Obama versus McCain (versus the rest)

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Wow, lots of polls today. Here are some more state polls..

Insider Advantage/Poll Position (Likely Voters)

VA: McCain 48-46
CO: Obama 51-41
GA: McCain 51-43
Big 10 Battleground (Registered Voters)
OH: Obama 46-45
MN: Obama 47-45

Of those, strictly FWIW & IMHO, barring any huge developments (i.e. if the campaign just played out the string from here with no major gaffes/home runs from either candidate)

I figure Obama wins Virginia & Colorado, the Georgia one sounds about right, and I think McCain may actually win both Ohio & Minnesota.

[Young Drachma]

chartjunk » Blog Archive » Tax Plans (that’s one for you, nineteen for me).

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I figure Obama wins Virginia & Colorado, the Georgia one sounds about right, and I think McCain may actually win both Ohio & Minnesota.

These polls are all over the place.

Demographically, the way that these states tie into the popular vote, there is no conceivable way that McCain could win Minnesota while losing Virginia and Colorado.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

Demographically, the way that these states tie into the popular vote, there is no conceivable way that McCain could win Minnesota while losing Virginia and Colorado.

Call it a fluky hunch based on a combination of the polling data I'm seeing & a (un)healthy dose of gut.

I've had a bad feeling about Virginia for quite a while now and I've actually been surprised Colorado has been red for as long as it has. Minnesota, for whatever reason, I've had a similar sort of good feeling about in spite of its blue background in recent elections.

Also, considering how split we've been as a country for quite a while, something completely off the wall like the scenario I mentioned would actually make a weird sort of sense. Assuming the two are really very close on election day, the swap of Virginia & Minnesota could happen on the basis
of nothing more than different weather patterns driving turnout up or down.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

I'm disappointed that your reaction was one of agreement, because I believe I would have told my non-American friends to go fuck themselves.

Unlike you I value even dissenting points of view. What sghould I tell me wife and in-laws to go fuck themselves?

[Flasch186]

I love seeing things like the chart above because it borders on indisputable and what you see is what you get, so the ads from either side stating stuff that contradicts the above simply become dressing in an attempt to 'spin'.

[Kodos]

That's a great chart. Really shows who is helping the middle class, and who likes to make the rich richer.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

Oh I'm sorry. What is the proper Obama-like response to "Haw haw, Americans are so stupid"? Besides agreeing, of course.

"No, no, you're getting America all wrong. Despite the fact that many small town Americans feel let down by their government and so therefore cling bitterly to xenophobia, faith in God, or their 2nd Amendment rights, they're still basically decent.

You know, they may listen to the wrong talk radio shows, or watch the wrong television networks, but that doesn't mean they're stupid."

I guess I'm just a jingoist freak, because despite our flaws, I still think this is the greatest country in the world. It's like someone insulting my family. We may have internal arguments, but if someone insults them, I'm going to stand up for my family.

This leads me to the problem I have with a lot of people in this country not just conservatives though they are the primary "offenders'. The fact that many american's feel we are the "big shot hot shots" of the world and can do as we please with no thought for other people. The feeling of if you are against us fuck you get out of our way. This my friends is not the American way my father fought in WW 2 in the Pacific for. We are a nation of 290 million pople on a planet of 6.721 billion! So why should evryone fall in line with basically 120 million peoples views since even half the adult population is against it? That is by the way less than 2% of the world pop. And this may all sound like I am not patriotic or proud of being American and to that I say you would be wrong. I as many others on this board chose to serve my country in my case for 8 years in the military and another 4 years in the government. During that time I was in combat in the Gulf War and spent most of 11 yeras living in foreign country's including living among the locals. This experience has given me invaluable opportunites to learn what others thought as opposed to just talking about what I thought. I guess I just think we should start listening alittle more instead of just talking.IMHO.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

chartjunk » Blog Archive » Tax Plans (that’s one for you, nineteen for me).

There is a third chart that is missing from that site, based on total tax burden:

[MikeVic]

Am I reading the chart correctly if I say that Obama wants to lower taxes for the bottom/middle income people?

[TazFTW]

Rasmussen Reports™: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election.

Connecticut, Obama 53 McCain 41. Previous Rasmussen (7/31) Obama 51 McCain 36.

Rasmussen Reports™: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election.

New Jersey, Obama 55 McCain 42. Previous Rasmussen (08/04) Obama 48 McCain 40.

Likely voters.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

"Progressive" might be acceptable.

I'm not even sure what you're trying to get at. Are you suggesting that Americans should listen to being called "stupid", "uneducated", "ignorant", "small-minded", or something else and just nod our heads?

Folks don't have to only say nice things, but if you're going to say something not so nice, I certainly get to speak my mind in return. Or is this the articulation of the DT policy: "First we turn our cheeks, then we spread 'em."

You are correct sir you do have the right to say what you like in response which is precisely one thing a lot of conservatives would like to take away from Marxist pinkos like myself that won't tow the line. But, the problem is with your response of " go fuck yourself" is that is not meant as a constructive or postive communicative response just as a combative answer.

[Flasch186]

well I guess the first question is where you draw the line to mean 'bottom/middle'?

Then you could say that that may be the plan.

Whether or not one candidate is 'trusted' to accomplish this is another story.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Galaril

The feeling of if you are against us fuck you get out of our way.

Sums it up pretty well IMO.

This my friends is not the American way my father fought in WW 2 in the Pacific for.

To that I can only say "Bullshit". I'd say that's a significant part of why he was sent there to fight ... along with making sure we handed out a healthy dose of payback of course. Or have you forgotten the colonial nature of quite a few of the allies?

I guess I just think we should start listening a little more instead of just talking.

Depends largely upon what's being said is worth hearing.
And most stuff, frankly, isn't.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by MikeVic

Am I reading the chart correctly if I say that Obama wants to lower taxes for the bottom/middle income people?

He apparently wants to lower taxes for the 95% of the population that is paying 48ish% of the total taxes. More would be cut for those making less.

[CamEdwards]

Originally Posted by Galaril

You are correct sir you do have the right to say what you like in response which is precisely one thing a lot of conservatives would like to take away from Marxist pinkos like myself that won't tow the line. But, the problem is with your response of " go fuck yourself" is that is not meant as a constructive or postive communicative response just as a combative answer.

As opposed to the constructiveness of "There sure are a lot of stupid Americans"?

As to the "Marxist pinkos", I have no problem with them speaking their mind. As a talk show host, it typically gives me a great deal to talk about! It's not conservatives who are pushing for a return to the Fairness Doctrine. It's not conservatives who are sending out blast e-mails demanding that supporters call radio stations and protest conservative guests speaking about politics. It's not conservatives that are setting up "free speech zones" and speech codes on college campuses. Yes, there are plenty of conservatives who would love to see restrictions on speech. There are also plenty of Marxist pinkos who'd love to do the same.

This leads me to the problem I have with a lot of people in this country not just conservatives though they are the primary "offenders'. The fact that many american's feel we are the "big shot hot shots" of the world and can do as we please with no thought for other people. The feeling of if you are against us fuck you get out of our way. This my friends is not the American way my father fought in WW 2 in the Pacific for. We are a nation of 290 million pople on a planet of 6.721 billion! So why should evryone fall in line with basically 120 million peoples views since even half the adult population is against it? That is by the way less than 2% of the world pop. And this may all sound like I am not patriotic or proud of being American and to that I say you would be wrong. I as many others on this board chose to serve my country in my case for 8 years in the military and another 4 years in the government. During that time I was in combat in the Gulf War and spent most of 11 yeras living in foreign country's including living among the locals. This experience has given me invaluable opportunites to learn what others thought as opposed to just talking about what I thought. I guess I just think we should start listening alittle more instead of just talking.IMHO.

There's a difference between recognizing the unique and dramatic contributions that the mere existance of the United States has had on the world, and not giving a damn about the rest of the world.

You spent most of 11 years living in foreign countries, protecting the interests not just of the United States, but of those locals as well. I'd say that's a fairly good demonstration of the United States' concern for other countries in and of itself.

But when I say we're the greatest country on earth, I mean it. It's not through any of MY contributions, and it's more than the contributions of people like yourself, your father, or my own (who also fought in the Pacific in WWII). The fact is that before 1776, no country had ever done what our Founders did, and you could make a case that no country after has ever been as successful at it as we have. Our Commander-in-Chief stepped down after the war to gain independence, instead of becoming a military dictator. He stepped down as President after two terms, instead of serving for life. Our 2nd president stepped down after being defeated, and turned the country over to the rightful winner of the election, despite the fact that the two parties believed the other was veering dangerously close to treasonously violating the ideals of the Revolution.

The Civil War may not have started as an abolitionist movement, but that's what it became. After the war was over, we unified once again. No matter how unstable it might have been, we did not erupt once more into civil war. We live in a melting pot of cultures, with relatively little inter-cultural friction. We have had a stable government for 150 years, despite aquisition of new lands and an end to the days of geographic isolation. And all the time, we continued to grow as a world power, because we understand the world as it is, not how we would like it to be.

Has there ever been a time in history where the civilized world has NOT had a dominant power? Perhaps the Dark Ages would qualify, and we all know what a world that was. It is, IMHO, beyond silliness to think that if America suddenly ceases to be a hyperpower, that some other country won't take its place. So who should that power be? If the United States is not the greatest nation on earth, who would you propose take its place?

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Depends largely upon what's being said is worth hearing.
And most stuff, frankly, isn't.

well that's just stupid. You should hear everything so that you can decide what to do with it.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Sums it up pretty well IMO.



To that I can only say "Bullshit". I'd say that's a significant part of why he was sent there to fight ... along with making sure we handed out a healthy dose of payback of course. Or have you forgotten the colonial nature of quite a few of the allies?



Depends largely upon what's being said is worth hearing.
And most stuff, frankly, isn't.

Valid points.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

well that's just stupid. You should hear everything so that you can decide what to do with it.

But how many times do you need to hear the same crap that you've already rejected? Crap is crap, regardless of the language.

Or do you actually believe there's a significant amount of anything "new" coming from any quarter (including those I agree with) at this point, i.e. something that hasn't already been said countless times over?

Or do you just have so much spare time that you care to hear the same rejected ideas/concepts in multiple accents?

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

But how many times do you need to hear the same crap that you've already rejected? Crap is crap, regardless of the language.

Or do you actually believe there's a significant amount of anything "new" coming from any quarter (including those I agree with) at this point, i.e. something that hasn't already been said countless times over?

Or do you just have so much spare time that you care to hear the same rejected ideas/concepts in multiple accents?

I guess im being too technical. Im saying that before someone opens their mouth you can't be certain what is going to come out so you *should* listen and then decide to ignore it/consider it/ etc.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Of those, strictly FWIW & IMHO, barring any huge developments (i.e. if the campaign just played out the string from here with no major gaffes/home runs from either candidate)

I figure Obama wins Virginia & Colorado, the Georgia one sounds about right, and I think McCain may actually win both Ohio & Minnesota.

That would be very interesting. Obama likely still wins in that scenario, since he's almost certain to win Iowa. Right now he's got Kerry's 252. Losing MN gets him down to 242. Winning IA (7), CO (9), and VA (13) would get him to 271 electoral votes.

Right now, the most fun scenario is if Obama wins the Kerry states, and adds IA, NM, and NV. That would give each candidate 269 and send the election to the House.

[Big Fo]

Nobody's e-mail is safe. Bored 4chan users got to Barack Obama's GMail account a day after they hacked into Palin's e-mail yesterday.

theonion.com link

The "Need experience? We can help..." Monster.com ad was a nice touch

[Jas_lov]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

I have to admit, I don't understand the McCain/Palin campaign strategy over the past few days. They're in Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin. He's behind in all of these states, and even if he did win them, they are not states that are going to get him to 270 (if he won these states, they would be getting him to 290 or 300). I don't know why they're wasting their time and resources in these states.

The Big 10 battleground polls that came out today have Iowa tied which really surprised me because I don't think it's that close. The DM Register poll that came out last week had Obama up 12 and they're probably the best pollster in the state.

Maybe McCain has different internal numbers that are showing a big swing from the Palin pick. Huckabee won here in January so there is a base she can get here. McCain came to Iowa last month and reiterated his opposition to ethanol subsidies. He never does well in the Iowa caucuses and I still think it's the surest Red state pickup for Obama so I don't understand McCain's strategy either.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

As opposed to the constructiveness of "There sure are a lot of stupid Americans"?

As to the "Marxist pinkos", I have no problem with them speaking their mind. As a talk show host, it typically gives me a great deal to talk about! It's not conservatives who are pushing for a return to the Fairness Doctrine. It's not conservatives who are sending out blast e-mails demanding that supporters call radio stations and protest conservative guests speaking about politics. It's not conservatives that are setting up "free speech zones" and speech codes on college campuses. Yes, there are plenty of conservatives who would love to see restrictions on speech. There are also plenty of Marxist pinkos who'd love to do the same.



There's a difference between recognizing the unique and dramatic contributions that the mere existance of the United States has had on the world, and not giving a damn about the rest of the world.

You spent most of 11 years living in foreign countries, protecting the interests not just of the United States, but of those locals as well. I'd say that's a fairly good demonstration of the United States' concern for other countries in and of itself.

But when I say we're the greatest country on earth, I mean it. It's not through any of MY contributions, and it's more than the contributions of people like yourself, your father, or my own (who also fought in the Pacific in WWII). The fact is that before 1776, no country had ever done what our Founders did, and you could make a case that no country after has ever been as successful at it as we have. Our Commander-in-Chief stepped down after the war to gain independence, instead of becoming a military dictator. He stepped down as President after two terms, instead of serving for life. Our 2nd president stepped down after being defeated, and turned the country over to the rightful winner of the election, despite the fact that the two parties believed the other was veering dangerously close to treasonously violating the ideals of the Revolution.

The Civil War may not have started as an abolitionist movement, but that's what it became. After the war was over, we unified once again. No matter how unstable it might have been, we did not erupt once more into civil war. We live in a melting pot of cultures, with relatively little inter-cultural friction. We have had a stable government for 150 years, despite aquisition of new lands and an end to the days of geographic isolation. And all the time, we continued to grow as a world power, because we understand the world as it is, not how we would like it to be.

Has there ever been a time in history where the civilized world has NOT had a dominant power? Perhaps the Dark Ages would qualify, and we all know what a world that was. It is, IMHO, beyond silliness to think that if America suddenly ceases to be a hyperpower, that some other country won't take its place. So who should that power be? If the United States is not the greatest nation on earth, who would you propose take its place?

Good post and appreciate the thought you put into it. I agree with alot that you said here. The thing that makes me crazy is that both sides the "Red" and "Blue" forget too often we are all Americans as well as members of the world as well. That is all I am saying. I really wish we all could get back to the USA and less this us against them shit in the US today between the two sides.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

I'm saying that before someone opens their mouth you can't be certain what is going to come out so you *should* listen and then decide to ignore it/consider it/ etc.

But if we're talking about, let's call them philosophical issues/big picture stuff/etc. then probability, past experience with someone on other subjects, other known information, etc. provides a good bit of information that saves time otherwise wasted.

And ultimately, whether you agree or disagree with the other person specifically, what are the odds that they're actually going to say something you haven't already heard, assessed, and formed a position on already? Maybe that's one of those YMMV things but for me it's pretty low.

[ISiddiqui]

Interesting fight over one of Obama's ads:

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - Obama’s Limbaugh ad causes stir « - Blogs from CNN.com

I wonder how much traction this will gain since most informed people know that McCain got a LOT of flack by his party for turning his back on them during the illegal immigration debate. Trying to link him to Limbaugh may provide short term gains, but it may hurt Obama as he gets tarred with the "race-bating" brush.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Galaril

I really wish we all could get back to the USA and less this us against them shit in the US today between the two sides.

But I'd say there's a great deal of "us vs them" that's a reality, unfortunate or not.

There are significantly fewer widely shared values today than, say, the 1940's. Better, worse, indifferent, whatever, the reality is that "United" is well on it's well to becoming an obvious misnomer.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Big Fo

Nobody's e-mail is safe. Bored 4chan users got to Barack Obama's GMail account a day after they hacked into Palin's e-mail yesterday.

theonion.com link

The "Need experience? We can help..." Monster.com ad was a nice touch

I love the Cheney and Carter emails .

LOL!! I just saw the Biden one in the trash folder!

[CamEdwards]

Originally Posted by Galaril

Good post and appreciate the thought you put into it. I agree with alot that you said here. The thing that makes me crazy is that both sides the "Red" and "Blue" forget too often we are all Americans as well as members of the world as well. That is all I am saying. I really wish we all could get back to the USA and less this us against them shit in the US today between the two sides.

Me too, which is why I'm less offended by an American saying "there sure are a lot of stupid Americans" than I am a foreigner saying it.

No matter how many differences we have, we will always have at least ONE thing in common with each other. And you're right, it's easy to forget that.

[larrymcg421]

More Big 10 Battleground (RV)....

PA: tied 45-45
MI: Obama 48-44
WI: Obama 45-44
IA: tied 45-45
IN: McCain 47-43
IL: Obama 53-37

Also, Pew Research released a National poll showing a 46-46 tie.

[CamEdwards]

Speaking of the Palin e-mail hack, this is from Wired:

Palin E-Mail Hacker Says It Was Easy | Threat Level from Wired.com

A person claiming to be the hacker who obtained access to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's private Yahoo e-mail on Tuesday has posted a supposed first-person account of the hack, revealing the relatively simple steps he says he took to crack the private e-mail of the Republican vice-presidential candidate.

The story was briefly posted Wednesday to the 4chan forum where the hack first surfaced. Bloggers have connected the handle of the poster, "Rubico," to an e-mail address, and tentatively identified the owner as a college student in Tennessee.

Threat Level was unable to reach the student by phone because his number is unlisted. A person who identified himself as the student's father, when reached at home, said he could not talk about the matter and would have no comment. The father is a Democratic state representative in Tennessee. Threat Level is not identifying them by name because authorities have not identified any suspects in the case, and the link to the student so far is tenuous.

[cartman]

I'd be highly suspicious of that, because usually when a name is used in a posting at 4chan, it is almost never that person doing the posting. 99% of the time, the posting is done by 'anonymous'. If it is true, then he is one of the dumbest people ever to log on to the intertubes.

[Big Fo]

Originally Posted by wired.com

A person who identified himself as the student's father, when reached at home, said he could not talk about the matter and would have no comment. The father is a Democratic state representative in Tennessee.

That's pretty embarrassing.

[Flasch186]

MBBF, this is the inevitable ROI I was talking about earlier. It isn't a reflection on Palin in particular because ROI and it's diminishment, occurs with almost everything:

Palin excitement levels off as Democrats regain lead

(CNN) -- Is America's honeymoon with Sarah Palin over? Polls suggest that might be so.

Sarah Palin and John McCain dropped behind the Democratic ticket in the polls Wednesday.

Palin appears to be losing some of her initial appeal as Democrats make gains in the polls.

The Alaska governor came out swinging at the Republican National Convention, energizing her party's base and shifting the momentum to John McCain's favor.

At rallies in the week following the convention, the McCain-Palin duo saw their best attendance and a newfound zeal, and the Republican ticket took the lead in national polls for the first time.

But polls show that the momentum has shifted once again.

Palin's favorable rating is at 40 percent, according to a CBS News/New York Times poll. That's down 4 points from last week. Her unfavorable rating is at 30 percent, rising 8 points in a week.

The poll was conducted September 12-16 and has a sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

Former Bush adviser Karl Rove predicted Wednesday that Palin's star power would wear off.

"Nothing lasts for 60-some-odd days," Rove told The Associated Press. "Will she be the center of attention in the remaining 48 days? No, but she came on in a very powerful way and has given a sense of urgency to the McCain campaign that's pretty remarkable."

But this week, the Democrats recaptured the headlines, and Obama regained his lead in the national polls.

CNN's latest poll of polls, out Thursday afternoon, shows him ahead of McCain by 3 points, 47 percent to 44 percent.

The poll of polls consists of six recent surveys: CBS/NYT (September 12-16), Quinnipiac (September 11-16), IPSOS-McClatchy (September 11-15), Gallup (September 15-17), Diageo/Hotline (September 14-16) and American Research Group (September 13-15). It does not have a sampling error.

After a week in which McCain put Obama on the defensive over allegations of playing the gender card, the economic crisis has given Obama an opportunity to go on the offense. Most Americans see Obama as more capable than John McCain when it comes to handling the economy, polls show.

The Illinois senator has been aggressively attacking what he sees as shortcomings in McCain's economic plans.

Also this week, McCain handed Obama ammunition for what has turned out to be a weeklong attack.

Despite the shake up on Wall Street, McCain said Monday that "the fundamentals of the American economy are strong."

The Obama campaign jumped on those remarks, replaying them in a campaign ad, even after McCain clarified his comments. He said what he meant was that American workers are the fundamental strength of the economy and that the country will rebound with their help.

Obama continued to criticize the remark Wednesday at an event in Elko, Nevada: "His campaign must have realized that probably wasn't a smart thing to say on the day of a financial meltdown, so they sent him back out a few hours later to clean up his remarks."

Obama has filled this week's campaign speeches with a focused view of his economic agenda and sound-bite friendly slams to bruise McCain's image.

"This is somebody who has been in Congress for 26 years, who put seven of the most powerful Washington lobbyists in charge of his campaign. And now he tells us that he is the one who is going to take on the old boys network. The old boys network, in the McCain campaign, that's called a staff meeting," he said Wednesday.

David Gergen, a senior political analyst for CNN and former presidential adviser, said neither candidate has shown expertise on the economic situation, but Obama has gained more from it than McCain.

"The momentum for John McCain and Sarah Palin has stalled out. There is a little momentum on Barack Obama's part. But he hasn't yet fully seized it, and it is still very close," he said, adding that McCain could still recapture it.

But the Democratic ticket has shown a weakness in regards to the government takeover of insurance giant AIG.

A day after saying the federal government should not come to the rescue of AIG, Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden shifted his position Wednesday, saying he needs to get more details on the terms of the $85 billion takeover.

"The truth is, I don't know what the bailout is yet," Biden said Wednesday afternoon in Mansfield, Ohio.

Obama was slow to respond when asked about the AIG deal. A statement issued from his campaign did not clarify whether he supports or opposes it.

McCain said he didn't want the government to have to take over the company, but it was necessary.

"When AIG was bailed out, I didn't like it, but I understood it needed to be done to protect hard-working Americans with insurance policies and annuities. Sen. Obama didn't take a position. On the biggest issue of the day, he didn't know what to think. He may not realize it, but you don't get to vote 'present' as president of the United States," he said Thursday in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

He also accused Obama of seeing the economic crisis as a "political opportunity."

Obama's campaign responded by accusing McCain of flip-flopping on the issue because he said he opposed the bailout this week.

"Barack Obama does not second-guess the Fed's decision to take unprecedented action to prevent the failure of one of the largest insurance companies in the world from creating an even larger crisis, and he believes it must protect families who count on insurance," said campaign spokesman Bill Burton.

As the McCain campaign tries to regain its footing, it is hitting hard with an ad accusing Obama of wasting taxpayers money.

The ad says Obama's economic policies would severely worsen the country's economic woes.

"When our economy's in crisis, a big government casts a big shadow on us all," the ad's narrator states. "Obama and his liberal congressional allies want a massive government, billions in spending increases, wasteful pork. And we would pay: painful income taxes, skyrocketing taxes on life savings, electricity and home heating oil."

Obama has repeatedly said the notion he will raise taxes on middle-class Americans is untrue.

According to a CNN fact check, Obama's tax plan would increase taxes in 2009 on the wealthiest 20 percent of households while offering tax cuts for the other 80 percent. The largest increases would be on the top 1 percent of earners, according to analysis by the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan research group whose staff of experts includes former economic advisers to the White House and Congress under both Republicans and Democrats.

By comparison, the Tax Policy Center analysis says, McCain would offer tax cuts across the board. Those at the top end of the scale would get the biggest percentage cuts under McCain, while households with the lowest incomes would receive the largest percentage cuts under Obama's plan.

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by Big Fo

That's pretty embarrassing.

Really? I have to admit I'd be a somewhat proud papa.

[SirFozzie]

That your son has initiated his own mini-Watergate and accomplished, absolutely nothing?

[Flasch186]

now this is just ridiculous IMO. He's not going to abide by the subpoena, wow. Troopergate has been hijacked by GOP strategy and that is a shame that, IMO, IMFO, they'd be more apt to hide the truth (whatever it may be) than let it come out:

Palin's husband refuses to testify in probe - Yahoo! News

Palin's husband refuses to testify in probe

By MATT VOLZ, Associated Press Writer 6 minutes ago

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's husband has refused to testify in the investigation of his wife's alleged abuse of power, and a key lawmaker said Thursday that uncooperative witnesses are effectively sidetracking the probe until after Election Day.

Todd Palin, who participates in state business in person or by e-mail, was among 13 people subpoenaed by the Alaska Legislature. McCain-Palin presidential campaign spokesman Ed O'Callaghan announced Thursday that Todd Palin would not appear, because he no longer believes the Legislature's investigation is legitimate.

Sarah Palin initially welcomed the investigation of accusations that she dismissed the state's public safety commissioner because he refused to fire her ex-brother-in-law, a state trooper. "Hold me accountable," she said.

But she has increasingly opposed it since Republican presidential candidate John McCain tapped her as his running mate. The McCain campaign dispatched a legal team to Alaska including O'Callaghan, a former top U.S. terrorism prosecutor from New York to bolster Palin's local lawyer.

Earlier this week, Alaska Attorney General Talis Colberg said the governor, who was not subpoenaed, declined to participate in the investigation and said Palin administration employees who have been subpoenaed would not appear.

State Sen. Bill Wielechowski, a Democrat, said the McCain campaign is doing all it can to prevent the Legislature from completing a report on whether the GOP's vice presidential nominee abused her power as governor.

Wielechowski, a member of the panel that summoned the witnesses, told The Associated Press that the witnesses can avoid testifying for months without penalty and that court action to force them to appear sooner is unlikely.

Palin fired Walt Monegan in July. It later emerged that Palin, her husband, Todd, and several high-level staffers had contacted Monegan about state trooper Mike Wooten. Palin maintains she fired Monegan over budget disagreements, not because he wouldn't dismiss her former brother-in-law.

Wooten had gone through a nasty divorce from Palin's sister before Palin became governor. While Monegan says no one from the administration ever told him directly to fire Wooten, he says their repeated contacts made it clear they wanted Wooten gone.

Alaska Senate President Lyda Green, a Republican foe of Palin, said Wednesday that the investigation is still on track.

"The original purpose of the investigation was to bring out the truth. Nothing has changed," she said.

Without the testimony, the retired prosecutor hired to head the investigation could still release a report in October as scheduled, based on the evidence he's already gathered. As of Thursday, Steven Branchflower had interviewed or deposed 17 of the 33 people he had identified as potential witnesses in the probe.

The Legislature does not have the leverage to compel any witness to testify before Nov. 4, said Wielechowski, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Wielechowski said he did not know whether Branchflower has enough material for a complete and fair report with so few witnesses. But he said delaying the probe, which began as a bipartisan effort, would only politicize the matter more.

"It would be to appease the McCain camp," Wielechowski said. "They're doing everything they can to delay."

Ignoring a legislative subpoena is punishable by a fine up to $500 and up to six months in jail under Alaska law. But courts are reluctant to intervene in legislative matters and the full Legislature must be in session to bring contempt charges, Wielechowski said. The Legislature is not scheduled to convene until January.

[Mac Howard]

Slowly the American people are beginning to realise that Palin is something of a fraud. Most Americans, many Republicans, are far less right wing than Palin. When Palin says to trust her to attack earmarking in Washington with "I told them "Thanks, but no thanks"" she's selling you bullshit - she only turned against the bridge when Congress refused to increase the earmarking and she had to go to the Alaskan people themselves (who knew the bridge was a waste of money) for the extra funding. Even then she found a legal way of retaining the money without building the bridge.

There was no "no thanks" it was a case of "give me more". She's asking you to trust her while simultaneously lying to you.

Her religion is extreme - it's Pentecostalism which is fundamentalist Christianity at the whacky end. And the Wasilla church is at the whacky end of Pentecostalism. When Pentecostalists say they want creationism taught in science classes they're not talking of the pseudo-scientific ideas of Intelligent Design, they're talking about a literal interpretation of Genesis. How many Americans want "the world was created in 6 days" taught in science classes?

The superficial appeal - the attractive, personable, feisty hockey-mom appeal - is wearing off and reality slowly sinking in. She's hopelessly inexperienced, has views to the far right of most Americans, is disingenuous in representing her experiences and not what you want in charge at the White House (which could well happen because of McCain's age and ill health). It might even be that she can transcend these failings - but there's no way of knowing that at this point and it's a hell of a risk to assume that it's so.

The next president is facing enormous problems, in a collapsing economy, a resurgent Russia and growing China and in climate change. You cannot assume that this woman can make the enormous leap from small town Alaska to most powerful person in the world.

[CamEdwards]

Mac,

You do realize she's not running for president, right? As for the whole "slowly the American people are starting to realize" nonsense, nobody expected that the post-convention bounce was going to be permanent. 2000 was extremely close, 2004 was extremely close, and 2008 looks like it's going to be extremely close.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by Mac Howard

she only turned against the bridge when Congress refused to increase the earmarking and she had to go to the Alaskan people themselves (who knew the bridge was a waste of money) for the extra funding. Even then she found a legal way of retaining the money without building the bridge.

The bridge funding went from a congressional earmark to a state transportation project before she was Governor...and retaining the federal money was the work of Sen. Stevens and former Gov Murkowski in 2005.

When Pentecostalists say they want creationism taught in science classes they're not talking of the pseudo-scientific ideas of Intelligent Design, they're talking about a literal interpretation of Genesis. How many Americans want "the world was created in 6 days" taught in science classes?

Her father was a high school science teacher...I assume he didn't teach 'wacky' creationism or the press would have already let us know.

You cannot assume that this woman can make the enormous leap from small town Alaska to most powerful person in the world.

Biden is a senator from small town Delaware. Not much difference, imho.

[law90026]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

Mac,

You do realize she's not running for president, right? As for the whole "slowly the American people are starting to realize" nonsense, nobody expected that the post-convention bounce was going to be permanent. 2000 was extremely close, 2004 was extremely close, and 2008 looks like it's going to be extremely close.

I think the point that Marc is trying to make is that if McCain is elected and dies in office at some point, you're stuck with Palin as your new president. It really should be a factor that votes are thinking about.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by law90026

I think the point that Marc is trying to make is that if McCain is elected and dies in office at some point, you're stuck with Palin as your new president. It really should be a factor that votes are thinking about.

Not really. The President of the United States receives the best health care in the world and the odds that one will die from health reasons seems about the same as me hitting a hole in one on a par 4. I'd say there are greater odds that a U.S. President dies from a bullet than from failing health...at least that's what history tells us anyway. With that the case, we should be equally concerned about the possibility of Joe Biden as President. That's just as worrisome as a Palin presidency, so it's basically a wash in my mind.

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by VPI97

The bridge funding went from a congressional earmark to a state transportation project before she was Governor...and retaining the federal money was the work of Sen. Stevens and former Gov Murkowski in 2005.

I believe you have the timing wrong but it's irrelevant.

Palin is trying to tell you she'd be a crusader against earmarking and tells you that she said "thanks, but no thanks" to the money earmarked for Alaska to convince you of her sincerety. You are clearly intended to believe that she turned down the money.

SHE KEPT IT!!!!

Any reasonable interpretation of "No thanks" is that she refused the money. SHE TOOK IT!!! She deliberately misleads Americans even as she asks for their trust!

Her father was a high school science teacher...I assume he didn't teach 'wacky' creationism or the press would have already let us know.

1) would he be allowed to?
2) did he?
3) was he also a pentecostalist?

Your assumptions are all part of a denial process. We know nothing of what her father did or did not do and such "assumptions" (I would suggest "rationalisations") are meaningless.

Biden is a senator from small town Delaware. Not much difference, imho.

With enormous amounts of experience beyond small town admin. Masses of difference - no one could suggest Biden has less relevant experience than Palin (Obama, maybe.)

I don't say Biden is the right man for the job but his experience would push the balance of probabilities very much in his direction.

You can twist and turn as much as you like - Palin's experience does not qualify her for the VP position! She may be capable of rising above it, we can't know. But that's a different matter - her inexperience is a problem and Americans, having now gone beyond the initial appeal, are beginning to realise that.

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

Me too, which is why I'm less offended by an American saying "there sure are a lot of stupid Americans" than I am a foreigner saying it.

No matter how many differences we have, we will always have at least ONE thing in common with each other. And you're right, it's easy to forget that.

Cam, do you really want to extend this logic? Are you actually arguing that factual criticism is invalid if you don't like the source? The next-time some conservative talking head comes on and starts talking about the decline of the African-American family due to single-parenthood, I take it you support the Jesse Jackson / Al Sharpton approach of dismissing criticism because it comes from an "outsider"?

Look, I understand the defense mechanism aspect of a reflex reaction, but criticism should be judged on its value, not that of the critic.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by VPI97

Not really. The President of the United States receives the best health care in the world and the odds that one will die from health reasons seems about the same as me hitting a hole in one on a par 4. I'd say there are greater odds that a U.S. President dies from a bullet than from failing health...at least that's what history tells us anyway. With that the case, we should be equally concerned about the possibility of Joe Biden as President. That's just as worrisome as a Palin presidency, so it's basically a wash in my mind.

Yeah really. You know McCain has already been diagnosed 3 or 4 times with skin cancer right?

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by Mac Howard

If you think about that it simply doesn't make sense - if the earmark had already been changed to a transportation project before she was governor she wouldn't have had to make a decision about the bridge would she? Stevens initiated it, Palin took it on as part of her election campaign.

The issue at hand during the gubernatorial election was whether the candidates were in favor of continuing the project with state funding. While the initial earmark was already off the table at that point, the state transportation budget had still allocated over $100 mil for the project in 2005. That's what she said she was in support of continuing. Fast forward two years when the projected cost of the bridges had doubled and tripled...that's when she pulled the plug on the project.

Any reasonable interpretation of "No thanks" is that she refused the money. SHE TOOK IT!!!

Again...the money was accepted by Alaska in 2005...when the Governor was Frank Murkowski. You can deny it all you want, but it's actually a matter of looking it up in the public record.

Your assumptions are all part of a denial process. We know nothing of what her father did or did not do and such "assumptions" (I would suggest "rationalisations") are meaningless.

No, it's just common sense. I can assume that her father taught science the proper way because if he didn't, the press would have already dug it up and reported on it. That's not an unreasonable assumption. Meanwhile, you have assumed that she's in favor of teaching "wacky" creationism despite the fact that she has explicitly said the opposite. That's not using common sense.

With enormous amounts of experience beyond small town admin. Masses of difference - no one could suggest Biden has less relevant experience than Palin (Obama, maybe.)

I don't quite understand why you seem to imply that she has jumped from being a mayor of an Alaskan small town to Vice Presidential candidate...or are you implying that being the governor of Alaska is an easy job that has no relevance?

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by Galaril

Yeah really. You know McCain has already been diagnosed 3 or 4 times with skin cancer right?

...and you know that Obama smoked for over 25 years, right?

Big whoop. The odds that either of them die in office from health reasons are too small to make a difference for anything.

[Daimyo]

Originally Posted by VPI97

I don't quite understand why you seem to imply that she has jumped from being a mayor of an Alaskan small town to Vice Presidential candidate...or are you implying that being the governor of Alaska is an easy job that has no relevance?

Palin
Governor of Alaska - 2 years
Mayor of Wasilla - 6 years
City Council Member - 4 years

Originally Posted by VPI97

With that the case, we should be equally concerned about the possibility of Joe Biden as President. That's just as worrisome as a Palin presidency, so it's basically a wash in my mind

Biden
United States Senator - 36 years
County Council Member - 2 years

Are you seriously arguing that Palin has more relevant experience than Biden? Two years at governor isn't long. If she had four years experience at that level it would be one thing, but two?

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by VPI97

Again...the money was accepted by Alaska in 2005...when the Governor was Frank Murkowski. You can deny it all you want, but it's actually a matter of looking it up in the public record.

Then why did she say she refused the money?

You're missing the point completely. The complaint is not that she accepted the money but that she told you she'd refused it.

"Thanks, but no thanks!" She clearly intends you to believe she refused the money. SHE TOOK IT!

There is the hypocrisy! "Trust me! I've refused earmarking before."

Oh, but wait .......

I don't quite understand why you seem to imply that she has jumped from being a mayor of an Alaskan small town to Vice Presidential candidate...or are you implying that being the governor of Alaska is an easy job that has no relevance?

You make far too many assumptions. I'm well aware she's governor of Alaska. But 18 months as governor of Alaska does not equip her to be VP and certainly not President. There are many demands that are not remotely required of the governor of such a small state. Not least foreign affairs.

She simply doesn't have the experience and it is ludicrous to suggest she does.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by Daimyo

Are you seriously arguing that Palin has more relevant experience than Biden?

Not at all. I'm arguing that regardless of experience, the prospect of Joe Biden as President is just as unappealing as the prospect of Sarah Palin as President. After his showing in the primary race, I would suspect that most people agree with me.