Barack Obama is not a terrorist.
Barack Obama will not raise your taxes if you make under $250K a year.
Barack Obama will not pull troops out of Iraq or Afghanistan without the advice and input of the military leadership. He will begin to pull out of both areas in a responsible manner as soon as he can.
Barack Obama will make sure that if you have adequate health care, you keep it. He will also make sure that every person in this country has access to affordable health care and that people will not be denied coverage based on preexisting conditions.
The Obama and McCain financial plans have both been analyzed by independent experts. Obama's was given a higher rating.
If you think it is a problem that Obama may be President with a Democratic controlled Congress, you should also think that it was a problem that President Bush had 6 years with a Republican controlled Congress.
And let me say this: for the last 8 years I have been in the political minority in this country. I did not use that as an excuse to act like an ass. Now that I am in the majority, it seems, I still refuse to stoop as low as those of you who disagree with me.
Not once have I attacked McCain's integrity, his patriotism, or used his personal life against him. Not once have I posted a Photoshopped picture of McCain or Palin made to look like the devil or a character from Star Trek or any other unflattering character. I have not made accusations without basis, I have not linked to articles that were written by liberals in a condescending, snarky tone to back up my statements and opinions.
I have more respect for myself and you than that.
And I sincerely hope that IF Obama wins, this will end the snarky, bitchy comments from you. Because when W won the last 2 times, I was bitterly disappointed. But I didn't threaten to move to Canada, I didn't moan and whine, I didn't continue the divisiveness. I am sick of this campaign, but I am MORE sick of people who will not listen to reason, who can't be dissuaded from arguments that are based on rumors and innuendo, who continue to be disrespectful of my opinions even as I try my damndest to be respectful of theirs.
Mom, wife, daughter, sister, friend. Scrapbooker, family historian, reader, cook, photographer. Volunteer. Political junkie. Springsteen fan. Loves deeply, strives daily to be a cheerful, kind and generous person. Fails regularly. Snarky, judgy and more than a little blunt. Some people don't appreciate my style. If you're one of them, that's ok. Get your own blog.
Forgive me, but don’t you think that Obama does “terrorize” some people -- People that are afraid of losing power, influence, and a tax system that favors passive income (capital gains) over wages ?
ReplyDeleteI glad that you cite the tax question. The current talking points of “socialism” and “income redistribution” are confusing the real issue. Who pays taxes and how should the tax base be allocated is the real question.
In 2004, I was waiting for a price check at CUB Foods when the cashier – a middle aged woman – noticed my Kerry t-shirt and hat (I’m an Independent who votes on fiscal conservatism and diplomacy in foreign affairs … Kerry beat Bush hands down). She said to me that she just couldn’t trust Kerry … “you know they’ll raise my taxes” … I proceeded to explain that he would not, but that Bush tax cuts gave a disproportionate share to the wealthy … she just didn’t get it.
That argument is being played again this year.
Haven’t we learned enough about legal (and illegal) corporate tax loopholes … just ask Norm Coleman as after five years, he has finally seen that the US Treasury is missing $100 Billion in revenues and offered legislation -- Levin-Coleman-Obama Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act. (Darn that Coleman he’s working with that anti-American Obama but I suppose if Levin and Obama hadn’t explained it to him, he would still be silent). Or about hedge fund tax avoidance schemes ?
What were talking about is how to cut the tax pie and what rates should be taxed. Prior to the Bush Tax Cut of 2001, the top rate was 39.6 that was lowered to 39.1% and then the Tax Cut of 2003 lowered it to 35% Do you think that if it was raised back to the previous rates, that anyone would seriously quit work because of rising tax rates? Add to that fact, that the Long Term Capital Gains tax rate is only 15%. Working families rely on wages for their income … but the corporate executive will be glad to take a lower wage and a greater stock option -- Managers of hedge funds are the perfect example.
Obama is sending out some very effective mailings showing his tax proposals … but McCain has the microphone to scare voters that “income redistribution” is wrong. Paul Krugman had a great piece on Ohio plumbers … citing Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average annual income of “plumbers, pipefitters and steamfitters” in Ohio was $47,930 and that but the average Ohio plumber’s income in that 2007 report was only 15.5 percent higher than in the 2000 report, not enough to keep up with the 17.7 percent rise in consumer prices in the Midwest.
It’s all about how you cut the pie.
The one thing that Obama is not pointing out that his plan is only helps workers … contrary to what McCain’s talkers are saying, Obama will not send “your money to people on welfare” … you must work to get tax relief.
But I suppose that some may be equally concerned about Obama’s foreign policy approach. Well, Dick Lugar (R-IN) endorsed Obama’s approach to diplomacy “If most U.S. foreign policy attention is devoted to crises fomented by hostile regimes, we are ceding the initiative to our enemies and reducing our capacity to lead the world in ways that are more likely to affect our future.” Chuck Hagel (R-NE) also rejects McCain’s approach. Lincoln Chafee (R-NH) outright endorsed Obama. That’s 3 Senators who know a few things about how to deal with other countries from their experience on the Foreign Relations Committee (along with Joe Biden). (NOTE: Coleman is also on that Committee, but he has embraced the John Bolton school that rejects talking with enemies.)
And, if you want the opinion of someone who knows a little bit about terrorists … listen to Colin Powell who endorsed Obama stating that he “displayed a steadiness, an intellectual curiosity, a depth of knowledge and an approach to looking at problems”. Powell continued Obama “has given us a more inclusive, broader reach into the needs and aspirations of our people. He’s crossing lines --ethnic lines, racial lines, generational lines. He’s thinking about all villages have values, all towns have values, not just small towns have values.”
Obama would keep us safer than McCain … in world security and financially.
Ok...now I have to follow that comment? I'm so out of my league! But I'll try because I talk/type a lot.
ReplyDeleteMonths ago when McCain was the apparent nominee I was gleeful. Absolutely delighted. I'm also an independent, I lean hard to the left, though I am personally quite fiscally conservative and I know the blog author knows how I struggle with cultural social issues as well.
Anyway, I was so happy for John McCain. I admired him as a man of conviction, willing to say no to his party. It tickled me pink that after being dragged through the mud and trounced by his own party, that he was now the pinnacle of GOP.
In truth, I told people that I was pleased, figuring that if he was elected, it wouldn't be the worst thing that could happen, certainly not any worse than what we've got now, and that he was the best we could get from the GOP lineup this year.
But as time has passed, I have watched a man I admired for not always toeing the party line (yeah- he voted with Bush 90% of the time, but I had hope for the other 10%), a man who actually experienced the hell of a real war, a man with a family that doesn't make headlines for underage drinking - in general, while I didn't agree with everything he said, STILL a decent honorable public servant...I have watched this man spiral into an unholy Roveian mess with a vitriolic spewing self-described pitbull at his side.
It makes me sad. It's like getting a nicely wrapped gift and finding nothing inside.
John McCain never had my vote. But now he has lost my respect. There was a time when I think McCain would have been more dismayed to have lost that. That time is not now.
Oh, and one other thing, speaking to the snarky comments. It's more than snark, it's hatred.
ReplyDeleteWhat separates me from the people Sarah Palin is currently riling up to the point of mouth foaming is that while I don't agree with John McCain, I DON'T WISH HIM DEAD.
I'm fearful for my fellow citizens who don't grasp the essential difference between disagreeing with someone and abject hatred.
Thank you. You are my hero right now - and you have lowered my blood pressure by about 100 points. You are eloquent and calm - and of course, correct in your opinions! Love ya Jennifer!!
ReplyDeleteJust a quick follow-up.
ReplyDeleteDid you hear Obama’s speech in Richmond VA yesterday ?
“ Now, given that every time I go to a rally and I ask how many people are making $250,000 a year or more, not many hands go up.
And the overwhelming majority of Americans -- bus drivers, teachers, social workers, small-business people -- make less than $250,000 a year. They don't have a very good argument on their side.
So what they're trying to do is to fabricate an argument and to try to suggest that somehow what I'm proposing would hit the middle class or small businesses. Factually, it's just not correct. I mean, Senator McCain is running a campaign against somebody else, not me, because he's not speaking to my plan.
Look, I had a nice conversation the other day with Joe the plumber. Joe's cool. Joe's cool. I got no problems with Joe. All I want to do is give Joe a tax cut.
But let's be clear who Senator McCain is fighting for. He's not fighting for Joe the plumber; he's fighting for Joe the hedge fund manager.
Actually, if you look at McCain’s tax plan, it maintains the 35% tax rate for small businesses, but lowers the top corporate tax rate to 25% which proves that not only would McCain’s tax plan help the top 2% earners, but also he picks corporations over small businesses.
McCain is winning the Media Wars without anybody actually looking at his plans which would leave the next generations with increased debt.
Lastly, my spouse voted for McCain in 2000 and 2004 (being in Minnesota, we knew our votes didn’t matter, so why not write in who you think would be the best. In fact, I am so disappointed with Minnesota’s Senate candidates that I might write-in Tim Walz … he would have creamed Coleman in a debate.)
Yet, McCain has public image that may actually be different than a lot of voters think. On foreign policies, he pressed Clinton for regime change in Iraq. When 9/11 happened, his first reaction was that Iran was behind it. Those examples should be a concern that he would overreact and let his “gut” make his decisions … while Obama has exhibited “coolness” under pressure and the desire to seek counsel. Plus Obama has a BA in foreign relations … a very good background that is not highlighted enough (plus being a constitutional law instructor is something that was not present in the Bush White House.)
McCain likes to promote his “maverick” credentials … for example campaign finance reform. But if you look at the history, McCain did break with his party on campaign finance legislation when the Democrats passed legislation but G HW Bush vetoed it. Clinton said he would sign that bill, but McCain joined the Republicans to filibuster it. Then when GW Bush became President, McCain joined with Russ Feingold and Fred Thompson (do you get the idea that this was now a Republican bill). The bill actually impacted unions and led to 527 groups … not exactly leveling the playing field. Today, campaign finance is still a problem, they just re-arranged how the monies are flowing. IMO, the only real bi-partisan solution that McCain should get credit is the Gang of 14 compromise on judicial nominees. IMO McCain was motivated by two factors, the need to get the process moving (good) and the concern that at sometime the Republicans could be in the minority (who would have thunk it) and the 50 party-line vote could result in more liberal judges in a Democrat-dominated Congress.
Well thank you John, that certainly brought depth and meaning to this discussion!
ReplyDeleteI believe John was who Meredith Grey was talking about when she so succinctly said, "Stupid boy penises."
ReplyDelete