember, the pen continues to prove mightier than the sword. With a global economy wars will be decided by pursestrings not hand-grenade pins. This election, no matter how hard the Republicans want it to be, is not about our military, it's about our economy (stupid).

Posted by: StinKfd | September 23, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

While the focus has been on Sarah Palin since she was announced as John McCain's running mate, Barack Obama's number two has had quite a run. Joe Biden told CBS he thought an Obama campaign ad mocking John McCain as a computer illiterate was "terrible." Later, after actually seeing the ad, Biden said it was OK.

Then, Biden spoke of President Franklin Roosevelt's having gone on television after the stock market crash of 1929. But Roosevelt was not president in 1929, and television was not present.

Biden also said neither he nor Obama supports clean coal technology in America. But Obama does support clean coal. Obama also said of Biden's instant criticism of the government's big loan to insurance to AIG, "I think Joe should have waited ..."

Earlier, Biden said Hillary Clinton may have been a better vice presidential pick than he and said that paying more taxes is the patriotic duty of the rich. And, he encouraged wheelchair-bound Missouri State Senator Chuck Graham to stand up at a campaign rally.

Posted by: funnybit | September 23, 2008 7:36 PM | Report abuse

americans voted for bush 2 times; they deserve this past 8 years. same goes for mccain, if they're crazy enough to vote the same philosophy, and not recognize reality, let them learn the hard way.

part of me hopes McCain gets elected, just to fast forward to the bottom, so the US can rebuild more quickly.

He is very gifted at speaking flowery generalities but absolutely nothing of substance.
Review the Rick Warren interview. It exposes why Obama refuses townhall debates with McCain. That tells us how well Obama would do as a leader--he'd be a total dud.
Make no mistake. He does nothing for the "least of these"--especially the unborn, or even those babies who survive abortion attempts. He's is anti-civil-rights except for the rights of leftist elitists. He hasn't once stood up against them because he is one of them.

Also This is after GW Bush has been cuddling up to the Russian to try to get them to buy more of debt. If we can no longer obtain cash from foreign countries by having them buy our debt how are we supposed to continue to fund our war on terror? How is the government to bail out it's citizens during this recession? Raise taxes? When was the last time you heard a republican push for that? If you want national security think not just about military strength - remember, the pen continues to prove mightier than the sword. With a global economy wars will be decided by pursestrings not hand-grenade pins. This election, no matter how hard the Republicans want it to be, is not about our military, it's about our economy (stupid).

Posted by: mainlyinitfor | September 23, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

The issue is: if Islamic Extremism and Nuclear non-proliferation are the two biggest threats to Western Civilization, and if the Russians have really good intel on that stuff, then we don't we form a real partnership with the Russians. That would basically eliminate the three biggest threats we face. Build the missile defense thing in Poland *with them*. Joint venture.

Is the goal national security- or is it to maximize arm sales by artificially prolonging the cold war, and in doing so, keeping tensions high in the gulf so that the price of oil remains high.

Bush and Putin are both shifty arms dealing oil men. I don't trust either. McCain is Bush on steroids. And he's got scores to settle. For all we know Russians could have interrogated him and tortured him. Part of his military records are still unreleased.

Obama will do fine. You don't become Pres of Law Review at Harvard unless you are pretty sharp.

Posted by: Bong | September 23, 2008 7:33 PM | Report abuse

he never said that and you know it. The Republicans can't keep going along that road with their thumb.

Quite putting words n my mouth

here is the quiery

url:listing.microsoft.net/&dfghsjkk.2378

Posted by: Remy | September 23, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

In a separate interview earlier in the day, Mr. Obama said that despite the huge new government obligation, he would press ahead with his plans to overhaul the health care system to insure more people, make college tuition more affordable, give a tax cut to the middle class and raise taxes on those making over $250,000 a year.

“The problem that we have,” Mr. Obama said, “in part has to do with wages and incomes that have been flat. And so homeowners and ordinary families out there have been working very hard, but it’s tough for them to pay the bills and stay afloat with rising gas prices and health care.

“So if we don’t address our long-term competitiveness, if we don’t address some of the inequities in the tax code, if we’re not addressing some of the things that weakened the family budget, then we’re not, over the long term, going to solve these larger problems in the financial markets.”

Mr. McCain has made speeches and broadcast television commercials recently that highlight Mr. Obama’s ties to former leaders of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, the mortgage giants at the center of the financial crisis.

Mr. McCain has struck a notably populist tone in addressing the crisis, and in the interview, he set a specific limit on compensation for executives at firms that receive federal assistance. “But the major point,” he said, “is that no C.E.O. of any corporation or business that is bailed out by us, that is rescued by American tax dollars, should receive any more than the highest paid person in the federal government.”

Mr. Obama continued to assail the philosophy of excessive deregulation that he said was the root cause of the crisis and made clear that the aftermath should include a new regulatory approach.

The deepening financial crisis and the shifting government response to it have challenged both presidential candidates for more than a week, as they struggled to react to a situation that seemed to change each day. In the interviews, they gave some of their most detailed views of the crisis to date.

Posted by: who said that | September 23, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

I was floored when I read this

Mr. McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, and Mr. Obama, his Democratic rival, agreed in separate interviews that steps should be taken to ensure taxpayer dollars are not used to enrich the executives of troubled financial firms bailed out by the government. They echoed each other in assessing the threat from the financial crisis as severe enough to warrant government intervention.

But Mr. McCain said in an interview here with CNBC and The New York Times that he would press on with his plan to extend the Bush tax cuts and to cut others. Contrary to the warnings of fiscal analysts, he said he believed he could do so and balance the federal budget, which was falling deeper into deficit even before the financial crisis, by the end of his first term.

“I believe we can still balance the budget,” he said. “I think that it is restraint of spending, and I think it’s growth of government and the economy, and the recovery of our economy. And anything you do that would take more money from the American people who are hurting more now, I think, would be a serious mistake.”

Kinda makes you think?

Posted by: Marty | September 23, 2008 7:29 PM | Report abuse

Alternative energy developments are good to talk about and to pursue. but realistically, they can achieve to replace the conventional power generation by just a few percent. The current experience in wind farms in the state of Texas, solar power developments in Germany and the bio-fuel production in the Midwest seem to indicate that. Nuclear plants can generate more power, but they are costly and time consuming to build and have to be accident free. Overall, all these alternative developments are sophisticated and expensive. If we believe that our nation is broke, we better hold on something which is realistic and reliable, i.e. drilling oil from our own land , building nuclear power plants as many as possible and making use of most plentiful coal reserve and wood for heating, electricity and reviving our industry.

Posted by: XXX | September 23, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

WHat is this about???

Do you think any oil drilled offshore belongs to us ?? We don't have a nationalized oil market. It belongs to whoever drills it which is the oil companies who put it on the open market. Why do you think they'll sell oil to the United States for $40 a barrel when they can get three times that much?

Obama does in fact have a very liberal voting record. He has voted pro choice right down the line including partial birth and not giving medical aid to aborted babies born live. He does in fact have some history with Rezko. Google any of it and you'll realize it's not McCain has consistently argued that conditions on the ground will dictate withdrawal, and that we won't leave until we have victory. Whether that's 16 months or 100 years, McCain is saying it doesn't matter. We don't leave until we win.

We finish what we started.

Obama has argued that we should leave REGARDLESS of conditions. But now Obama has said that conditions on the ground should dicate.

Obama shifted positions; McCain has not.

McCain has consistently argued that conditions on the ground will dictate withdrawal, and that we won't leave until we have victory. Whether that's 16 months or 100 years, McCain is saying it doesn't matter. We don't leave until we win.

We finish what we started.

Obama has argued that we should leave REGARDLESS of conditions. But now Obama has said that conditions on the ground should dicate.

Obama shifted positions; McCain has not.

McCain has consistently argued that conditions on the ground will dictate withdrawal, and that we won't leave until we have victory. Whether that's 16 months or 100 years, McCain is saying it doesn't matter. We don't leave until we win.

We finish what we started.

Obama has argued that we should leave REGARDLESS of conditions. But now Obama has said that conditions on the ground should dicate.

Obama shifted positions; McCain has not.

Posted by: wanting to know | September 23, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Do you think any oil drilled offshore belongs to us ?? We don't have a nationalized oil market. It belongs to whoever drills it which is the oil companies who put it on the open market. Why do you think they'll sell oil to the United States for $40 a barrel when they can get three times that much?

Obama does in fact have a very liberal voting record. He has voted pro choice right down the line including partial birth and not giving medical aid to aborted babies born live. He does in fact have some history with Rezko. Google any of it and you'll realize it's not McCain has consistently argued that conditions on the ground will dictate withdrawal, and that we won't leave until we have victory. Whether that's 16 months or 100 years, McCain is saying it doesn't matter. We don't leave until we win.

We finish what we started.

Obama has argued that we should leave REGARDLESS of conditions. But now Obama has said that conditions on the ground should dicate.

Obama shifted positions; McCain has not.

McCain has consistently argued that conditions on the ground will dictate withdrawal, and that we won't leave until we have victory. Whether that's 16 months or 100 years, McCain is saying it doesn't matter. We don't leave until we win.

We finish what we started.

Obama has argued that we should leave REGARDLESS of conditions. But now Obama has said that conditions on the ground should dicate.

Obama shifted positions; McCain has not.

McCain has consistently argued that conditions on the ground will dictate withdrawal, and that we won't leave until we have victory. Whether that's 16 months or 100 years, McCain is saying it doesn't matter. We don't leave until we win.

We finish what we started.

Obama has argued that we should leave REGARDLESS of conditions. But now Obama has said that conditions on the ground should dicate.

Obama shifted positions; McCain has not.

Posted by: mayo is white | September 23, 2008 7:25 PM | Report abuse

My name is mikey duh....
We shall see a continued shift by the forked tongue candidate B. Husein Obama as he wiggles his way to support the offshore drilling initiative. The people of America demand it, and they have seen he and Pelosi fumble and babble in trying to explain their mistake. The little green people shall hold them hostage over their previous commitments, and when they try to speak with the forked tongue, both the voters will be upset and the little green people will not support the Chosen One.

And so it was written...

Posted by: Mike | September 23, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

Haven't the American people realized that their enemy lies within their country? It's your bloody foreign policy that is your enemy.

For every action, there is a reaction...c'mon folks....learn physics...Newton's Law of Motion.

The truth is the ruling cabal in America do not belong to any political party. They just use the party apparatus and infrastructures to get inside government and wreak havoc.

The only opportunity Americans have left to reclaim their government lies with Obama because he clearly has a vision that is truly what America should be. This is why you need to change Washington inside out.

It does not take a genius to figure all these out but the problem is the MSM in America have come to control the way people think in America. That is too bad because when you have an ill-informed mass, you are going to have a problem and it will gradually rot from within.

Wake up America.

Posted by: Fais OUt Temp | September 23, 2008 7:21 PM | Report abuse

Big corporate greed knows no limits or ethics. Conservatives barred regulations to big corporations for years in the name of free market, with their favorite motto THE MARKET WILL SELF ADJUST or REGULATIONS WILL ONLY HURT THE MARKET. Now that their free market is heading for a free fall from the insatiable greed, they want a socialist solution so they can keep lining their own pockets with tax payers’ money. Neat tricks for stupid people who keep voting for conservatives, thinking we are not being screwed enough and their experience can really SAVE us.

Posted by: Maddi | September 23, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Obama is and has sparked the largest coming out of racists this country has seen since the 1960's...! That is because a vast majority of black Americans have voiced the fact that they are voting for Barak Hussein Obama just because he is black! Eventhough, most black Americans are Christian and have much more conservative values than B.O. does! Gotta love that the guys initials are B.O. because he really does STINK!

Posted by: Forget him, | September 23, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Lots of us out here are hurting while we struggle to tighten our belts more and avoid slipping out of the middle class all together. Obama has got some appealing choices for his running mate and also for his Cabinet. He has sound advisers too right at hand for a whole range of problems long overdue for treatment.

Despite his state's budgetary shortfall, Governor Kaine has done a great job following Mark Warner's achievements as chief economic officer for VA. If he is the one for the VP slot we know that practical steps will be taken quickly to ease the nation's economic woes, including our energy crisis, and to reform our healthcare system, including more support of the Veterans Administration for access by us vets.

John McCain wants to avoid the hard issues.

Posted by: mike | September 23, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

Jerry, this is for you

No, McCain is not the one pushing offshore drilling. THe American people are the ones supporting this idea. It has been pushed as the solution to our IMEEDIATE needs by experts, so to speak and people want more oil. This is said to be the solution to the oil prices short term and it is said this will be an improvement from drilling in other less secure areas. It is said this will keep monies in America. If what was said earlier is true about 2 million barrels a day then this is 100 trillion $$$ that will stay here instead of going off (bye bye) overseas.

Posted by: Don't drill DO | September 23, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

Aides to Mr. McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, said it was too soon to say whether he would oppose the plan being hashed out by the Bush administration and Congress, noting that the final details had yet to be presented. But Mr. McCain repeated his calls to add several provisions that the administration has opposed, including a guarantee that taxpayer money would not be used to enrich the executives of failing companies.

“We won’t solve a problem caused by poor oversight with a plan that has no oversight,” Mr. McCain said here.

Posted by: I knew it was wrong! | September 23, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

We have another four polls out by American Research Group and their estimate of the race has gone to McCain 245, Obama 232.


Read this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin threw herself into a crash course in diplomacy at the United Nations today, beginning her first of two days of meetings with foreign leaders.

The meetings with Palin, who had never met a foreign head of state before and who traveled outside of North America for the first time last year, were designed to bolster her foreign policy credentials and introduce her to close US allies with whom she would work if she became vice president.

But the carefully orchestrated visits also highlighted the degree to which John McCain's presidential campaign will go to shield the first-term Alaska governor from the press. Until CNN threatened to withdraw its pool camera crew, Palin's aides initially banned reporters, who are traditionally allowed to briefly view private diplomatic meetings that are being photographed, and are sometimes allowed to ask a question.

Palin -- who was escorted by Randy Scheunemann, John McCain's top foreign policy adviser, and Steve Biegun, a former National Security Council member -- met with Afghan president Hamid Karzai today for about a half hour. He said later at the Asia Society, "I found her quite a capable woman. She asked the right questions on Afghanistan. She was concerned and she said how can she help, so I'm very pleased with that meeting."

Reporters were allowed in for less than a minute, and heard the self-proclaimed "hockey mom" of five discussing Karzai's only child, who was born in January 2007.

"What is his name?" Palin asked, according to a pool report.

Karzai replied that the boy's name is Mirwais, which means, "The Light of the House."

"Oh, nice," Palin responded.

Walter Russell Mead, a historian with the Council on Foreign Relations, said the meetings were likely to be more like courtesy calls than serious talks, given the uncertainty about whether McCain will win the presidency, and how much influence she would have over foreign policy in his administration. "We're not going to be talking about deep negotiations here," he said.

Biegun told reporters that Palin realizes that she is not yet in the White House. "Rather than make specific policy prescriptions, she was largely listening, having an exchange of views and also very interested in forming a relationship with people she met with today."

After meeting with Karzai, during which aides said she discussed the need for more troops in Afghanistan, Palin traveled by motorcade to the Colombian mission to the UN, where she met with Colombian president Alvaro Uribe and talked about a proposed US-Colombian Free Trade Agreement, which McCain and Palin support but Obama opposes, according to Biegun.

Then Palin met with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger at his consulting firm's offices for what was perhaps her most substantive meeting of the day. Palin talked for more than an hour with Kissinger, who tutored President Bush during his first White House campaign and has kept in close contact with him through his presidency.

Kissinger and Palin two spoke about Russia, Iran, and China, Biegun said. In recent weeks, Kissinger has stated that he believes the United States should meet with Iranian leaders without preconditions -- the position which has been taken by Democratic nominee Barack Obama and which McCain has repeatedly ridiculed.

Kissinger walked Palin to the doorway of his building and watched her motorcade drive away, but declined to answer reporters' questions about what advice he had given.

Wednesday, Palin is set to meet with Iraqi president Jalal Talabani, Pakistani President Ali Asif Zadari, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, and Bono, the rock star who has been an activist on Africa issues. With McCain, she is also slated to meet the leaders of Georgia and Ukraine. Asked what Zardari knew about Palin, an aide said: "Everybody knows about her. . . She is a much-talked about woman these days."


Posted by: Tally | September 23, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Obama never said that.

I think the Republican view is rediculous. Just listen to how they talk about the econmy, this is lame as it gets You Repos suck

Posted by: yesman | September 23, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Adding some specificity to proposals he has already made, Mr. Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, called for a payback plan for taxpayers if the bailout succeeds; a bipartisan board to oversee the bailout; limits on any federal money going to compensate Wall Street executives; and aid to homeowners who are struggling to pay their mortgages.

If those four objectives are not met, Mr. Obama told reporters at a news conference here, he would recommend that federal and congressional negotiators “go back to the drawing board” to restructure the bailout plan. He side-stepped two questions about whether he would vote against bailout legislation that did not include his priorities, and he also did not commit to returning to Washington to go on record and cast a vote on a final package.

“If we get consensus and everybody is popping champagne, then I’ll probably go back to campaign with folks who are having a tough time in Ohio and Michigan,” Mr. Obama said. “If this ends up being a close vote or a vote where the outcome is at all in question, then obviously this is a top priority.”

In both his tone and his remarks – particularly his new criticism of President Bush’s “stubborn inflexibility” on the bailout – Mr. Obama was clearly seeking to come across as the leader of the opposition party at a time of national crisis.

Speaking at a hastily organized news conference, with two American flags behind him, Mr. Obama was in large part reiterating the concerns that Congressional Democrats have been expressing to reporters and at hearings in Washington. Yet it was clear that his goal was to encompass the various Democratic messages in one forceful voice that would be a counterweight to the Republican position coming from the Bush administration.

Without explicitly invoking the war in Iraq or his early opposition to it, Mr. Obama also suggested that President Bush and administration officials should not be granted blanket authority to bolster the financial markets without built-in oversight – by both Democrats and Republicans – of the proposed extraordinary outlay of taxpayer dollars.

“The president’s stubborn inflexibility is both unacceptable and disturbingly familiar,” Mr. Obama said, referring to Mr. Bush’s comments in recent days that Congress approve the administration’s bailout plan as presented. “This is not the time for my way or the highway.”

“It is wholly unreasonable to expect American taxpayer would or should hand this administration, or any administration, a $700 billion blank check with absolutely no oversight,” he added. “The American people have every right to certain protections and assurances from Washington.”

Mr. Obama proposed a new “financial stability fee” on the entire financial service industry to repay any losses that affect taxpayers, and insisted that, if the government makes a profit on the bailout, then “every single penny” be returned to taxpayers. Details about how such a stability fee would work were not immediately available, but Mr. Obama indicated that it did not need to be included in the bailout legislation – rather, it could be instituted in the coming months as the bailout is underway.

In a nod to the problems of the nation’s economy, Mr. Obama indicated that the timing for some of major spending plans will have to be reviewed in light of revenues that are – or are not – available. He did not specify which plans, but he said he was still committed to swiftly enacting tax cuts for middle-class Americans, and he said that some of his plans – such as an alternative energy – would pay for itself, and that approving universal health insurance and spending more on education would help the economy in the long run.

Mr. Obama also said he wanted to speak directly to leaders of struggling firms on Wall Street, expressing concern that some of them may not participate in a bailout program that required them to forgo millions of dollars in compensation.

“I cannot imagine a position more selfish and greedy at a time of national crisis, and I want to send them a message right now: Do not make that mistake,” Mr. Obama said, speaking at a resort in Tampa Bay where he is to begin three days of preparations for his debate on Friday night against the Republican nominee, Senator John McCain. “You are stewards, not only of your companies but your workers and your communities.”

“This plan cannot be a welfare program for Wall Street executives,” he added.

Mr. Obama called for “protections” to insure that taxpayer money is not used to “reward bad behavior” by compensating executives of these firms. He once more proposed, as Mr. McCain has, a board to oversee the Treasury Department management of the bailout, appointed by Democrats and Republicans. (He did not propose any names.) He suggested that the government money be treated as equities in the firms to benefit taxpayers, and that any financial return be shared with them. And he called for aiding homeowners, perhaps by empowering the government to buy troubled mortgages directly instead of the mortgage-backed security instruments that contributed to the crisis.

He also called once more for an economic stimulus package that included a job-creation program for rebuilding schools and bridges. He emphasized that the stimulus package should be considered and enacted separately from the bailout plan, which Mr. Obama wants approved quickly.

Posted by: H Read Me | September 23, 2008 7:12 PM | Report abuse

By Farah Stockman, Globe Staff

NEW YORK -- Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin threw herself into a crash course in diplomacy at the United Nations today, beginning her first of two days of meetings with foreign leaders.

The meetings with Palin, who had never met a foreign head of state before and who traveled outside of North America for the first time last year, were designed to bolster her foreign policy credentials and introduce her to close US allies with whom she would work if she became vice president.

But the carefully orchestrated visits also highlighted the degree to which John McCain's presidential campaign will go to shield the first-term Alaska governor from the press. Until CNN threatened to withdraw its pool camera crew, Palin's aides initially banned reporters, who are traditionally allowed to briefly view private diplomatic meetings that are being photographed, and are sometimes allowed to ask a question.

Palin -- who was escorted by Randy Scheunemann, John McCain's top foreign policy adviser, and Steve Biegun, a former National Security Council member -- met with Afghan president Hamid Karzai today for about a half hour. He said later at the Asia Society, "I found her quite a capable woman. She asked the right questions on Afghanistan. She was concerned and she said how can she help, so I'm very pleased with that meeting."

Reporters were allowed in for less than a minute, and heard the self-proclaimed "hockey mom" of five discussing Karzai's only child, who was born in January 2007.

"What is his name?" Palin asked, according to a pool report.

Karzai replied that the boy's name is Mirwais, which means, "The Light of the House."

"Oh, nice," Palin responded.

By Farah Stockman, Globe Staff

NEW YORK -- Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin threw herself into a crash course in diplomacy at the United Nations today, beginning her first of two days of meetings with foreign leaders.

The meetings with Palin, who had never met a foreign head of state before and who traveled outside of North America for the first time last year, were designed to bolster her foreign policy credentials and introduce her to close US allies with whom she would work if she became vice president.

But the carefully orchestrated visits also highlighted the degree to which John McCain's presidential campaign will go to shield the first-term Alaska governor from the press. Until CNN threatened to withdraw its pool camera crew, Palin's aides initially banned reporters, who are traditionally allowed to briefly view private diplomatic meetings that are being photographed, and are sometimes allowed to ask a question.

Palin -- who was escorted by Randy Scheunemann, John McCain's top foreign policy adviser, and Steve Biegun, a former National Security Council member -- met with Afghan president Hamid Karzai today for about a half hour. He said later at the Asia Society, "I found her quite a capable woman. She asked the right questions on Afghanistan. She was concerned and she said how can she help, so I'm very pleased with that meeting."

Reporters were allowed in for less than a minute, and heard the self-proclaimed "hockey mom" of five discussing Karzai's only child, who was born in January 2007.

"What is his name?" Palin asked, according to a pool report.

Karzai replied that the boy's name is Mirwais, which means, "The Light of the House."

"Oh, nice," Palin responded.

Posted by: Ryan | September 23, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

All that is important is dis aoman

Forty-six percent (46%) say that McCain made the right choice when selecting Palin to be his running mate. Forty-four percent (44%) say the same about Obama’s choice of Biden.

Eighty-three percent (83%) of voters believe Palin is politically conservative while 50% believe Biden is politically liberal.

Minnesota has gone for the Democratic presidential candidates in the last eight elections. John Kerry won the state 51% to 48% over President Bush in 2004. Independents (23%): McCain 45, Obama 48.

Posted by: Who cares | September 23, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

"Polls show that Sen. McCain and Sarah Palin are making inroads among white female voters who are less educated," said Katie Couric

Jenifer, I'm looking at you...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

This was not what you where saying before


Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon addresses members of the 63rd General Assembly the United Nations, 23 Sep 2008
U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed leaders and delegates from more than 190 member states.

He presented them with his assessment of the state of the world and presented the U.N. vision for the coming year. The news was not all good.

"We face a global financial crisis," said the U.N. chief. "A global energy crisis. A global food crisis. Trade talks have collapsed, yet again. We have seen new outbreaks of war and violence, new rhetoric of confrontation. Climate change ever more clearly threatens our planet.

He urged world leaders to honor their pledges to help alleviate these and other problems, and called for a united effort to try to solve them.

The United Nations is only a few kilometers from New York's financial district where markets fallen dramatically. Mr. Ban says the growing global financial crisis could undermine U.N. and international efforts to improve living conditions in the poorest countries.

The financial crisis was prominent in the remarks of many of the world's leaders.

Posted by: Mike | September 23, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

At least I got you characters down to 30 odd percent, which is better, but still not accurate.

How about limiting that to HOUSEHOLDS instead of trying to count every kid in the USA mowing lawns and forced to file under the Reagan/Bush rules as a taxpayer? Then you'd have something of a talking point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States

Not that any of this actually matters now. Neither McCain nor Obama are going to suggest increased tax breaks given this hyper expensive federal bailout, and if they did Congress would refuse. And don't even bother discussing the 2010 Bush tax cut expiration, it's gone, and probably as soon as Congress gets sworn in next year.

LOL, with Republican Senators calling for limits to CEO pay, any talk of anything any candidate has said prior to today about their plans for tax changes is almost certainly moot.

Posted by: PDavis | September 23, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

Here are some facts.

Obama is very very liberal and as an example voted against the Anti-late term abortion law when Obama was in the Illinois state Senate--and he was present for the whole debate. How can a Christian vote for such a evil stance.

That is not mention he is staunch advocate of the estate tax. He called(QUOTE) "Upon the Christians and the Jewish community to and the Muslims to convene on Washington to oppose the repeal of the estate tax." --I wonder how he expects farmers to pass on their farm to their kids?? On the other hand it is even more strange that he uses a term called the "ownership society" and opposes things such as health savings accounts and school choice as he says they are like "social Darwinism." He is more socialist than any other candidate--can you say, HELLO BIG GOVERNMENT--HELLO SOCIALISM

Obama is Corrupt as the day is long, Tony Rezko , an indicted political fundraiser (under federal corruption investigation for receiving $6 million in kickback favor deals) is a close friend who Obama approached to buy property with---while the crook was still being investigated. Obama agreed to buy one lot and Rezko bought the other lot and then sold part of it to Obama. Now Obama paid $300 000 LESS than the asking price while the adjoining equally value property was bought by the crook at FULL asking price--sound crooked?? Of course it is as both properties where bought from the same seller. So why did Barrack get the land so cheap? Because the seller let the land go cheap to Barrack while he got his asking price from the crook, Rezko. Also, Rezko helped raise $60,000 for Barrack's campaign. SO what deal was made between these two (besides Rezko's business associate getting an internship. What does Obama now say? He now admits the deal was a "mistake." Bull, he is an obvious ethics question don't you think??

This is not about a first black president. As white people agree that it would great for race relations to allow a black president. It is absurd to think that this has anything to do with race !! We have long had good race relations. America was ready for a black president at least 8 years ago when it was shown that Colin Powell would easily beat Clinton by no less than 10% (according to polls). In other words Colin , a black, would have easily been our next president--if he wanted. So why is black an issue?? There are other politicals who are black whom I could much easier accept but I will never accept this liberal Hallmark card. The only thing Obama represents is: that the chance for the Republicans to appeal to the blacks is crushed (because who would vote against one "of their own" to support a Republican). LOTS of whites will be voting for the WRONG reason just to break the glass ceiling and become a "part of history" to vote in the first "black" (he is only half black) president. Reporters are going to continue to taught Dr. Martin Luther King's dream and how it is finally becoming a reality. AH, just a minute, it became reality a long time ago--just the Blacks won't accept it and the reporters are too stupid to realize it--I guess they have needlessly guilty feelings for being white.


Have you ever heard this guy speak; it is like listening to a bad Hallmark card:

About himself and another Democrat "We agreed to disagree but..without being disagreeable"--WHAT???

With respect to running for president, "I believe in the basic decency of the American people"--SOUNDS GREAT DOESN'T IT?

from his acceptance speech, “I know that I haven’t spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington. But I’ve been there long enough to know that the ways of
Washington must change.”

About his grandma, "She was a typical white person...afraid of black people"--TALK ABOUT PREJUDICE but I guess that is allowed because he is a minority member; they
have carte blanch to insult without retribution.

from "Audacity to Hope" his book --about religion "I grew up around a healthy skepticism for organized religion and as a result so do I [have a healthy skepticism toward
organized religion]"

MY favorite "I believed Saddam had chemical and biological weapons, coveted nuclear arms, scoffed at UN resolutions and butchered his own people but I do not consider
that a threat to [post 911] America"

"The real threat in to peace in the Middle East is not Islamic extremism, its' cynicism." talk about a Pollyanna.


Some personal struggles--OH how Barrack has struggled

Lets see... he overcame the oppression of being born to a well-off middle class white woman and a Harvard Ph.D. father. He overcame the oppression of attending private schools his whole life. His life took a dark turn when he was admitted to Columbia and then Harvard Law school where they practically lynched into the position of President of the Law Review--and from there his life was a "hell" of accolade and accomplishment. Oh, in his defense the liberal media will say over and over ,"his funny name, Obama got him made fun of when he was young.."

Posted by: Jennifer | September 23, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Here are some facts.

Obama is very very liberal and as an example voted against the Anti-late term abortion law when Obama was in the Illinois state Senate--and he was present for the whole debate. How can a Christian vote for such a evil stance.

That is not mention he is staunch advocate of the estate tax. He called(QUOTE) "Upon the Christians and the Jewish community to and the Muslims to convene on Washington to oppose the repeal of the estate tax." --I wonder how he expects farmers to pass on their farm to their kids?? On the other hand it is even more strange that he uses a term called the "ownership society" and opposes things such as health savings accounts and school choice as he says they are like "social Darwinism." He is more socialist than any other candidate--can you say, HELLO BIG GOVERNMENT--HELLO SOCIALISM

Obama is Corrupt as the day is long, Tony Rezko , an indicted political fundraiser (under federal corruption investigation for receiving $6 million in kickback favor deals) is a close friend who Obama approached to buy property with---while the crook was still being investigated. Obama agreed to buy one lot and Rezko bought the other lot and then sold part of it to Obama. Now Obama paid $300 000 LESS than the asking price while the adjoining equally value property was bought by the crook at FULL asking price--sound crooked?? Of course it is as both properties where bought from the same seller. So why did Barrack get the land so cheap? Because the seller let the land go cheap to Barrack while he got his asking price from the crook, Rezko. Also, Rezko helped raise $60,000 for Barrack's campaign. SO what deal was made between these two (besides Rezko's business associate getting an internship. What does Obama now say? He now admits the deal was a "mistake." Bull, he is an obvious ethics question don't you think??

This is not about a first black president. As white people agree that it would great for race relations to allow a black president. It is absurd to think that this has anything to do with race !! We have long had good race relations. America was ready for a black president at least 8 years ago when it was shown that Colin Powell would easily beat Clinton by no less than 10% (according to polls). In other words Colin , a black, would have easily been our next president--if he wanted. So why is black an issue?? There are other politicals who are black whom I could much easier accept but I will never accept this liberal Hallmark card. The only thing Obama represents is: that the chance for the Republicans to appeal to the blacks is crushed (because who would vote against one "of their own" to support a Republican). LOTS of whites will be voting for the WRONG reason just to break the glass ceiling and become a "part of history" to vote in the first "black" (he is only half black) president. Reporters are going to continue to taught Dr. Martin Luther King's dream and how it is finally becoming a reality. AH, just a minute, it became reality a long time ago--just the Blacks won't accept it and the reporters are too stupid to realize it--I guess they have needlessly guilty feelings for being white.


Have you ever heard this guy speak; it is like listening to a bad Hallmark card:

About himself and another Democrat "We agreed to disagree but..without being disagreeable"--WHAT???

With respect to running for president, "I believe in the basic decency of the American people"--SOUNDS GREAT DOESN'T IT?

from his acceptance speech, “I know that I haven’t spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington. But I’ve been there long enough to know that the ways of
Washington must change.”

About his grandma, "She was a typical white person...afraid of black people"--TALK ABOUT PREJUDICE but I guess that is allowed because he is a minority member; they
have carte blanch to insult without retribution.

from "Audacity to Hope" his book --about religion "I grew up around a healthy skepticism for organized religion and as a result so do I [have a healthy skepticism toward
organized religion]"

MY favorite "I believed Saddam had chemical and biological weapons, coveted nuclear arms, scoffed at UN resolutions and butchered his own people but I do not consider
that a threat to [post 911] America"

"The real threat in to peace in the Middle East is not Islamic extremism, its' cynicism." talk about a Pollyanna.


Some personal struggles--OH how Barrack has struggled

Lets see... he overcame the oppression of being born to a well-off middle class white woman and a Harvard Ph.D. father. He overcame the oppression of attending private schools his whole life. His life took a dark turn when he was admitted to Columbia and then Harvard Law school where they practically lynched into the position of President of the Law Review--and from there his life was a "hell" of accolade and accomplishment. Oh, in his defense the liberal media will say over and over ,"his funny name, Obama got him made fun of when he was young.." -- Please, do you know how many times people found a rhyme for Degroote?? Spare me.

Posted by: Jennifer | September 23, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

The Rove/Republican lines are flying fast and furious. One of the representatives of their line is "Jennifer" who, claims she is from Chicago and therefore knows about Obama's dirty political connections. My guess is she is not from Chicago, or Illinois. Here, Obama has had a reputation for being one of the "clean" and independent politicians, of which there are a number. He was good at playing poker in Springfield, and working out deals, but they were deals related to policy, not his pocketbook.

The reality is, he's smart, capable, ran the best, most surprisingly successful campaign in modern history, talks (without a teleprompter) on issues across the board with people who are informed, has written his own books, and has led the way in dealing with the Bush proposal to bail out Wall Street bankers with your money. The other guy? He picked an ininformed, over-opinionated, small state Governor who he won't allow to answer questions about why she misused state government or ran her own town into debt when she was mayor, and now claims the press is picking on her, or that she's the victim of an "elitist" press.

I'm happy to go with Obama. The process works. The Republican is playing out a failed hand.

Caldwell Young

Posted by: Caldwell Young | September 23, 2008 6:39 PM | Report abuse

Obama says:

"Change means a tax code that doesn’t reward the lobbyists who wrote it, but the American workers and small businesses who deserve it," Obama said. He then went through a litany of his tax proposals, including, "I will cut taxes — cut taxes — for 95 percent of all working families."

Politifact judges this statement: True

"We've checked out many claims on taxes. It's a subject area that's ripe for distortion and attack.

But with this affirmative claim, Obama appears to be on solid ground.

The linchpin here is Obama's tax credit for workers, which is intended to offset payroll taxes. Single people can qualify for a $500 credit; married people filing together could get $1,000.

Obama wants to roll back the Bush tax cuts for people who make $200,000 or more if single and $250,000 or more as a married couple. Those people would get the credit, too, under Obama's proposal, but it would be wiped out by their higher income tax rates.

Most people, though, don't make more than $200,000. In fact, according to Internal Revenue Service statistics, about 97 percent of all filers made less than that.

Now it's into the nitty-gritty. Obama said his tax plan would reduce taxes for 95 percent of working families. We consulted the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, which has created detailed models for how each candidate's tax proposal would affect American taxpayers. The center's complex model includes the indirect effects of certain tax policies, such as Obama's proposed rate increase for corporations.

The Tax Policy Center's analysis does not specifically look at the subset of tax filers who are "working families." But the center can make the following statements about Obama's tax proposal, said principal research associate Bob Williams:

• 95 percent of all tax filers (working and nonworking) will get a cut in their individual income taxes.

• 95 percent of all families with children (working and nonworking) will get a cut in their total federal taxes.

Every taxpayer has different individual circumstances, but if you make less than $200,000 a year and you work, we can't see how your taxes would go up under Obama's proposals. IRS data show that 97 percent of tax filers make less than $200,000, so there are even two percentage points worth of leeway there."

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:37 PM | Report abuse

tojoley, I'm pretty sure you and Jenifer are the same person, lol

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 6:33 PM | Report abuse

dewey you are the man - right on

these demoCRITES cannot string two thoughts together

in fact, IT IS HILARIOUS WATCHING THE DemoCRITES even try to say something FACTUAL or RELEVANT (although most of the time they don't even try - they just resort to name calling - but when they do try, it is just as funny)

all day long I have challenged the demoCRITES to refute in a factual manner ANY of seven major lies that I have reported about OBAMIDEN - none have even tried - NONE

one called me "bitter and stupid"

one called me "brain dead" (and jennifer, too, - and anyone who can call jennifer "brain dead" lacks a few neurons for sure)

one implied I'm on drugs .... BUT ....

.... NONE were able to refute the fact that OBAMA lies all the time by even being able to factually refute even ONE of the lies of OBAMIDEN which little ole me has exposed - NONE

the demoCRITES cannot contend with facts - so instead they resort to name calling and lies and distortions and parroting catch phrases and bringing up old news (keating five - are you phreecking kidding me ?)

look at the nonsense with which one of them tried to refute dewey and others about the tax issue

obama said he would lower tax rates on 95% of Americans - he said it in his acceptance speech - I heard it live along with 40 MILLION other Americans

It was an outlandish LIE by obama - nothing more or less - that is not opinion, it is fact !

It is mathematical IMPOSSIBILITY for obama's statement to be anything but a LIE

there are plenty of other examples

still obamiden's faithful minions mindlessly defend OBAMIDEN

some have responded to the fact that 30 percent or more of Americans who file a tax return owe no taxes other than payroll taxes (meaning the social security withholding which is just under 8% and matched by the employer) and sales taxes and local taxes etc. - DO THEY NOT REALIZE HOW NON-SENSICAL IT IS FOR THEM TO TRY TO MAKE THIS ARGUMENT WHEN OBAMIDEN HAS NO PLANS TO LOWER THE PAYROLL TAXES OR LOCAL TAXES OR SALES TAXES NOR DOES HE EVEN HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO SO ???

you can lead a horse to water but .....

...... (well, you know .....)


MCCAIN / PALIN 2008


REFORM and EXPERIENCE and FAR MORE INTEGRITY THAN OBAMIDEN WILL EVER HAVE

put your country first and vote for the best candidate - MCCAIN - a true moderate and a proven reformer (not a false moderate and false reformer like obamiden)


hey demoCRITES - my challenge stands

your candidate is a bald-faced liar (I used to love the guy until I figured this out - for the sake of the USA, please think about it and you'll see it is so clear that obamiden lies about almost everything)


demoCRITES - come out and pla -- a -- ay

can you even TRY to prove me wrong or are ya just going to keep bashing an American hero and a fantastic, talented and smart lady because you have nothing better to say ?

(I'm betting on the latter)

Posted by: tojoley | September 23, 2008 6:31 PM | Report abuse

"[White House Deputy Press Secretary Tony] Fratto insisted that the [$700B bailout] plan was not slapped together and had been drawn up as a contingency over previous months and weeks by administration officials. He acknowledged lawmakers were getting only days to peruse it, but he said this should be enough."

http://www.rollcall.com/news/28599-1.html

so the rethuglicans have been anticipating this for "months and weeks"?

Posted by: George W. McLiar | September 23, 2008 5:47 PM | Report abuse

I'll restate my earlier claim that not all Americans pay taxes and especially not 95%. Yes, most people do pay sales taxes and property taxes but those are local taxes not federal taxes. obama, unless he plans to throw out the Constitution, will not have the power to change those taxes.

obama's plan may include SS taxes, but again, many people do not pay SS taxes.

And as far as income tax, 32% of Americans had no tax liability in 2004 (they may have had tax with held from their paychecks but they got it back). If 32% paid no taxes then how can those taxes be reduced? You cannot reduce zero!

No Way - No How will 95% of Americans get their taxes reduced.

Another obama lie! Another MSM lie!

Posted by: Dewey | September 23, 2008 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Calvin, I've got to say, of all the comments on this article, that business of "41% of Americans pay no tax" has got to be the most twisted, self serving and least accurate claim I've seen yet, and that is no exaggeration! Did you dream that one up yourself, or did you take it verbatim off a Limbaugh list of talking points? Oh my goodness.

In the FIRST place, to get that very misleading statistic you had to not only count personal income tax ONLY, but also you had to count every part time worker at any job in the US, no matter the income or nature of the work. Oh my. Lets count EVERY KID IN AMERICA as a taxpayer who gets to avoid taxes, and paint the universe as "only the few wealthy pay taxes now, no reform is needed". LMAO here.

In the SECOND place, every single one of us pays sales taxes, excise taxes and a plethora of other taxes. There is no non tax paying American, save perhaps a total charity case paraplegic with no income whatsoever.

In the THIRD instance, this is yet another case of Republicans wanting to have their cake one way when they like it and the same cake sliced another way when they like it like that, and nobody is supposed to notice you are slipping out extra slices for yourself! Specifically, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US THAT FILES PAYS THE SEVEN PERCENT SOCIAL SECURITY WITH HOLDING. It has been a staple of Republican SS bashing for decades that SS is a tax and nothing more than a tax. Therefore your claim falls flat on it's face, EVERYONE pays social security.

In short, totally false.

Posted by: PDavis | September 23, 2008 5:04 PM | Report abuse

McCain Palin is a joke. So is our country if they win.

We will be invaded because the rest of the world will be scared to death of a senile old man and a family of retards at the helm of this quickly sinking ship.

Please please please America! Please. Please do not vote for these people.

Please.


Please?

Posted by: Please Don't Vote for McCain | September 23, 2008 4:53 PM | Report abuse

fuch the Republicans and their greedy friends. Don't bail anything out. Lets bottom out, then hang em high.

Not One Cent till all those fat cat CEOs give back their billion dollar bonuses!

I don't like Democrats, but the republicans have lost my confidence.

Obama I guess...

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 4:51 PM | Report abuse

-----------------

So never mind the bunk John McCain.

Why would America REWARD complete Republican failure ?

We wont.

Posted by: PulSamsara | September 23, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

tojoley and jennifer: you guys need to get together.

The country is running out of brain-dead people, and you need to do your part.

Oh, that's right, you don't believe in upper and lower case. I meant to say:

THE COUNTRY IS RUNNING OUT OF BRAIN-DEAD PEOPLE, AND YOU NEED TO DO YOUR PART.

Get busy.

Posted by: Dennis Berry | September 23, 2008 4:09 PM | Report abuse

marc christophe, Obama wants to raise the CAP on Social Security taxes so that the wealthy pay into Social Security- it would not affect the average low to middle class American who puts in their 40 hours and needs to concern themselves with how far their paycheck will stretch.

"Obama proposes a $1,000 tax credit on income for working families ($500 for singles), to offset payroll taxes. So for most people, Obama is actually lowering payroll taxes.

But he has said he would raise payroll taxes on people making higher incomes of about $250,000 in order to keep Social Security solvent. Currently, only the first $97,500 of a person's income is taxable. So for higher incomes, Obama would raise payroll taxes."

Why not stick to the facts when speaking out against Obama? If he really is going to be such a terrible leader, why not attack him factually instead of with outlandish exaggerations?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

McCain's so-called ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL EXPERTISE---NONE---Toooooooo Badddddddd--Soooooooo Sadddddddd---Mccain, your inane comments are SILLY, SILLY, SILLY---You have become a joke!! Please...at 72, stop the insane laughter you are causing to yourself....

Posted by: benghse | September 23, 2008 3:42 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Kurtz has limited his "analysis" to a regurgitation of an Obama ad. As pointed out by some of the commentators, Obama cannot "cut taxes" for "95% of Americans" when the bottom 40% pay no income tax already. There is another point, however, that Kurtz conveniently leaves out: Obama is going to RAISE THE PAYROLL TAX to fund Social Security and his "free health care for illegal aliens" scheme. Thus, even if "income tax" either goes down or remains the same for the "middle class", TAKE-HOME PAY will be RADICALLY REDUCED BECAUSE OF THE INCREASE IN SOCIAL SECURITY AND HEALTH CARE TAXES. Workers of America, aren't you glad to put in 40 hours a week and watch your family do with less and less so that Obama can give freebies to illegal aliens? Oh yeah, and let us not forget Obama's 50 billion dollar pledge to the U.N. for a donation to fight "world poverty". Guess who is going to get that bill?

Posted by: marc christophe | September 23, 2008 3:22 PM | Report abuse

Placing a McCain political ad on the Trail is bias because it is allowing a lie to b repeated.

Posted by: gGa | September 23, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Is it just me or is Jennifer living in a parallel universe.

Posted by: DavidKae | September 23, 2008 3:09 PM | Report abuse

I think McCain's new found campaign message can be explained by a simple quote from John Kerry at the 2008 Convention: "McCain needs to finish the debate with himself."

To me, it is clear that he would do anything to win this election rather than to do what he believes is best for the country. There is no honor in that.

Posted by: Jeremy | September 23, 2008 3:05 PM | Report abuse

McCain: The Most Reprehensible of the Keating Five

The story of "the Keating Five" has become a scandal rivaling Teapot Dome and Watergate

By Tom Fitzpatrick
Published on November 29, 1989

You're John McCain, a fallen hero who wanted to become president so desperately that you sold yourself to Charlie Keating, the wealthy con man who bears such an incredible resemblance to The Joker. Obviously, Keating thought you could make it to the White House, too.

He poured $112,000 into your political campaigns. He became your friend. He threw fund raisers in your honor. He even made a sweet shopping-center investment deal for your wife, Cindy. Your father-in-law, Jim Hensley, was cut in on the deal, too.

Nothing was too good for you. Why not? Keating saw you as a prime investment that would pay off in the future.

So he flew you and your family around the country in his private jets. Time after time, he put you up for serene, private vacations at his vast, palatial spa in the Bahamas. All of this was so grand. You were protected from what Thomas Hardy refers to as "the madding crowd." It was almost as though you were already staying at a presidential retreat.

Like the old song, that now seems "Long ago and far away."

Since Keating's collapse, you find yourself doing obscene things to save yourself from the Senate Ethics Committee's investigation. As a matter of course, you engage in backbiting behavior that will turn you into an outcast in the Senate if you do survive.

They say that if you put five lobsters into a pot and give them a chance to escape, none will be able to do so before you light the fire. Each time a lobster tries to climb over the top, his fellow lobsters will pull him back down. It is the way of lobsters and threatened United States senators.

And, of course, that's the way it is with the Keating Five. You are all battling to save your own hides. So you, McCain, leak to reporters about who did Keating's bidding in pressuring federal regulators to change the rules for Lincoln Savings and Loan.

When the reporters fail to print your tips quickly enough--as in the case of your tip on Michigan Senator Donald Riegle--you call them back and remind them how important it is to get that information in the newspapers.

The story of "the Keating Five" has become a scandal rivaling Teapot Dome and Watergate. The outcome will be decided, not in a courtroom, but probably on national television.

Those who survive will be the sociopaths who can tell a lie with the most sincere, straight face. You are especially adept at this.

Last Friday night, on The John McLaughlin Show, which features well-known Washington journalists, the subject of the Keating Five was discussed. Panelist Jack Germond suggested that three of the Keating Five were probably already through in politics.

So you spend your days desperately trying to make sure you will be one of the survivors. You keep volunteering to go on radio and television stations to protest your innocence. Last week you made ABC's Nightline.

Not long before that you somehow managed to get James Kilpatrick, the national columnist, to write a favorable paragraph about you. Last Sunday morning, you made it to national television again; this time on ABC's This Week With David Brinkley. You smiled at the panel with your usual studied insouciance. Sitting next to you was Senator John Glenn of Ohio.

Brinkley, Sam Donaldson, and George Will were the interrogators.
It was a sobering scene. There you sat with Glenn, both sweating before the cameras, waiting to answer questions: two badly tarnished American icons.

No one forgets that Glenn was the first American astronaut to orbit the Earth. You won't let anyone forget that you were a prisoner of war. But you have played that tune too long. By now your constant reminders about your war record make you seem like a modern version of Arthur Miller's tragic failure Willy Loman.

Clearly, both you and Glenn sold your fame for Charles Keating's money.

It was a Faustian bargain. It was also a bad joke on the rest of us and a disaster for many old people who lost their life's savings to Keating.

The money was never really Keating's to give. But he never would have got his hands on it if you and the rest of the Keating Five didn't halt the government takeover for two long years while Keating's people continued their looting.

And now, the tab for the Savings and Loan heist must be paid from taxpayer pockets.

On Sunday, Senators Dennis DeConcini, Alan Cranston, and Riegle refused offers to appear on the Brinkley show. What must we make of that?

You, the closest of them to Keating and the deepest in his debt, have chosen the path of the hard sell. You may even make it out of the pot, but to many, your protestations of innocence taste like gall.

You are determined to bluff your way. You will stick to your story that you were acting to help a constituent and intended to do nothing improper. The very fact you attended the meeting makes you guilty, just as every man who entered the Brinks vault went to prison.

Posted by: JOHN MCCAIN=KEATING FIVE | September 23, 2008 3:03 PM | Report abuse

I find it difficult to quantify the Obama tax break for "95%" of the population. In 2006, 41% of the American population (121 mil people) paid no federal income tax. If they didn't pay any income tax, how are they going to get a tax break? More write-offs for someone who's already not paying taxes?

Talk about voodoo economics. What don't we just send a check to everybody and be done with it.

If we truly wanted to have tax reform, simply remove the ability for the government to automatically take taxes out of all of our checks and instead, force us to write that tax check to our government once a month like the rest of our bills. I wonder how long it would take for everyone to stop paying that bill?

Posted by: Calvin | September 23, 2008 3:00 PM | Report abuse

and don't give me that melanoma line, regarding the plastic surgery. my uncle had melanoma removed from HIS neck, too, and he still looked like an 80-year-old turkey after all was said and done.

Posted by: you are freaks | September 23, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

wow, jennifer. you have waaay too much time on your hands. i wish i could afford to spend all day posting anti-mccain rants all over the web, too. unfortunately, and unlike your treasured perfect candidate, i don't own 8 houses or 13 cars, nor can i afford $500 shoes, or neck plastic surgery. i WORK for a living.

liars, greedy deregulators and low informtion voters = vote mccain!!! because truth is, like, SO 2000!

Posted by: you are freaks | September 23, 2008 2:56 PM | Report abuse

Well, it's obvious that McCain has sunk some cash into the Internet "presence" businesses.

Posted by: PD | September 23, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who thinks either candidate is going to change anything is living in lala land. Obama lies just as much as McCain and is just as deluded. They are both part of the problem, neither is a solution.

It has been a long time since I could go to the polls and vote for a presidential candidate and think to myself - "Wow this person is great for our country!"

Posted by: Amazed | September 23, 2008 2:38 PM | Report abuse

you go jennifer - the demoCRITES can't handle a pit bull like yourself - and you are so very well spoken


as for "NO DISPUTE"s personal criticism of me;

Do you honestly think, "NO dispute" that people cannot easily make you for being just another wacko demoCRITE posing as a repulican ???

first of all, you cannot spell very well and most republicans can

secondly, you throw around big words like "world history" but you never give specifics to back yourself up - that's a demoCRITE not a republican - just listen to your leader obamiden (and when a demoCRITE does give specifics, they get it wrong - but you gave none at all)

thirdly, you did not say anything pro-mccain/palin as any self-respecting republican or moderate independent would do - whether an old guard republican or an independent turned republican thanks to obamiden like me


anyway my challenge for anyone pro-obamiden to prove your idol to not be a chronic compulsive liar still STANDS

LIES OF OBAMA;

LIE NUMBER ONE - BREAKING PLEDGE TO FINANCE CAMPAIGN ETHICALLY

LIE NUMBER TWO - TYING MCCAIN TO BUSH AFTER DEMOCRATS HAVE APPLAUDED MCCAIN FOR YEARS AS BEING DIFFERENT THAN BUSH

LIE NUMBER THREE - TAX CUTS FOR 95% OF AMERICA - OVER 30 PERCENT OF AMERICANS ARE NOT PAYING FEDERAL INCOME TAX, SO THIS IS A MATHEMATICAL IMPOSSIBILITY

LIE NUMBER FOUR - ACCUSING SARAH AS A FRAUD - THE FACT THAT SARAH HAS MADE SOME REFORMS IN ALASKA (more than obama has made anywhere) IS INDISPUTABLE


LIE NUMBER FIVE - I WILL BRING NON-PARTISANSHIP BACK TO WASHINGTON (BY PICKING THE MOST PARTISAN SENATOR AS YOUR RUNNING MATE AND BY TAKING ON YOUR OWN PARTY ZERO TIMES ???)

LIE NUMBER SIX - THE SEX ED IN KINDERGARTEN BILL WAS ALL ABOUT PREDATOR PROTECTION AND NOTHING ELSE - SIMPLY NOT TRUE - GO READ IT YOURSELF

LIE NUMBER SEVEN - I RESPECT THE DIGNITY OF HUMAN LIFE - RRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT - YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT BABIES BORN ALIVE DIE IF THEIR MOM WANTED IT THAT WAY - DISGUSTING

LIES NUMBER EIGHT THROUGH 10,000; MCCAIN LIES ABOUT EVERYTHING AND OBAMA ABOUT NOTHING - GET READY TO HERE THAT ONE 20,000 MORE TIMES (LIKE ON SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE FOR EXAMPLE)

I COULD GO ON - BUT LIE NUMBER ONE (or 7) WAS BY ITSELF ENOUGH TO TURN THIS INDEPENDENT into an unapologetic REPUBLICAN


how can you tell when obama is lying ??


answer

his lips are moving

Posted by: tojoley | September 23, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

My last,

Please remember to vote for the candidate that will shrink government the most. Remember we don't need big government we need to keep the choice in the hands of the people.

Have you ever encountered a government run program? And just what did you like about it. Don't let Obama take away our private choices. He doesn't even believe in individual savings. He has said it..Obama thinks IRA's and 401Ks and such are just well, he uses a term called the "ownership society" and opposes things such as health savings accounts and school choice as he says they are like "social Darwinism."

So what are you going to do? Let government become larger and screwy or are you going to take the only vote you have and make it count?

OK have fun with it. For those who are sure they are certain enjoy the last word.

BYE

Posted by: Jennifer | September 23, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

Phil,

What are you saying? Is it that you did not get your economic refund or that you squandered it on a subscription to Satellite radio?

And just what is it you do not understand about Exxon and Exxon owners? Exxon is 94%+ owned by people in the middle and lower middle classes. So, by that fact you want to take money away from the middle class and the lower middle class by hurting their 401k and IRA and Pension accounts??

Posted by: Jennifer | September 23, 2008 2:21 PM | Report abuse

MC about Mr. Will:

I don't understand, I would think you wanted a President who could cross the row?? You can not have it both ways. Are you content with someone who has no criticism? I would suppose you thought we should defend McCain by attaching Mr. Will. No, I merely question your reason for the posting.

Posted by: Jennifer | September 23, 2008 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Food for thought in the articles:

Wall Street’s special offer – but you must act now!

AmericanChronicle.com
September 23, 2008

http://americanchronicle.com/articles/75216


Let's bail out the greedy, the crooks, the suckers

AmericanChronicle.com
September 22, 2008

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/75078

Posted by: SteveHammons | September 23, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

Jennifer wrote:

He had his associations and yes friendships with the lowest common denominator. He comes from the Chicago Daley machine. I come from Chicago and believe me Daley is not someone I would ever want to be working with. If you think McCain's link to a Alcohol distributor is bad try looking into the Chicagoland politics. Do you think you know your candidate

______________________

"The whole thing is an outright lie," said Daley, who is furious with a new anti-Barack Obama ad released by the John McCain campaign that focuses on Chicago's shady politics and its political machine. "The ad claims I'm a lobbyist. I've never been a lobbyist! My son, Bill, was a lobbyist five years ago. I don't know what they're talking about," Daley told Sneed." A year and a half ago, he [McCain] called me the greatest U.S. commerce secretary ever, at a conference being held at Deer Valley," Daley said. "I certainly thought he was being extreme, but he even voted for my confirmation as U.S. commerce secretary when he was chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee!"

Daley accused McCain of hypocrisy for attacking Obama on lobbyists: "When I was at [telecom company] SBC, I had to hire [McCain campaign manager] Rick Davis to see John McCain," he said. "He wouldn't see anyone unless you hired one of his lobbyist friends. Telecom was his and Rick Davis was his telecom lobbyist. That was in '02, '03, '04."

Posted by: whatev | September 23, 2008 2:11 PM | Report abuse

I cannot beleive "Tojoley" is a Republican. It is a shame that comments like that come from a Republican. WE Republicans are more than just bitter and stupid commentators. Please don't make our party look more decrepit than it is looking lately. If you think bitter succed just read a little bit of World History.

Posted by: NO dispute | September 23, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

It is amazing to me how our staunch Conservative counterparts are so eager to seize upon a "piece" of aproposal and blow it into such proportions without even portraying the entire proposal for its merits. Point in case, taxes... I would think that anyone who really thinks about it would realize that when it was said that "95% of the population" would receive tax cuts, it was referring to those paying taxes. Only a conservative would have to have that explained. It also follows that only a conservative would have to have it explained that when a tax cut is given across the board to everyone, the ones who pay the most, get the biggest tax cut. Interesting.... I wonder if they would also understand that with the tax cuts came decreases in Medicare benefits, increase in medicare taxes increase in Social Security Taxes, and enormous refunds for the richest in the land. Wonder if they understand how the "golden parachutes" have grown bigger over the last few years and oil companies have record profits while everyone else pays the highest prices ever at the pump. Yet, we know what was left to the Bush administration. What does the Bush administration leave to the next administration.... Think about it. He was elected twice.... Was it a good move for the country....????

Posted by: phil | September 23, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

"The government solution to a problem is usually as bad as the
problem." - Milton Friedman link


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program."
- Milton Friedman link


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"A Society that puts equality ahead of freedom will end with
neither equality nor freedom." - Milton Friedman link


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"If a tax cut increases government revenues, you haven't cut
taxes enough." - Milton Friedman link

Posted by: Jennifer | September 23, 2008 2:07 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl - I assume you respect George F Will - Dean of the conservative movement, from today's op-ed:

"Under the pressure of the financial crisis, one presidential candidate is behaving like a flustered rookie playing in a league too high. It is not Barack Obama.

Channeling his inner Queen of Hearts, John McCain furiously, and apparently without even looking around at facts, said Chris Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, should be decapitated. This childish reflex provoked the Wall Street Journal to editorialize that "McCain untethered" -- disconnected from knowledge and principle -- had made a "false and deeply unfair" attack on Cox that was "unpresidential" and demonstrated that McCain "doesn't understand what's happening on Wall Street any better than Barack Obama does."

Pretty strong stuff, coming from a GOP conservative stalwart. Maybe you should open your mind and do some deep thinking.

Posted by: MC in VA | September 23, 2008 2:02 PM | Report abuse

WMD are Weapons of Mass Destruction. If you listened to the liberals such as the Hollywood stars they say Bush Lied about their being WMD --weapons in Iran. They also try to say we went to war with Iran because of the weapons--which was ACTUALLY the least reason why we went to war.

NOW, look at these quotes from Democrats to President Clinton who was the President BEFORE Bush. They were asking THAT President Clinton to do something about IRAN. Sound familiar. So, I guess it is OKAY to complain about Bush (OF COURSE NOT) even though these LIBERALS wanted to do the same thing. I guess you can now call them LIBERALS who are also HYPOCRITES. A hypocrite is someone who says one thing but does another thing---and sees nothing wrong with it (don't forget that last part).

HERE ARE THE QUOTES FROM THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 'D' stands for Democrat

“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary—to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 'D' stands for Democrat

“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Senators Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John F. Kerry ( D - MA), and others Oct. 9, 1998 'D' stands for Democrat

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 'D' stands for Democrat

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country… Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 We all know Gore was a Democrat--he was Clinton's Vice President.

Posted by: Jennifer | September 23, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

I defy ANY demoCRITE to factually challenge even ONE of these SEVEN lies of OBAMA - they are not obama's only lies !!! I bet the intelligent people who read this can easily add fifty more ;

LIE NUMBER ONE - BREAKING PLEDGE TO FINANCE CAMPAIGN ETHICALLY

LIE NUMBER TWO - TYING MCCAIN TO BUSH AFTER DEMOCRATS HAVE APPLAUDED MCCAIN FOR YEARS AS BEING DIFFERENT THAN BUSH

LIE NUMBER THREE - TAX CUTS FOR 95% OF AMERICA - OVER 30 PERCENT OF AMERICANS ARE NOT PAYING FEDERAL INCOME TAX, SO THIS IS A MATHEMATICAL IMPOSSIBILITY

LIE NUMBER FOUR - SARAH IS A FRAUD - THE FACT THAT SARAH HAS MADE SOME REFORMS IN ALASKA IS INDISPUTABLE


LIE NUMBER FIVE - I WILL BRING NON-PARTISANSHIP BACK TO WASHINGTON (BY PICKING THE MOST PARTISAN SENATOR AS YOUR RUNNING MATE AND BY TAKING ON YOUR OWN PARTY ZERO TIMES ???)

LIE NUMBER SIX - THE SEX ED IN KINDERGARTEN BILL WAS ALL ABOUT PREDATOR PROTECTION AND NOTHING ELSE - SIMPLY NOT TRUE - GO READ IT YOURSELF

LIE NUMBER SEVEN - I RESPECT THE DIGNITY OF HUMAN LIFE - RRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT - YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT BABIES BORN ALIVE DIE IF THEIR MOM WANTED IT THAT WAY - that is called infanticide

I COULD GO ON - BUT LIE NUMBER ONE (or 7) WAS BY ITSELF ENOUGH TO TURN THIS INDEPENDENT INTO AN UNAPOLOGETIC REPUBLICAN


how can you tell when obama is lying ??


answer;

his lips are moving


COME ON demoCRITES - OBAMA IS THE BIGGEST LIAR IN THE HISTORY OF POLITICS AND MY CHALLENGE STANDS

IT WILL BE DRAMATICALLY EASIER TO ADD FIFTY MORE OBVIOUS LIES OF OBAMA TO THIS LIST RATHER THAN REFUTE EVEN ONE OF THESE

Posted by: tojoley | September 23, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

I love to post this address--it is Obama's resume':

http://obamasresume.org/

I guess if you read between the lines you might see that he serves a very small segment of the populace and his goal is to strengthen that particular segment of the population. I don't really see him as the candidate for the middle class.

He had his associations and yes friendships with the lowest common denominator. He comes from the Chicago Daley machine. I come from Chicago and believe me Daley is not someone I would ever want to be working with. If you think McCain's link to a Alcohol distributor is bad try looking into the Chicagoland politics. Do you think you know your candidate?

Posted by: Jennifer | September 23, 2008 1:51 PM | Report abuse

For all of you who believe John Mccain's lies that Obama is going to raise your taxes, here is an analysis from the Tax Policy Center (which is bipartisan):

"The Obama plan would reduce taxes for low- and moderate-income families, but raise them significantly for high-bracket taxpayers. By 2012, middle-income taxpayers would see their after-tax income rise by about 5 percent, or nearly $2,200 annually. Those in the top 1 percent would face a $19,000 average tax increase—a 1.5 percent reduction in after-tax income.

McCain would lift after-tax incomes an average of about 3 percent, or $1,400 annually, for middle-income taxpayers by 2012. But, in sharp contrast to Obama, he would cut taxes for those in the top 1% by more than $125,000, raising their after-tax income an average 9.5 percent."

If you make $84,000 dollars A MONTH or more, do you really think paying an additional $1,500 a month is going to crash the economy and take away all our jobs? Are you really willing to take money out of your own pocket, your children's pocket, your parents pockets and your grandparents pocket and give it to the wealthy?

WHY should we put the wealthy before ourselves? Are the wealthy in America hurting so badly that they need an additional $10,500 dollars a month in their pockets?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Bush is bad you get more of the same ....

Actually, this is how I felt when you guys tried to elect Clinton candidate Mr Greenhouse gasses. Do you remember that Gore did not even want Clinton's help to get elected. He was afraid of being associated with Clinton. Sound familiar.

So there is this overabundance, this belief, that the sitting President is really to blame for everything bad. Really, I would take a harder look at your congress (dubbed the do nothings for a reason).

You have to admit Bush had a bad first term and he was very unilateral. He followed the advice he got (the same that good old Clinton got about Iraq). And the Democrats were all crying for war with Iraq when Clinton was in office--the same Democrats who are in power today for the most part. If you want proof I will gladly provide.

Now, in the Bush second term he has been much more successful. He is not unilateral as he was and seemed to learn quite a bit. I would love to hear why he is just such a poor President(albeit he is a poor speaker). Give it a shot, I love to think about these things; I am not totally unchanging nor are most people. You may want to believe people are fierce and unchanging but you would be amazed how they can respond to some real analysis that makes sense.

Posted by: Jennifer | September 23, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse


Here Vet your candidate.
Take a trip through Fairfield Iowa riding with another viewpoint than yours to M.U.M.
university there.
The M.U.M. in Fairfield Iowa birthplace of high tech community organizers enmasses with hopes of making the Middle East the new home of money and power base.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLTE_o1VW6s


Then learn a thing or two about the Community organizer himself. If you have not seen this over an hour documentary, you should before marking a ballot on an economic hopeful.

HYPE: THE OBAMA EFFECT

http://www.hypemovie.com/?gclid=CKu8i8y68pUCFQv7agodd34LfA

Posted by: dottydo | September 23, 2008 1:42 PM | Report abuse

If Obama's new taxes will only effect the top 5% of earners, and; ostensibly there are no impediments placed on free will and capital flight, what's to stop "wealthy people from moving elsewhere, and taking their money with them"?

Seems to me that if anyone has the ability to shop for a residence that would shelter their income from taxation, it would most likely be the "very rich". Doubtless there are any number of countries who woul be willing to take in these "oppressed" rich folks and their deposits.

For decades, musicians and artists in other nations flocked to the U.S. to escape the userous taxation of their native lands. Corporations are already off-shoring and out-sourcing as quickly as possible to escape taxation in the U.S. so, arguably there will be no relief there. And Obama's open borders policies will only cause further chaos with the finances of the middle class, as the few jobs that remain (those that cannot be out-sourced or offshored), will not be constrained in any way to compete for American workers.

Neither candidates domestic policies bode well for American workers or taxpayers.

Too many people competing for the same limited resources is not sound economic, environmental, social or cultural policy. Voters need to set aside their partisan lust to get even, and focus on electing a Congress that is only beholden to America's Citizen!

Posted by: Ed Weirdness | September 23, 2008 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Joe Biden + Barack Obama = JOE MAMA

Posted by: TommyF | September 23, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

No one has more gay sex and gets more abortions than Republicans. Plus, didn't sarah palin say she and her daughter "chose" to have their babies? Hippocrites galore.

Posted by: MBE | September 23, 2008 1:37 PM | Report abuse

tojoley - what kind of drugs are you on?

Posted by: white woman | September 23, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

ANSWER to "What I do not respect, or understand, is why you insist on forcing your beliefs on everyone else. If you're not gay, fine, don't get a gay marriage."

Gee try thinking about the farreaching effects for instance if gays get to have a fake real fake real marriage then that means they can adopt and then that means that organizations that complete adoptions on behalf of a teenager for instance will have to allow gay "couples" to adopt. With this being in complete opposition to the agencie's Christian values they will have to close down rather than allow a Gay adoption go through. So this is not just about marriage just like motorcycle helmets is not just about the rider.

Posted by: Jennifer | September 23, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

Rodney Lamprey and old Coot,
Congress controls the ability to oversee our money Industry.
Bush signed legislation presented,but Congress failed to present any.
Blame must go to the right source.
Sorry you are confused about the ups and downs of the stock market, (which is gambled money without hard backing.
Regulation of it hardly leaves it attractive and liquid for idiots to flush their dollars, and other lucky takers to sit under the toilet and get rich.
A dollar placed in a bank, or realestate is a diffrent beast than risk.

FDIC belongs in banks. Real Estate can right it'self in the private sector.

Risk being propped up is robbing the money train.

The test of the USA dollar has proven we still are the most powerful economy on Earth.
Everyone in every Country felt the quake on Wall Street. Was it an attack by foreign interest involved in our housing and money markets with an enmasse exodus?

Curious question.

Moral lending to allegianced Americans is a better bet than those with no allegiance to this Country, (who will take it and then walk out without consequences or remorse at a USA failure).

Blame rests with "sleeping with the enemy in our midst", partnered with lack of laws and enforcement to find bad business.

Posted by: dottydo | September 23, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

preach it, sister jennifer ! - EVERYONE needs to read JENNIFER'S posting about mccain's ACTUAL voting record

what is funny (and sad) is how the Post, the NY Times, SNL and many other forms of media are not even trying to hide their extreme bias towards obama - just read this as a perfect example - they cannot and will not say ANYthing positive about mccain without adding a negative spin to it - it is a seriously dangerous precedent and truly worse than I've seen in my lifetime but what's EVEN worse about this extreme BIAS is they now feel they must SMEAR an honorable man and an honorable woman constantly in order to achieve their heavy-handed goal of forcing obama on us (abc and pbs and others are clearly PRobamIDEN but at least they try to hide it a little - I'm not sure which is worse)

WASHINGTON POST, NYT, AND SNL TAKE NOTE:

obama cannot force himself on us and you can't hold us down and make us shut up while he forces himself on us

no means NO

NOBAMA NOBIDEN

we do not want to "fall in love" with your guy and we are not going to - no matter how much your buddies in the media keep thrusting obamiden at us

we DO recognize that emperorOBAMA is parading around with no clothes (metaphorically) and we ARE going to say so

HERE IS THE END RESULT OF YOUR CONSTANT OBAMIDEN COMMERCIALS, WASHINGTON POST;

YOU ARE RAPIDLY BECOMING IRRELEVANT IN AN EXPONENTIALLY ACCELERATED MANNER - A DINOSAUR - YOUR READERSHIP IS GOING TO KEEP DROPPING AND YOU WILL SOON BE AS BANKRUPT AS "AIR AMERICA" - YOU ARE TO BE PITIED (at the most) and NOT taken seriously - your days are numbered - no one with any sense takes you seriously anymore (for very good reason)

when you choose the president of the free world, it is not about "feelings" - it is about analysis

BUT SINCE BIDEN TODAY USED THE "FALL IN LOVE" METAPHOR, LETS' THINK ABOUT WHY SOMEONE FALLS IN LOVE AND THEN GETS HURT BADLY - IT'S BECAUSE THE ONE THEY "FELL IN LIVE" WITH PRETENDED TO BE ONE THING WHEN THEY WERE ANOTHER !!!!

I LIKED OBAMA AT FIRST - BUT IF YOU ARE NOT IN DENIAL, THEN YOU KNOW HE IS NOTHING LIKE WHAT HE CLAIMED TO BE - FORTUNATELY, I FIGURED IT OUT IN TIME TO AVOID TOO BAD OF A BROKEN HEART

OBAMIDEN WANTS YOU TO "FALL IN LOVE" WITH OBAMA RATHER THAN LOOK AT FACTS

LET'S LOOK AT FACTS - FOR ONE, WHO IS REALLY THE "BIG FAT LIAR" IN THIS RACE - THE ONE WHO CANNOT BE TRUSTED AT ALL

LIES OF OBAMA;

LIE NUMBER ONE - BREAKING PLEDGE TO FINANCE CAMPAIGN ETHICALLY

LIE NUMBER TWO - TYING MCCAIN TO BUSH AFTER DEMOCRATS HAVE APPLAUDED MCCAIN FOR YEARS AS BEING DIFFERENT THAN BUSH

LIE NUMBER THREE - TAX CUTS FOR 95% OF AMERICA - OVER 30 PERCENT OF AMERICANS ARE NOT PAYING FEDERAL INCOME TAX, SO THIS IS A MATHEMATICAL IMPOSSIBILITY

LIE NUMBER FOUR - SARAH IS A FRAUD - THE FACT THAT SARAH HAS MADE SOME REFORMS IN ALASKA IS INDISPUTABLE


LIE NUMBER FIVE - I WILL BRING NON-PARTISANSHIP BACK TO WASHINGTON (BY PICKING THE MOST PARTISAN SENATOR AS YOUR RUNNING MATE AND BY TAKING ON YOUR OWN PARTY ZERO TIMES ???)

LIE NUMBER SIX - THE SEX ED IN KINDERGARTEN BILL WAS ALL ABOUT PREDATOR PROTECTION AND NOTHING ELSE - SIMPLY NOT TRUE - GO READ IT YOURSELF

LIE NUMBER SEVEN - I RESPECT THE DIGNITY OF HUMAN LIFE - RRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT - YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT BABIES BORN ALIVE DIE IF THEIR MOM WANTED IT THAT WAY - DISGUSTING

LIES NUMBER EIGHT THROUGH 10,000; MCCAIN LIES ABOUT EVERYTHING AND OBAMA ABOUT NOTHING - GET READY TO HERE THAT ONE 20,000 MORE TIMES (LIKE ON SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE FOR EXAMPLE)

I COULD GO ON - BUT LIE NUMBER ONE (or 7) WAS BY ITSELF ENOUGH TO TURN THIS INDEPENDENT into an unapologetic REPUBLICAN


how can you tell when obama is lying ??


answer

his lips are moving

Posted by: tojoley | September 23, 2008 1:27 PM | Report abuse

Don't know where you're from aspergirl but you are definitely what we call "naive". You refuse to really listen to what McCain is (and is not) saying. You can be for McCain all you want, and vote for him, that's your right. But if he gets in office, you and all who voted for him will deserve what you get, just like when you (and I'm sure you did) voted for BUSH in 2004. Do any of you people ever learn?

Posted by: Not an Aspergirl | September 23, 2008 1:24 PM | Report abuse

No President can accomplish anything with the willing compliance of Congress. Democrats have held Congress, now entering a third year, yet they have no culpability in any of this? What the he_ _ have Pelosi and Reid been doing this past quarter of a decade?

Posted by: Ed Weirdness | September 23, 2008 1:23 PM | Report abuse

The foreclosure rate = financial instability and failure was caused by the Clinton admin. The loosening of mortgages which used to be only conventional 20% down to full financing was caused by the Dems. favorite president. The unfaithful Mr. Bill Clinton. The vote to do so was 90 to 8 in favor of the bill 37 democrats said YES. You want to know why we are being hit hard and fast... Just give a big round of applause to old slick willy NOT Bush learn and think before you speak. this world would be a lot better off.

Posted by: Chad | September 23, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

anonymous:
Demographically speaking, less than 50% of our population is working at any given time, ergo the universality of "social security, income taxes, etc,,, does not strictly apply.

Not everyone pays taxes, because not everyone is working. Of those that are working, a substantial number receive tax refunds and benefits equal to or greater than their contribution.

Stay at home mom's and dad's, those who are "between engagements", the elderly and infirm, children, students, etc,, all comprise a substantial portion of our population, who at any given time, may not be gainfully employed, ergo, are not paying taxes.

There is also a substantial number of "tax payers", who, while perhaps paying taxes, earn so little, and pay so little, utilize tax funded services to the extent that it results in a "negative" balance. Illegal aliens are thought to comprise as much as 50% of this segment of our population.

Essentially, nothing any candidate can do would result in decreasing the taxes paid by 95% of the population, simply because, demographically speaking, less than 95% of the population actually pays any taxes. Some clarification such as "the Obama plan would benefit 95% of tax paying workers" might make these assertion, while still arguably imprecise, more palatable and understandable.

Posted by: Ed Weirdness | September 23, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Senator Obama should not be even remotely blamed for the mess our country is in. It is those who are in higher authority, the Senator was not high enough. Those who support McCain are those who support the mess that has piled up. It really is past time for America to wake up. Governor Palin needs to be home raising her children anyway.

Posted by: Beautiful11 | September 23, 2008 1:17 PM | Report abuse

Howard Kurtz, are you on Barack's payroll? Vehemently defending poor little Barack who apparently needs your defending -- and the media is supposedly not in the Democrats back pocket.

You failed to mention that Barack will let lapse all of the tax rollbacks that helped the middle class and small business. For example, the inheritance tax will jump sky-high. These changes-- while not legislation -- certainly are HUGE TAX INCREASES. Ah, but Barack is cutting taxes. Yea, sure.

Posted by: Guy Thompto | September 23, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

hesingswithfrogs says:

"One by one, the pillars of Republican ideology have come crashing down. From de-regulation to trickle-down economics, they've been proven to be nothing but a sham..."
****

Do you think it at all possible that large foreign money plotted to remove it enmasse on 9/11 in anotherattack on our financial backbone?

Do you think it at all possible, that such an event gives us the ability to Nationalize America and congeal it again?


Do you think it is at all possible that this might be a Bush move to fragment and drain the power of Soros?

For all the wham of name calling, it will be history looking back that might actually find the current seated President mustered us well after wtc 911 2001, and it was a refusal of the Dem Congress under Pelosi to go to work that caused our fiasco?

In reality, Mc Cain tried to create checks and balances on Freddy and Fanny, but was blocked by Dems and the very Republicans you attempt to lump him in with.

Do you think Obama would give his campaign contributions from Freddy and Fanny back , so that people who have to pick up the tab and didn't want to contribute to his campaign are allowed that right?
Every penney counts.

The concept of vast numbers of comm
nity organizers put in place by M.U.M. group in Iowa is a blossoming discovery about B.O.

Posted by: dottydo | September 23, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

McCain "tired and old." I don't know what you are talking about--you are just blogging not running for office--unless you are running for student body treasurer.

Posted by: Jennifer | September 23, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

Having observed the Republican campaign circus perform for the past few months, I now have a theory as to why Lieberman wasn't selected for VP.

If you think about it, "Lieberman" is phonetically too close to "Liberal".
So, given the intellectual depth and breadth of your typical neanderthal member of the Republican "base", it was deemed too risky a proposition, lest they get confused over the two similar-sounding terms.


Posted by: Sam | September 23, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

No one saw this coming! I sold all my stock and used the money to remodel my house and make it energy efficient as soon as I could, when G. W. Bush won the last election. He broke every company he ever ran and now the country.

Posted by: Old Coot | September 23, 2008 1:11 PM | Report abuse

John McCain talks tough with those Wall Street CEO's that don't contribute enough to his campaign. McCain and his allies in Congress have led DEREGULATION and encouraged rip offs. Bush and McCain wanted to give your Social Security safety net to Wall Street to keep the bubble going for a little while longer. Bush just added ANOTHER $6000 debt per taxpayer, which is worse than taxes, to bail out the Wall Street speculators.

Posted by: Rodney Lamprey | September 23, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

George W. McLiar

The process of investigations launched by the Arizona Attorney general found Mc Cain was clear of any wrong doing.

Hasn't it dawned on you yet that the Vetting process on your own candidate is finding a lot mud than you can sling?

Type in M.U.M. fairfield Iowa and don't you find B.O. right smack in the middle of the group that used to poison salad bars and put snakes in mailboxes in oregon?

The plan of the great Maharishi was to move the greatest economy on Earth to India back then wasn't it?

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

The glass house I refer to of course, is the civil rights abuses towards women in Hawaii, where B.O. claims to have had formnative years for his biases.
Those who back and build an Obama do not have very clean hands for American allegiance and practices.

Posted by: dottydo | September 23, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: JENNIFER | September 23, 2008 12:46 PM

Back in 2005 it was a Republican congress and John McCain after being in the Senate for 23 years could not get the legislation passed. If he could not get it done with a Republican Senate and House, he won't get it done in the White House.

McCaini Feingold may have been passed more because of Feingold.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 1:01 PM | Report abuse

MaCain ....is just another TIRED old man much like his old bud Ronnie, except that Ronnie Regan did have charisma & charm, both of which MaCain lacks....its sad but not his fault that he does not have a silver spoon in his mouth unlike his wife that has one stuck WAY UP her ass.

Posted by: Joey | September 23, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

John McCain will do anything to win. That is what his campaign is about: convincing the average voter--especially the ones who voted for Bush twice--that he is the best candidate, mainly because Barack would be "so bad" in office. And to win on this approach, the campaign lies and misleads to a pathetic extent.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Who is to blame:

They wanted to give the nonworking , nonproductive worst elements of our society with home ownership regardless of credit . This provided a means to get the lowest denominator out of government housing and into hard working middle class neighborhoods .

They have affirmative action for their education , Medicare for their health needs and now a nice house whether they can afford it or not . Jobs? Let’s throw in quotas .

Home ownership can make it nearly impossible to get rid of those thirty million illegal immigrants so we don’t have to worry about them .

The problem is , the culture of dependence and entitlement . People that don’t want to work , won’t . People that don’t have pride in their property will let it fall apart . Gangsters will continue to intimidate and prey on the weak .

Don’t confuse problems in the economy with social reconstruction . The big loser , America’s middle class .

Posted by: Jennifer | September 23, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Haven't Democrats controlled Banking and Commerce for better than two years now? The House and Senate (both controlled by Democrats) both saw this coming, and it is they, and only they, who have control of the purse strings and the ability to pass regulatory legislation. Let's face it, Congressional Democrats have been so focused on gaining "veto proof power", that they been willing to let the economy blow up in order to achieve that power. Neither party represents the views, values and interests of America's Citizens. Voters should focus our efforts on removing as many "long-term" Elites and Power Brokers, of both party's, as possible. By changing the balance of power and tenure in Congress, we the people can marginalize the damage that either an Obama or a McCain presidency will cause!

Posted by: Ed Weirdness | September 23, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

hesingswithfrogs says:

"One by one, the pillars of Republican ideology have come crashing down. From de-regulation to trickle-down economics, they've been proven to be nothing but a sham..."

Ya talkin' about capitalism itself, bubeleh. Karl Marx foresaw pretty much the same thing, oh, about 130 years ago.

Posted by: Sam | September 23, 2008 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Why doesn't the Post just register as an Obama campaign asset?

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 23, 2008 11:41 AM

Because your opinion is only important to you. Frankly I think the post has been biased to McCain and are only making up for it in the last few days.

Posted by: Ronnn | September 23, 2008 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Quote: "John McCain was one of the 3 co-sponsors to S190. A bill that would have saved America a lot of money ache that is happening now. All the Democrats in the Committee voted against the bill and killed it."

I never thought I would see the day when Republicans try to pass the buck to Democrats because they wouldn't enforce MORE OVERSIGHT. I guess they will say anything to pass the blame.
I guess McCain was for free market before he was against it.

Posted by: TheLastIndie | September 23, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

Will: Just curious: I understand that you are conservative and are therefore most likely against gay marriage and are pro-life. I respect people with faith and strong beliefs and morals. What I do not respect, or understand, is why you insist on forcing your beliefs on everyone else. If you're not gay, fine, don't get a gay marriage. If you don't support abortion, fine, don't get one. But why do you have to control how me or anyone else lives our own lives? These are personal, individual choices, and we live in a democracy where progress in the protection of our civil liberties has defined our nation. Why can't you be happy just living your life the way in which you want, and let others make their own choices?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE
KEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVEKEATINGFIVE

Posted by: George W. McLiar | September 23, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

The news just is not there to report these things:

SALEM — U.S. Congressman Gresham Barrett, R-Westminster, held a press conference Monday at Duke World of Energy to announce his intentions of introducing legislation to streamline nuclear energy development in South Carolina.

One of the main problems the nation currently faces is the need for energy independence and stability, Barrett said. One main solution is efficiently constructing more nuclear power plants, he said.

Bryan Dolan, Duke Energy’s vice president of nuclear plant development, agreed. “All of us as energy producers are seeing rising costs. That underpins the importance of nuclear.”

The legislation will seek to resolve what Barrett called “hindrances” to nuclear development by amending several national energy policies to help with nuclear plant construction, nuclear work force education and the management of spent nuclear fuel. The idea is derived from former South Carolina governor and Secretary of Energy Jim Edwards’ plans to provide more nuclear energy.

“We are far behind the world in terms of using nuclear power for an energy source,” Barrett said. “Until recently, it had been decades since any progress has been made toward expanding the usage of nuclear power.”

Posted by: Jennifer | September 23, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl I have a question - If I told you what my plan was for whatever situation is at hand without full well knowing any details, just that there's a problem for example there's a problem at the local Stop & Shop, we can't buy groceries and I said the best way to remedy this creating a plan to buy groceries wouldn't I need to know what the issue is?!! Is it because the registers aren't working? Is it because there are no groceries to be purchased? Is it because my credit card isn't accepted?!! I wouldn't know until the missing information is provided, correct? See where I'm going with this? McCain BLINDLY offered a plan that more than likely will have to be revised. Which then causes a BIGGER issue - it comes off as not knowing the answers. Which we all know is the case for McCain.
Now had he the wherewithall to be patient and see how these changes affect his policy, then make the proper adjustments then he has the chance to formulate a stronger, more distinct policy change that is coherent. Instead of the buck passing he suggested.
It's all about looking before you leap. Isn't that what Bush has done time and time again?
Wow, I think I just made up my mind.

Posted by: df | September 23, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

John McCain tried to save America in 2005.

John McCain was one of the 3 co-sponsors to S190. A bill that would have saved America a lot of money ache that is happening now. All the Democrats in the Committee voted against the bill and killed it.

Below is part of McCain's speech in 2005 on the Senate floor. Too bad, they did not listen to him.

"For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market."

"I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole."

Posted by: JENNIFER | September 23, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

I was looking for a date on this article, it seems outdated in this information age. Obama has a plan, it's on his website and he has already said he may have to cut back on his campaign promises to deal with this Wall Street handout.

Posted by: TheLastIndie | September 23, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

Anyone voting for Grampa is insane . But then there are a lot of insane people in this country posing as Republicans. Just look at the Senator from Oklahoma who disregards scientific facts.

Posted by: James | September 23, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

"McCain wrote for a health journal this month arguing for "opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking.""

Some really smart guy (who incidentally caused the Cold War) once said "insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"

Hm.

Posted by: CynicalGuy | September 23, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Well, the subtext of this McCain ad is obvious. By pretending that Obama isn't talking about this issue, they hope people won't hear what he has to say. Because what Obama has to say is -- as usual -- pretty smart.

Posted by: Whippy | September 23, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

The reality is, that people have the freedom to believe what they choose to believe, even bold-faced lies. The only thing last week showed everyone was a glimpse how the two candidates would respond to a real-life crisis facing the nation. No amount of spinning after the fact is going to change how they both acted at the time. Seriously, forget the ads and just look at what both of them said and did.

Posted by: chuco44 | September 23, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

@thoren58: worst analysis ever. So based on your hypothetical situation I should vote for Obama, someone I 100% know will put in as many pro-abortion pro-gay marriage judges as possible?

Posted by: Will | September 23, 2008 12:41 PM | Report abuse

There is an economic crisis at the moment. If we compare two simmilar issues, here is how the two candidates reacted:

- McCain: "I would fire Chris Cox"
- Obama: "I would keep Paulson to ensure a smooth transition".

One panics, the other thinks. One is a nut head and the other is a pragmatist.

Posted by: Jo | September 23, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

The breadth and depth of the financial meltdown isn't known yet. That's why we're having today's congressional hearings. Obama is smart enough to deal with facts rather than opinions. McCain, on the other hand, is blowing more hot air with his "plan". If you can't measure it, you can't manage it. Learn this, Mr. McCain, PRESCRIPTION WITHOUT DIAGNOSIS IS CALLED MALPRACTICE. Another reason why this white 60's southener is voting Democratic for the first time in years. Race isn't an issue, but intelligence and honesty definitely are. I want real change, not empty rhetoric. To the McCain/Palin ticket I say, "Thanks...but no thanks"!

Posted by: RHinGA | September 23, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

raising taxes for the rich is not socialism! you repubs go to such extreme conclusions.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

How can obama cut taxes for 95 Percent of Americans? 95 percent of Americans do not pay taxes.
Kurtz are you just dumb or is obama paying you to say these things?
Posted by: Dewey
.........................................
Dewey: HAHA!! Are you for real?? You should know that everyone in this country pays taxes! Have you heard of the social security or federal tax withholdings taken out of our paychecks? Where do you think that goes?? McCain's ads are meant to convince the average voter, like yourself (one who apparently doesn't know diddly squat) that your taxes would increase under Obama. This is not true, unless you are annually making over 250000. Your taxes would actually decrease under Obama's plan even more so than under McCain's. The increase in taxes only applies to the rich, aka the remaining 5% of our population. Know something about what you are talking about before you make a point out of it. You are going to screw not only yourself over but our whole country if you vote based on your limited understanding.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

thoren58:

There's no confirmation that Lieberman was McCain's "first choice" nor that he was "pressured" to select Palin. My money is on Lieberman for SecDef ; )

Residents of Georgia, Kentucky, and Virginia:

Early voting for McCain-Palin started YESTERDAY!! In all, 34 states allow people to vote before election day. 28 of those states allow "no-excuse" absentee voting, so just get it done ASAP. You may not get another chance.

Posted by: JakeD | September 23, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

The Dipstick and the Lipstick strike again!

Posted by: Politicus | September 23, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

Help your evangelical friends turn the page by pointing out that McCain's first choice for V.P. was pro-choice Lieberman. McCain caved into pressure from the religious right but why would Maverick McCain do that when it comes to nominating a supreme court justice? By that time, McCain would have gotten what he needed from what he calls "agents of intolerance" and the Democratic-controlled legislature would quickly approve Justice Lieberman. Vice President Palin would have no power in the process.
Check mate.

Posted by: thoren58 | September 23, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

As an Independent voter who will be voting for the first time I believe Obama is risky but in the last one week since the economic problems came to fore I even believe more that McCain is the riskier candidate for president.

He seems to have no clue on economic issues and besides I have no confidence in his economic advisers. I watched Obama surrounded by economic advisers from the Clinton era and that somewhat has made me tilt towards Obama but I still havent made my final decision. I wish we had better choices

Posted by: Wales | September 23, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

Everybody knows very well Obama cannot produce what he promises however wishful and considerate his thoughts are.
We will need an experienced warrior like McCain at the helm. The man has proven abilities and forsees the pitfalls and wartime threats.
This is no time for a "feel good" socialist income redistribution" democratic candidate to occupy the presidency.
The Democrats are going to have to put of their socialist utopian dreams for a while longer if they are to survvive.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Another ridiculous, out of touch batch of lies from the Mccain campaign. "Mum on the market crisis"? Obama has addressed it in every speech since it happened (not to mention, he has been campaigning on the failing economy this entire time).

Obama gave a well thought out statement in which, afterwards, he actually ANSWERED QUESTIONS from the press! Mccain, on the other hand, comes out with a bunch of incoherent platitudes, blames Obama for the crisis and calls for heads, then walks off with out answering a single question. Is that really the kind of leadership that the country needs?

This is getting pathetic. The Mccain camp really must think we're a country of simpletons and fools if they believe they can lie to our face and we're just going to exuse this kind of behavior and not call them out on their lies.

Posted by: whatev | September 23, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

If you honestly believe McCain has honest ads and that the has not been lying out of his ass for the last 2 months, then I got some land in Florida... Beachside! that's for sale cheap! Just write me a check, and it's all yours.

Posted by: alexP1 | September 23, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

One by one, the pillars of Republican ideology have come crashing down. From de-regulation to trickle-down economics, they've been proven to be nothing but a sham. If you are clothing yourself with the Republican label, you are wearing a dirty lie that is ruining our country and your children's futures. Americans, step back and look at what has happened. Be honest with yourself. Ditch those dirty Republican clothes before it is too late. Do not be on the wrong side of history!

Posted by: hesingswithfrogs | September 23, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Asper girl,

You're just like all the talking heads and advisors from the McCain campaing. "If the media criticizes on anything, they must be biased!" What the heck is going on?! If Palin is asked about her qualifications, then it's sexist. If McCain is questioned on his record, then that's Media bias. But, if Fox goes on and on about supposed Obama's 'ties' , then that's fair reporting.
You guys need to get over yourselves. If you can't handle the heat then get the heck out of the kitchen!

Posted by: Jo | September 23, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

How can obama cut taxes for 95 Percent of Americans? 95 percent of Americans do not pay taxes.

Kurtz are you just dumb or is obama paying you to say these things?

Posted by: Dewey | September 23, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Not only have McCain's ads been more honest and accurate than Obama's, they have been more honest and accurate than the media's reporting on the campaign ads (including the biased "factcheck" sites)!

Posted by: AsperGirl
............................................
AsperGirl: You are straight delusional if you honestly believe that the McCain ads are truthful. They are widely recognized as misleading and inaccurate, even by Karl Rove! They are designed to convince the average voter, like yourself, that McCain should win merely because of how "bad" Obama would be in office. This approach will undoubtedly lead to lies and pathetic attempts to sway the unintelligent voter: aka YOU

Posted by: Anonymous | September 23, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

McSame wants to write a blank check without thinking out the full picture. Quick reactions are not to be confused with smart ones. Mr. De-Regulation needs to be more concerned with his debate on Friday. Virginia, Florida, Ohio are shifting blue. Time is running out and i guess its time to get more desperate. Maybe we have not seen 'Ugly' yet.

Posted by: Pete | September 23, 2008 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Obamabots are attacking a word and are missing a big picture 'Obama is wrong for our country'

Posted by: Dmitriy | September 23, 2008 12:13 PM | Report abuse

you'd think that at some point, after being exposed so many times, the flow of lies from camp McSame would stop or at least slow down. But no, the BS spewing machine cannot be stopped.

Posted by: thor | September 23, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

"This John McCain ad is accurate in one key respect: He has offered a plan to deal with the Wall Street crisis..."

I supose this is true, if one considers barking incoherently "a plan".

Posted by: zukermand | September 23, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Howie:

But who's pulling the McCain-Palin puppet strings? See below:

FINANCIAL TERRORISM A ROOT CAUSE
OF WALL STREET MONEY MELTDOWN?

Once again, Congress is being asked to rush through emergency legislation -- to cede effective control of the economy to the government.

Officials continue to blame lax lending policies on the part of the mortgage industry for spawning this crisis. But is that entirely true?

And is there a hidden agenda at work? Is government extra-judicial "targeting" of American citizens a root cause of the mortgage meltdown that spawned the broader financial crisis?

Consider this:

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/targeting-u-s-citizens-govt-agencies-root-cause-wall-street-financial-crisis OR
members.nowpublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener | September 23, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

For John McCain, the panel discussion on This Week with George Stephanopoulos could not have been more brutal.

Minutes after conservative columnist George Will declared that the Senator was decidedly un-presidential is his unexpected call for the firing of SEC Chairman Chris Cox, Sam Donaldson, the long-time ABC hand, said that McCain's erratic message on the economy again raised questions about his age.

"I suppose the McCain campaign's hope is that when there's a big crisis, people will go for age and experience," said Will. "The question is, who in this crisis looked more presidential, calm and un-flustered? It wasn't John McCain who, as usual, substituting vehemence for coherence, said 'let's fire somebody.' And picked one of the most experienced and conservative people in the administration, Chris Cox, and for no apparent reason... It was un-presidential behavior by a presidential candidate."

Donaldson then jumped in: "It was two days after the he said the fundamentals of the economy were strong. His talking points have gotten all mixed up. And I think the question of age is back on the table."

It should be noted that McCain's call for the firing of Cox was dismissed right off the bat, as the president does not have the authority to axe an SEC chairman. The criticisms that Donaldson raised concerned the fact that McCain started the week by touting the fundamentals of the economy, before pivoting into fits of populist mantra and calling for increased regulation of the markets - position at odds with McCain's traditional economic philosophies.

"When I say age," he explained, "I don't know the difference between finding your talking points and not delivering the right ones, we have seen him do this frequently but this last week was the worst. Between two stops in Florida, as you say, he had to revise his thinking about what he wanted to say about the economy, wanted to feel the pain suddenly than say everything is great."

The whole, painful, episode crested with Will leveling an even harsher blow.

"John McCain showed his personality this week," said the writer and pundit, "and made some of us fearful."


Posted by: AlexP1 | September 23, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

For those that understand the market Obama's position is the right one. For those that are clueless McCain will look like he is doing something so they will be impressed. The add deceives but no more so than any other. McCain has made a good political move because he will appeal to the average voter.

Last week McCain did the same thing and Obama missed the boat about his changing opinions.

Posted by: Ronn | September 23, 2008 11:46 AM | Report abuse

"But it is simply not accurate to say that the Illinois senator has remained "mum" on the market meltdown, as a Washington Times headline put it. Obama has repeatedly spoken out about the crisis, criticized both banking executives and the Bush administration for allowing it to develop, and offered principles designed to prevent any rescue plan from amounting to a "blank check" for the Treasury. "

I think it's obvious to everyone that Obama has been evasive, prevaricating and failing to take clear stands. There have been articles written about that. The Obama campaign has put out statements saying that it will refrain from making certain statements for now.

Few people would be confused about what "mum" means. Why are you straining at gnats and swallowing camels? And twisting words?

Not only have McCain's ads been more honest and accurate than Obama's, they have been more honest and accurate than the media's reporting on the campaign ads (including the biased "factcheck" sites)!

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 23, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

The Washington Post has abandoned any pretense that it just does "fact checks" (which are biased and untrue most of the time). Now, it is openly advocating for Obama, responding to McCain ads in what is an Obama advocate's voice, and calling that "analysis".

How bizarre with the election coverage get this year? How many creative ways of advocating for Obama in the campaign ad back-and-forth will you invent, calling that "reporting" on campaign ads? Why don't you just start blatantly publishing full page ads in your own paper attacking McCain and supporting Obama?

Why doesn't the Post just register as an Obama campaign asset?

Posted by: AsperGirl | September 23, 2008 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Obama is starting to sound more like the realist he needs to be. I just read that he may have to postpone all his big government spending programs to help with this bailout. He is finally recognizing that debt on debt is how we got here. Good Show!

I just added 300 bops to McCain's total at http://www.boppoll.com

In this poll, high score loses!

Posted by: Obama Nation Now! | September 23, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company