McCain vs Obama: Take 2 (Or Repeat of Last Debate?)
To say that the debates this year have been entertaining and competetive would be the overstatement of the decade. The first debate was like watching two undead zombies attack each other in slow motion. It seemed that after heavily campaigning around the United States, the hustle and bustle flow finally caught up with them. Neither of the candidates showed any flair and the debate, lead by PBS News Anchor Jim Lehrer, seemed to have ended in a reluctant draw.
If you remember last time, I really wanted McCain to come down on Obama with the fury of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. Knowing everything we do about the Democrats in congress, Obama’s rise to power through the ranks of sleaze, and their hand in the economic crisis, it was time that the Republicans and conservatives alike, got angry… and vocally so. We’re typically a quiet, restrained group, but when things get rough like they are now, I’d like to see some confrontation in the Senate, House and especially these debates.
Well, McCain said the gloves were coming off for this debate, but I have one question… when did he take the gloves off, and where exactly did he put them? Did he replace them with something else, so that Obama wouldn’t feel the punches? I don’t get it. It looked like a snowball fight out there. There were no hardball questions… just the same questions from last time, all over again. Same questions equate to the same answers. We really didn’t learn anything new this round.
I think we can attribute that fact to the moderator, Tom “Same Questions” Brokaw. He had apparently received 10s, even 100s of thousands of questions from people online, as well as the people that were in the town hall, which was the format of this particular debate. They wanted to try something different and have user submitted questions, picked by the moderator. Of course, Mr. Brokaw, an Obama supporter by the way, decided that it would be very important to choose the questions best befitting the current situation in America… you know, the questions that had already been debated and discussed to some degree in debates, as well as throughout the campaign. Yes, these were questions befitting the current situation that America is in, but the problem is that the viewers already knew the answer to these.
Were these questions asked to shield Obama from damning questions pertaining to the social issues that could damage his reputation? Well, honestly? I believe they were. I believe that Tom Brokaw, having 100s of thousands of questions to choose from, could have easily picked more enticing, social questions. He could have questioned Obama about his relationship to Bill Ayers and connection to ACORN. He could have asked about abortion or immigration, though he decided to stick to the safe subjects and further Obama’s lead.
Anyway, without sounding too bitter about the results, I do think that this was another debacle of a debate. Though I do believe that McCain came out a little stronger than Obama, there really wasn’t a clear winner. Of course the polls were mixed, skewed, biased and otherwise, as per usual. One thing that’s important to note, is that McCain finally came out with clear, concise responses, kind of dumbing down the answers to the questions so that they were easily understood by the audience. I felt this was important, because Obama tends to like to talk in code a lot of the time, really hiding the truth behind his policies.
For instance, he’s says that he’ll give a tax break to 95% of Americans… What, exactly, does that mean? Well, first of all 1/3 of Americans don’t even pay taxes, so that leave about 62% of America actually getting a tax cut. What does that mean for the 1/3? They’ll most likely get a tax rebate.
What Obama plans on doing, is taxing business; that’s large AND small. Any business making over $250k per year will be receive an increase in tax. That’s most of small business America. In fact, small businesses account for 99% of the employers in the United States; most of which, earn more than $250k.
These facts are what Obama is keeping from the public. His cryptic politics are misleading and dissuade you from seeing the truth. Higher taxes on businesses will mean lower levels of employment and a degradation of the economy. The market will slow, businesses will be forced to pay lower salaries, unless they unload some employees and more. Punishing the hard working and successful, while rewarding others and redistributing wealth, will be the beginning of the end. Add this economic “plan” to all of the other socialistic plans of Obama, and you have a failing democracy.
Did that sound bitter? Maybe… If so, then I’m sorry. I can’t help but feel that the people of this country are being lead astray and lied to. They’ve fallen for this guy’s luster and appeal. He’s sly, he can read a teleprompter pretty damn good and he’s got a Harvard education. Unfortunately, he’s been educated by some of the most liberal and extreme minds on the planet.
After all is said and done, we’re nearing the end of the election season and the last debate is on Wednesday. Three more weeks and the voting shall ensue; fraud or not, and we’ll find out who’s going to be the next President of the United States. It’s an important election, due to the economy and the world affairs going on at the moment, as well as the potential extremism that may come into office.
Hopefully America can unite under one flag and decide on the right candidate to bring us a prosperous 4-8 years. Probably four if it’s McCain, but hey, who knows? You’re only as old as you feel, and he seems pretty young to me. Here’s to Wednesday’s hopefully more entertaining (with new questions) debate. ;]
On the debate. This time around, I have to agree with you. I’d even go so far as to say that McCain actually won this one. He was much more comfortable in his performance than last time, and you could see that he was really in his element that night. There were a couple of moments with Obama that really made me cringe (“safely storing nuclear energy?” d’oh!), and that was a first for me. I’ve watched hundreds of unscripted talks he’s made, and I’ve found him to be very eloquent, but this night he flubbed some big lines. Aside from their performance though, I agree that this was pretty much a repeat of the first debate.
I think it’s important to note that while I thought McCain came out ahead in regards to performance, I still think Obama has the right ideas on the issues.
As to why they weren’t discussing other issues, well, to paraphrase the Bill Clinton slogan, “it’s the economy, stupid.” Every poll this year has shown that the economy has been the voters top concern. Of course it’s going to get the most attention. Getting up in a bunch about abortion is a luxury you can afford when things are good.
And you’re STILL laboring the Bill Ayers connection? Are you just being willfully ignorant, or did you simply not read the article I sent you? http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/790/
I’d also like to see how Obama is in any way linked to the ACORN improprieties. Heck, I’m not even sure that there is any foul play going on with ACORN to begin with. What I’d like to know is HOW exactly they are going to translate the extra fraudulent regristrations into actual fraudulent votes. You show me that and I’ll join you in your outrage.
On taxes. Let me start off by saying, wow, 1/3 don’t pay taxes? What do you mean by that? Where did you get that number, and who is it referring to? Does that include everyone, even children? Or does it refer to adult workers? That sounds like an inordinate number of people not paying taxes.
And small business account for 99% of employment?? That sounds like an astounding number. Where did you get that number? And furthermore, what qualifies as a “small business” under that number?
Obama’s 95% number refers to tax-paying families. If you look at ALL tax filers, the number is 81%.
You can compare the Obama plan and the McCain plan here:
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/numbers/displayatab.cfm?Docid=1976&DocTypeID=7
Numbers in brackets indicate tax reductions, regular numbers indicate tax increases, zeroes indicate no change.
Just curious, how much will you and your wife get cut from the respective plans Kev?
Well hello there! lol
I never mentioned this statement: “Ayers and Obama ran a radical education foundation together.”
He did, however, meet Ayers years ago and has garnered Ayer’s support for the Illinois State Senate election. In fact, Ayers did throw Obama a fundraiser at his own house (which Obama did attend). That, to me, counts as an endorsement and association of some kind.
It would be silly to deny that Ayers and Obama never exchanged ideas, during the times that Obama and Ayers both served on the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (from 1995-2001) and the Woods Foundation (from 1993-2002).
Something else that is of question, is the fact that Obama once claimed he “didn’t know” that Ayers was a terrorist or had committed despicable acts. Well, first of all… how in the world did he not know that? They’ve been in the news ever since the 60s and heavily covered. The attacks from the Weather Underground are discussed in schools, and I find it unreal that being the “President” of the Harvard Law Review and a lawyer, that he never would have heard of the instance. Deplorable…
Second, he changed his story from never “knowing” to “I thought he was reformed. Get your story straight, yet?
Here’s a source for the rundown: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,437201,00.html
Let’s also not forget that Bill Ayer’s wife, Bernadine Dohrn, and Obama’s wife actually worked together in 1985 at the same law firm. Of course, Dohrn couldn’t pass the bar, because of her controversial past, but Bill Ayer’s father (who was basically the Kingpin of Chicago), was able to get her an opportunity within Sidley & Austin. Just something to note.
Anyway, I know that it’s very wrong to associate Obama with his associates. People hate to hear the truth for some reason. However, there’s an old saying that goes: “You are known by the company you keep.” I just find it funny that the company that Obama keeps is generally anti-American, in the form of hate speakers, unrepentant terrorists, and corrupt organizations. Funny, but scary to many Americans.
Why is it scary? Because it’s a testament of Obama’s judgment and character, and possibly his beliefs. He’s been educated and indoctrinated by the far left extremists, making him one of the (if not THE) most liberal senator(s) in the Senate.
As for ACORN, I’m just going to quote what I said on Facebook: “Obama has contributed $800,000 to ACORN to acquire votes for his campaign. He was also a … Read Morelawyer for ACORN in the mid-90s.”
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/11/us/politics/11acorn.html?em
As for 1/3 of Americans not paying taxes, I’m referring to income tax. Obviously, sales tax will apply to most everyone. Income tax is what the two candidates are talking about, so that’s what I’m referring to. Most other taxes are state taxes, and as such, not relevant to the Presidential election, since they are responsible for federal taxes.
Anyway, in America we have tax brackets. If you fall into a particular tax bracket, it determines the percentage that you pay in income taxes. Well, the 35% of Americans that pay no income tax fall into the low income category/tax bracket. 65% of Americans fall into a tax paying bracket, because they earn over a certain amount and can’t write off enough to fall into the lowest tax bracket. Taxes are based on taxable income, which is the net income from the deductions of your gross income. It’s all very complicated and I wouldn’t be able to explain taxes at depth to anyone, since they’re written in IRS/Accountant code. Truth be told, the tax system needs to be simplified, so that everyday people can understand it.
I didn’t say that “small business accounts for 99% of the United States employment”, I said that small business accounts for 99% of the employers in the United States. Large businesses, in effect, account for about 1%. The number of employees, by the way, is what determines if a business is small or large. I believe that a company employing less than 500 people is a small business and anything above that would be large. So, you can understand that most companies that are even perceived as being large, because they employee 500 people, are actually “small.” Keep all of this in mind when Obama mentions “small businesses” next time.
You’re a guy who likes his sources, so here you go: http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/oecon/chap4.htm
By the way, some more helpful information about employment/unemployment can be found here: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
Very informative and full of statistical goodness.