Tuesday, September 16, 2008

It's Time to Pounce, Blues

CNN agrees with me--it's time for the Dems to trample the Republicans on their most vulnerable issue--the economy.

For a change instead of insulting what people are saying, I'm going to give a list of things that need to be said about John McCain. These are in no particular order except for the first one:

  1. This one is for all of us, Blues and Reds: We need to put our social issues (abortion/choice, same-sex marriage, etc.) and come together on the one issue that affects us all more than any single issue ever could. It is only then that we can truly make a difference as a nation.
  2. John McCain does not stand for change nor does he even understand the concept. John McCain is not a maverick. A maverick is someone who stands up to things that don't work and either fixes them or gets rid of them. Amongst the things that John McCain has not stood up for, fixed or gotten rid of: (a) an antiquated tax system which favors the wealthiest amongst us with more feedback than a bad mic at a Metallica concert; (b) a campaign finance system in which he doesn't even believe; (c) lasting, proper and meaningful dialogue on the immigration issue. (Don't even try and tell me those matters don't impact the economy.)
  3. John McCain hates regulation, so his quip yesterday about Wall Street's regulation needing work is absolutely worthless.
  4. John McCain has sided with big business far more often than he's ever sided with the "American Worker" he claims is so fundamentally strong.
  5. John McCain couldn't find the middle class with a map, a compass and an invitation to K-Mart. He claims he was joking about the "less than $5 a year" comment, but odds are he wasn't. He doesn't understand that a tax credit for something does nothing to help people do anything.
  6. John McCain fails to understand what it is like to be a regular American homeowner. As Joe Biden alluded to at the DNC, how can you have a kitchen table conversation when you don't know which kitchen you are supposed to be at? This is exascerbated by the fact that his campaign staff and he believes that Fannie and Freddie should be spun off into private companies. Great. This privatization of the bare minimum has to stop.
The problem isn't just attacking McCain, though. The problem is us figuring out what our message needs to be. Here are some talking points for that:
  1. Health care is priority number one. If people dont' have to worry about health care, they are more able to find a job based on other factors and truly live out the American dream. Tax credits, as McCain proposes, to privatize the system are inadequate and could actually do harm in an area where "do no harm" is the motto.
  2. Governmental programs are good--a small government never solved problems. McCain and the Republicans are fatally flawed in believing that privatizing everything leads to greater business advantages. Perhaps that's true for the 3% already on top, but it neglects to take anyone else into account. We all can't be entrepreneurs or small business owners. This cannot stand as a service economy. The American Worker may be fundamentally strong--but it doesn't mean jack unless he has a job.
  3. Cutting taxes isn't the answer. It is merely an over-used and tired old campaign tactic started back in the 80s when taxes were actually high. Taxes are the lowest they've been in 50 years. Lowering them more can only hurt us.
  4. It's one thing to bail out federally-backed industries, but those same rules must apply to individuals. It shouldn't be shameful to get governmental assistance. Companies do it all the time. We need to shed light on that.

What did I miss?


Anonymous said...

That might be the case - IF Obama actually had a sound Fiscal economic plan. But he doesn't. He has a tax the economy down further plan that will complicate things even more. This election was for the Dems to lose - and they are trying as hard as they can to do so!

You can't increase tax burdens on businesses and the wealthy in a recession - it causes a depression. It is plain and simple economics 101. I would rather have more of the same - with a party who has now screwed up and will adjust, than one who is going to thrown a bazillion unknown or tried and failed before factors into the equation to screw things up more!

Doubt me on this? Orlando's Democrat Mayor and his party just increased taxes on the properties in Orlando - and many of the businesses affected are shutting their doors or laying off people because of the increase in cost. LEARN from the mistakes folks - on either party.

I am sorry - but until Obama gets an actual plan that people with one ounce of brains can agree to - there is no voting for a junior anything in these times.

xysea said...

Sorry, anonymous, but I have a hard time imagining you ever voting for a Blue, since you refer to 'Orlando's Democrat Mayor'. A candidate is Democratic, the adjective. A Democrat is a noun.

That's like saying Tampa's Republic Mayor' - wholly made up.

And yes, you can increase taxes on wealthy and businesses - it will not cause any further recession than what we've got. The wealthy and the businesses aren't bailing us out now, for all their lower tax rate under Bush II. The average consumer is what has kept the economy afloat, and the average consumer ain't got no more credit or green left to spend.

What we need are good paying jobs, decent wages and the restoration of the middle class. That will happen under Barack Obama. John McCain is giving us more 'trickle down' disproven economic theory. Problem is, it ain't been trickling down.

Thank you, but taxes are what is needed, as well as regulation of the financial sector. This current crisis is what happens when you let free markets operate a little too freely.

stat said...

Here's what I think. People have already made up their minds who they are going to vote for.
In the blogs, all you see are people fighting for the candidate they want.
Obama was over 40 years old before he paid his student loans. Thanks to Oprah pushing his books, he came into a ton of cash. What makes this man qualified to come up with an economic plan...HA!

WOBG said...

Hey anonymous--you didn't do so well in history class, did you? It was Democrat FDR's government programs that got the country though the Depression (big D) after Republican Coolidge's deregulation and Republican Hoover's ineffectiveness.

You want to rescue a nation from recession/depression, you gotta go Dem. The Repubs will just make sure their rich folks are well padded enough to ride it out, which probably won't help you--you know, because of greed and all.

xysea said...

Stat -

Sorry, but my father was 42 when he paid off his student loans. He became a doctor. So what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? The loans were 20 year loans, for Pete's sake. lol

You make it sound like you're on to something, when you really aren't. That, however, tends to be standard GOP operating procedure.

stat said...


My point is.......if it wasn't for Oprah, he would still be paying off student loans.
Now he is suppose to have an economic plan for the country

Give it a rest

marilynJean said...

Yeah and your argument would work if it were valid. What Obama - and essentially - Democrats will do when he's President is seek out the kazillion loopholes that exist in our tax system that benefit corporations and close them. The loopholes that exist that create tax breaks for businesses that move jobs to overseas, the same businesses that despite losing millions of dollars, reward their outgoing CEOs.

Anyone who tries to scare the public into thinking that taxing businesses will ruin the economy obviously hasn't been around for the last eight years. Bush has done nothing but hand tax breaks to the corporate elite and look where it has gotten us. Doubt me on this? Perhaps you want to check in on the folks at AIG, Lehman and Merrill. They might be able to tell you what caused the massive fuck up that is their lives at this point and I can guarantee you that it ain't taxes.

If increasing tax burdens on businesses in a recession causes depression, what the hell does it mean when the Joe and Jane Average are suffering at the grocery store and at the pump? I don't want to assume, but people like Rex Tillerson over at Exxon don't seem to be at a loss while I'm stuck paying almost $5 at the pump (and that was BEFORE Ike hit.)

If the average American can't afford to pay for everyday things let alone the consumer luxuries that drive the economy, where the hell does that leave businesses? Arguing that saving the backs of businesses is good for the people and thus the economy, doesn't hold true when you look at the current state of affairs.

I am sorry - how anyone can twist their minds into thinking that the current party will "adjust" after screwing up for the past eight years deserves to have their right to vote rescended because illogical thought is criminal to democracy.

Samantha Grace said...

@ anonymous--Obama does have a sound fiscal economic plan. The problem with your argument (other than the poor grammar), is that you think that just by sitting back without taking any drastic measures you can ride out the storm. That mentality has already put us in this spot. I wouldn't advocate it for the future. Furthermore, taxing the rich at an appropriate amount instead of allowing them more loopholes than a cut up pair of fishnet stockings (same thing for corproations) will shore up our government to be able to provide benefits to the "American Worker" McCain thinks is so strong--the same American Worker who is defaulting on his loans, whose home is in foreclosure and whose job has been sent overseas. America cannot survive on trickle-down economics. It has never worked in the past, and it's always taken a Democrat to get us out of the mess a Republican has made.

@stat--I don't get your point other than it's snarkiness. I doubt I'll ever see the end of the tunnel on my student loans...and having gone to both undergrad and law school entirely on financial aid, I know how it feels. If I were lucky enough to get a book published to get out from underneath that, then yes, that's a damn good financial strategy. It worked, didn't it? Furthermore, isn't it that kind of ingenuity that we need?

marilynJean said...

No, him paying off student loans didn't have anything to do with him working all his life or the money he made from his two books...no...Oprah is the answer.

And guess what, stat? Plenty of Americans take a long time to pay off their loans. If only we were all born with silver spoons up our asses like most elitest hacks, then we wouldn't have to scrape and work our way through college.

Samantha Grace said...

Thanks MJ for providing some much needed perspective.

Businesses will suffer as long as the American consumer suffers. It's pretty much that simple. Taxes don't even come into the picture.

stat said...


Hey MarilynJean, sounds like you saved yourself a ton of money.

Howard said...

Obama keeps crying about how bad the economy is,
but if Americans are hurting so bad, how come they
were able to send Obama 66 million dollars last month? ... And, tonight Obama is asking Americans to give him $28,500.00 each for the Obama/Streisand fund raiser dinner. Two faced Obama has no credibility. No Wright, no Farrakhan, no Pfleger, no Rezko, no Ayers, no mean Michelle, and, NOBAMA !!!

Anonymous said...

It's a catch-22...companies are filled to their brim with economic advisors that seek out loopholes. Increase the corporate tax rate, and what happens? Companies move their operations overseas. Decrease corporate taxes and what happens? Perhaps companies will actually stay in the US and grow HERE. The big 3 are a perfect example of this--union expenses and the overall cost of doing business in the US have led them to the logical conclusion that business growth needs to happen overseas.

The fact of the matter is businesses will ALWAYS have aggressive tax options because they serve more people than, say, the single blue-collar worker. They fuel growth and provide jobs. Does it make sense to punish them for creating jobs? Or tax them because they're successful?

Anonymous said...

Obama can't pounce on the economy and the mortgage crisis because the republicans will shred his to pieces if he does. Did everybody forget that Penny Pritzker, his campaign finance director was Chairman of Superior Bank when it failed? And the regulators directly blamed her and her lending practices?

Anonymous said...

I guess I am just amazed at the debate. McCain has said it best. His party is only interested in the promotion of those who make 5 million a year or more. It kills me that so many people will vote against their own self-interests in order to further their bigoted agendas. Let's call it what it is. Don't hide behind Obama's supposed poor economic plan or lack of experience. Call it what it is. Racism plays a huge part in this. The Republican party elected one of the biggest idiots of all time (Bush) who had minimal experience, but now want to set some new parameters for Obama.

stat said...


HA!!! Why do you want to make it a racist issue.

You're right Bush won against Kerry, and Kerry was white.

Obama is black, repeats speeches written for him, (and does a great job at it) Has never made any strides in his own state. Has no major accomplishments that I know of, has had 2 years experience in the Senate. So what makes Obama great?? I love it when people say he has great judgement. Let me repeat something here. SOMEONE ELSE WRITES HIS SPEECHES AND DOES A HELL OF A JOB. Want to know who that is? Remember the Kennedy speech "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country" That speech was written by Ted Sorensen, and that is who also writes Obamas speeches. Do please don't get caught up in his words, because that is all they are. And don't credit him with great judgement, because they are Sorensen's words

stat said...


It is not a great economic plan to tax the hell out of companies. Think about this....Taxes go up for companies, to adjust for this, one of two things happen, either they let people go (rise in unemployment) or the cost of products go up (then people end up buying foreign). His plan will not work. It is simple math....think about it

Nicole said...

I dont want to make it a race issue, but it is. You're so invested in who writes Obama's speeches, well, who wrote/writes Bush's? What about McCain's? What were George Bush's great accomplishments before getting into office (I'm sure you'll concede there were none after). Seriously, people are for Obama because of what he represents. CHANGE. You know, that concept McCain has tried to steal...McCain represents more of the same tired politics from the good ole boys network.

stat said...


The difference is....Obama says they are his own words, and people have bought into his wonderful sense of judgement because of them

Trueth is....His words are coming out of his mouth, because he is reading a teleprompter filled with words written by someone else.

Samantha Grace said...

@ Stat--here's the thing, just because I say "close loopholes" you assume "tax the hell out of companies." That's EXACTLY the problem--you don't get it. There is a happy medium. In fact, many companies did well in that happy medium for decades.

And by the way unions are a convenient excuse for the Big 3 to leave the states. The fact is whether it's a unionized or un-unionized workplace, the labor is more expensive here than it is elsewhere because we (gasp) have regulations on work. Go figure. Unions do more for American Workers than your so-called good economic policies ever could.

And here's the thing--just because he hasn't been an ineffectual senator for 26 years who has changed his "maverick" ways in order to try and get elected, doesn't mean he isn't qualified. I believe Obama writes more of his speeches than most politicians.

By the way, who writes McCain's speeches?

And your "experience" argument falls to pieces when you throw Palin in the mix.

stat said...

Nichole...one more thing

The reason they call McCain a Maverick, is because he doesn't play nice with the kids in his own party. He has always sided on what he believed to be best for his country, no matter what side of the table they are on. So your remark about the "Ole Boys Club" must have come from a very misinformed person, or you just thought it sounded believable.

stat said...


I wasn't going with what you were saying (as interesting as it was) I am going by you're almighty Obama, and his ideas of economic reform.

His wonderful plan will cause havoc, and in the end he will say "the country was in worse shape than I imagined" (when it all blows up in his economic reform face)

Anonymous said...

It's not just union pushing work overseas. It's merely the cost of doing business in the U.S., which I think everyone agrees is a good thing. No one in the U.S. wants the same standard of living compared to Mexico.

But facts are facts. Even companies that do not rely on union labor are outsourcing. It's cheaper. When you're publicly traded, you OWE it to the stockholders to initiate strategies to reduce operating expenses.

I'm just saying, taxes on corporations are not going to produce this magical influx of cash Dems assert so.

I would disagree with the fact that more government is needed. What precisely has the government done for average citizens that is so wonderful? Privatizing actually produces companies that want a profit, and therefore run leaner and more efficiently. The government is absolutely bloated with waste, and you can't blame this on Dubya. Just look at FEMA. What a waste of money, government contracts handed out like candy.

Samantha Grace said...

My solution isn't to just tax companies--it's to close the tax loopholes that they have available to them. I believe they should be rewarded with tax breaks for good behaviors and penalized for bad ones.

I'm sorry, Anonymous (can I call you Anny?)but outsourcing in this country's history has been nothing but a disaster. You mention FEMA, but that disaster was only created in this administration--it actually used to do something. Instead, we start wars to sell off the rights to the highest bidders such as Haliburton. Should private companies be run on profit? Yes. But should we allow the public welfare to be available to the highest bidder? I think not.

Anonymous said...

I do not believe a program like welfare should be privatized. Take this example, though. I have a friend who works in the Ypsilanti court systems, in the IT department. Every year they have to submit their budget. They have a cap, and they max out the budget to the cap on ridiculous things they don't need because if they request less, they lose that money. And why should they care--it's JUST the taxpayer's money. Imagine that waste in other governmental programs and systems. Not that companies don't waste money, but at least it's not at the expense of taxpayers.

Anonymous said...

We all (middle class) are being used. The Republicans are being used more than anyone because they really believe that the issue of abortion is the reason they would need to vote for McCain.

The real reason is that they are being manipulated by the wealthy corporations and special interests who are protecting control over the government and the public. The Right to Choose is the issue they can latch onto and dig in their heels, but the right to choose is not decided by the President

I am no conspiracy theorist, but, given that electing Obama would benefit all of America, it is amazing to me that middle Americans are not all flocking to vote for him. The reason is that they are being manipulated into believing that they should vote for the Republican ticket. We desperately need to reform the health care system. I personally heard Obama discuss reforming the health care system by requiring better, computerized record keeping.

Why don't we have that already? Why can't we have affordable health care for everyone? Why can't we get better care?

My mother died because of a hospital record mistake - they forgot she was diabetic.

Obama is too intelligent to be used by the wealthy special interests and corporations, military contractors, oil companies, so to them he is a threat.

Don't be manipulated. Vote in Obama and you will see the change the world needs to see our country accomplish.

Anonymous said...

"Obama is too intelligent to be used by the wealthy special interests and corporations, military contractors, oil companies"

That is a naive comment if I've ever seen one. Here's a question. The Dems have been in charge of Congress for a couple of years now. Congress has the ability to change this whole mess that Dubya has put us in. They've done...jack? You can get up on your holier-than-thou pedestal and claim Obama will not be swayed by special interests, but all politicians are to a degree. It's part of the game.


blogger templates | Make Money Online