Jack & Jill Politics

Chuck revealed his hand when he said just today to Tim Russert that the “ObamaNation” activists were going to come after the media and anybody else if Obama wasn’t the nominee and in doing so they would destroy the Democratic party.

They’re still trying to peg us as ‘ emotional’ and ‘irrational’ and a ‘cult’. When in fact, we’re very sane, and know how to get our point across, and they’re stunned.

She has to release her money statements for March. I’m very interested in the truth about her numbers.

Valid points made from opposing viewpoints are easy to disregard if one recognizes the name attached and the readers deems them ‘conservative.’
At least the post was read, but unfortunately the points raised have not been addressed. Only requested that they be censured.

Mark Steyn was the author of the comments @ 8:48

Here’s Larry Kudlow:

During the debate, Obama bungled his answers on tax policy, big time. Period. End of sentence. End of story. To my liberal friends in the media, all I can say is: Get over it. Your guy has a very poor grasp of basic economic principles.

First off, you don’t raise taxes during a recession. That’s a no-brainer. Second, doubling the capital-gains tax rate will affect Americans up and down the income ladder, not just rich hedge-fund managers. In addition, capital-gains tax cuts are self-financing, and they stimulate jobs and the economy. You want to raise budget revenues and spark economic growth? Cut the cap-gains tax rate. That’s what history shows.

The Wall Street Journal’s Steve Moore points out that in 2005, almost half of all tax returns reporting capital gains came from households with incomes under $50,000, while more than three-quarters came from households earning less than $100,000.

Obama also proposed uncapping the payroll tax, another blunder that will hit people up and down the income ladder. While Obama pledges tax hikes only for folks earning more that $200,000 a year, his tax hike on payrolls would actually slam middle-income earners. The cap on wages subject to the payroll tax is presently $102,000. By eliminating that cap Obama will be soaking veteran firemen, cops, teachers, and health-service workers, along with a variety of other occupations.

In fact, in America’s largest cities, a firefighter married to a school teacher can earn close to $200,000 filing jointly. So not only will each spouse separately pay more for Social Security and health care under Obama’s plan, together they’ll also be slammed by Obama’s cap-gains tax increase.

This is more than just a failure to understand the Laffer curve. It’s another cultural misstep by Obama. I can’t help but wonder if the senator knows any cops or firemen. His appeal is to well-educated latte liberals. That remark about middle-income folks having turned to God, faith, and guns because of economic setbacks? Not only was it ill-advised, it illustrates the wide cultural chasm that exists between the candidate and the rest of America.

In effect, Obama’s economics are bad and his social circle is very limited. This is one of the many reasons why a quarter of the Hillary Democrats are telling pollsters they’ll likely move to John McCain in the general election.

Halle,

So, are pastoral associations of the candidates in bounds or out?

Do you believe voters should excuse Wright, but not Hagge? Should both candidates be held up to further scrutiny or not? Should they be treated equally, and if not, why?

S

They can afford to – the poor and middle class working folks cannot.

“Bush was a drunk and a drug addict and ran several businesses into the ground…okay, this one doesn’t prove my point. ; )
———————————–

ahahahahahahahahahahaha

Too funny!

haale,

The focus is more on Wright because the truth is, voters have so little to go on with Obama. He is virtually a newcomer on the national political stage, thrust onto the scene by his speech a the last Democratic convention. His record in the Illinois State Senate and his record in the US Senate are thin, and highly partisan. This calls into question his ability to ‘reach across the aisle’ and to effect real ‘change’ in such a highly partisan political climate.

Lacking any evidence of working on any major political issue (ie judicial appointments, immigration, etc.) in the US Senate, those seeking to become more informed look to Illinois and the roots of his political career. Personal and professional affiliations are also examined.

As children we are often taught to choose our friends wisely. We are told that hanging with the ‘wrong crowd’ can get us into trouble.

So it is true in national, presidential politics. The quality and quantity of a candidate’s political and personal relationships are used by many to determine the ‘content of ones character’ and the quality of their judgment.

McCain and Obama should be scrutinized for the length and depth of their religious affiliations. They should expect to be criticized when those associations are seen as being out of the mainstream by a majority of voters. Voters can decide if it its a big enough deal to them to disqualify either candidate from having ones vote, but a double standard should not be applied.

Anonymous and D,

McCain has an interview with Stephanopolous (sp?)tomorrow so we shall see…

And I’m sorry… no one is squeaky clean because “clean” is relative. Personally, associations with Code Pink is a plus in my book!

Great discussion guys/gals!

S,
The democrats don’t realize that the situation in Iraq is going to require a presence for the forseeable future. So when they get into office-after being swept in on antiwar sentiment-and they learn that lesson, it kills their standing with the base.

A lot of the representatives who were swept in in 06 on the same sentiment may well find themselves bounced out the door, for the same reason. And I’d love to run against Webb when he’s up for reelection.

But if you notice, the Code Pink connection isn’t even being heavily reported. And if you were to try to mention it to most of the Obamaists and the liberal media, they’d write you off.

S,
Remember, you’re talking about someone who preaches that he was “against the war from the start.” that’s so intricately tied to what his campaign’s about that anything less than a complete withdrawal-regardless of the end results of such-will be seen a failure to the base. So on that issue, to suggest what you are loses him the nomination.

I don’t think McCain uses either as attack points. Once you get past the rhetoric, both your points should be common sense.

d,

If elected, even though exiting Iraq and not raising taxes are ‘common sense’ would the Congress and the base put so much pressure on Obama, that he would have no choice but to submit to their will?

S,
Probably. The base (which-oddly enough-is what “al qaida” translates to) would kill him.

s.,

Apparently, that’s what you hope will happen. That you still think most Americans are stupid enough to be duped yet again. That the Baby Boomer Battles still have cache in 2008.

CodePink co-hosted that fundraiser ages ago on the political calendar.

Bringing it up now is a Hail Mary.

Like I said, let’s see who catches it.

craig,

What I truly want is to be able to believe that Obama is a independent thinker and a moderate politician.

Hillary is working to divide the party into the ‘activists’ or ‘new dem party power base’ vs. ‘the common man’ or ‘old dem party power base.’ She is using the unions to raise questions about Obama’s radical associations and his self-proclaimed superior judgment, all under the guise of “this is what the Republicans will do.”

I agree, it is up to the voters to decide the primaries, but the superdelegates will still be left to make the final call.

This is from the “Winter Soldier Hearings” held in March, 2008 in Washington DC:

“We tried to comprehend the enormous scale of the so-called “collateral damage” in Iraq as speakers cited surveys that estimated about a million Iraqi civilians have died since the U.S. invasion, and that over four million Iraqis were forced from their homes. The speakers told of Iraqis, being without power and water, begging for food and fuel, and only wanting foreign troops and the 180,000 private contractors and mercenaries to leave so they can begin to rebuild their devastated country.”

The Miami Herald reports on a study at the National Defense University that it claims calls the war in Iraq a “major debacle” with the outcome in doubt. However, what the Miami Herald didn’t report was that the study looked at a specific time period and has little bearing on the current status of the conflict. The Herald’s report is disputed by the author, John Collins.

Collins writes, “The Miami Herald story (”Pentagon Study: War is a ‘Debacle’ “) distorts the nature of and intent of my personal research project. It was not an NDU study, nor was it a Pentagon study. Indeed, the implication of the Herald story was that this study was mostly about current events. Such is not the case. It was mainly about the period 2002-04. The story also hypes a number of paragraphs, many of which are quoted out of context. The study does not “lay much of the blame” on Secretary Rumsfeld for problems in the conduct of the war, nor does it say that he “bypassed the Joint Chiefs of Staff.” It does not single out “Condoleeza Rice and Stephen Hadley” for criticism.

Here is a fair summary of my personal research, which formally is NDU INSS Occasional Paper 5, “Choosing War: The Decision to Invade Iraq and Its Aftermath.”

This study examines how the United States chose to go to war in Iraq, how its decision-making process functioned, and what can be done to improve that process. The central finding of this study is that U.S. efforts in Iraq were hobbled by a set of faulty assumptions, a flawed planning effort, and a continuing inability to create security conditions in Iraq that could have fostered meaningful advances in stabilization, reconstruction, and governance. With the best of intentions, the United States toppled a vile, dangerous regime but has been unable to replace it with a stable entity. Even allowing for progress under the Surge, the study insists that mistakes in the Iraq operation cry out in the mid- to long-term for improvements in the U.S. decision-making and policy execution systems.

The study recommends the development of a national planning charter, improving the qualifications of national security planners, streamlining policy execution in the field, improving military education, strengthening the Department of State and USAID, and reviewing the tangled legal authorities for complex contingencies. The study ends with a plea to improve alliance relations and to exercise caution in deciding to go to war.”

Rikyrah

There’s a radio talk show host from Chicago on the CNN Rick on the Road Show explaining why the “elitist” tag applied to SBO was offensive to blacks.