Nice try, McCain.

Put up or shut up. Obama said it perfectly, “It’s going to be part of the president’s job to be able to deal with more than one thing at once.”

Look at Bush, the worst President in our history… even he can do more than one thing at a time. He is running an illegitimate war, spending billions of dollars we cannot afford, while scaring the crap out of 1/2 of America with this $700 billion dollars OR BUST scam on his way out of office. And people say he isn’t talented…

We need change. Real change. You are so good at giving lip service to change but you are anything but honest. Show up to the debates, McCain. You can’t weasel your way out of this one. You can’t put out a ridiculous ad to confuse or mislead the masses in a debate. You can’t change your stance 125 times and hope it goes unnoticed. Just show up and let the world know what you are really about. Enough is enough.

Gone are the day of the Republicans who reallyloved our country, more than money. Gone are the day where our country meant more than the lobbyist, more than the funds shoved in pockets by the military industrial complex. War is doubleplus bad folks. Here is a speech from the last true Republican President, Dwight Eisenhower, warning against the military industrial complex.

Since him, the Republicans in office should more aptly have claimed the Corporatist Party. And the everyday people who vote Republican should claim the same party under the United Federation of Sheeple. They seem not to be able to think or reason amongst themselves. McCain has flipflopped not positions he espoused twenty years or even ten…though he has changed those too but rather he is flipflopping on positions he had two months ago, two weeks ago, two days ago. He is saying whatever he can to win the election. What is most infuriating are the masses who seem incapable of calling him on his crap.

Look, if Obama suddenly wanted to give corporations tax breaks and take away our civil liberties or started riding around on tank declaring the victory in a war he plans to continue, I would NOT stand behind him. I would NOT vote for him. Some change, some flexibility is necessary. Obama has demonstrated his entire career a reasonable amount of flexibility. This is not the same flexibility McCain is demonstrating. His only demonstrable flexibility is in stretching the truth in commercials and townhall meetings to fit what he thinks you want to hear, what Obama has been saying along. So, if suddenly his views are coinciding with Obama’s views, why again are you not voting with Obama instead? The original maverick? The guy who came up with the plan instead of the guy who stole it?

How many times will McCain conveniently adopt a stance he has never voted for and has heard Obama advocate? This is no more than cheap ploys, mimicking the other guy because he makes sense. But I ask, “where’s the beef” in McCain’s empty words? And I am shocked that more Republicans are not doing the same. What happened to you Republicans? SHEESH! Bring back the old-time real Republicans…they would never stand for someone because of one issue. Republicans are so narrow these days… it is all about getting their sold-out party into office or generally falls to one issue-voters. That is why they STILL can’t get their heads around an idea that Hillary supporters are not Palin supporters, afterall she is a woman. Their reasoning for supporting their candidate is flawed, weak, ridiculous.

I will save for tomorrow the topic of the weak-knee’d, pansy Democrats of today. It is time to stand up and call a greedy, corporatist LIAR (AKA JOHN MCCAIN) exactly what he is… a greedy, lying, power hungry Corporatist. He is not Republican, not a real Republican anyways. And Democrats must come to realize, they can’t just wait for the new Republicans to do the right thing. Gone are those days!

In case you are interested in real politics. I am posting the transcript of the speech (in the youtube video above) below.

(more…)

Make, sell and buy products. Starring in the Economy are consumers, manufacturers, corporations (often the latter two are one in the same) and, in today’s world, a whole mess of middle-men. You must make products (companies who hire workers to produce products) to sell (requiring stores, businesses etc. and workers) and then people (consumers) to buy these products. There are many theories on how to best manage an economy. We keep hearing about the fundamentals of our economy being strong or weak, depending on who you listen to…sadly enough. Let me tell you my thoughts on the real economic fundamentals politicians should be focused on right now.

Before people will shop or spend their money, they need the following things:

1. A roof over their head
2. Food on their plates
3. Electricity (yes, most of us have grown accustomed to that in this country)
4. Good health (which requires sufficient healthcare)
5. Gas/energy to get to and from work
6. Employment to provide the money necessary for the above

And finally…

7. Extras (these come after the fundamentals are procured).

However, if people cannot pay their mortgages (because they are victims of predatory lending born of the current Regime’s deregulation polices or because they have less money from the price-gouging of corporations on groceries, gas, electricity etc. or because they cannot find a job or are laid off or because corporate responsibility has flown out the window) and if they can’t buy enough groceries to feed their children or to pay for gas to get to and from work, or they fall ill and cannot get the proper care necessary for themselves, their children or their aging parents…then they will not be able to buy other stuff. Get it? If they cannot buy the “other stuff” then businesses suffer. Then businesses must cut jobs and/or employee benefits. And thus we spin towards a depression. You need only to examine the current financial situation to see this vicious cycle in action.

The fundamentals of economy are housing, groceries, gas/energy, and healthcare. This is true for the average American. Perhaps because the rich do not have the same concerns and they may think the fundamentals are different. However, if you ask the everyday American what is important to them, when they say economy, this is to what they are referring. They want their family’s basic needs met and to have a little extra money at the end of the day to buy bright and shiny things; to save a little extra for retirement and college funds; and to leave their children a little better off than they were left themselves. These are the fundamentals with which politicians should be concerned.

McCain, at best, gives lip service to these areas of the economy. He believes the fundamentals are strong. Oh, he is changing his tune the past week but if you didn’t know last week, we were in trouble… and it took a 500 point drop in the market and a ten point drop in your campaign lead to get it, you probably are not the most economically-savvy person for the Presidency. He does not truly understand what is fundamental for most of us. Simple enough mistake but simply too costly for everyday people to support his very different economic fundamentals by voting for him.

His idea of helping to immediately reduce the price of oil and groceries is to “send a strong message”¹ to the oil producing countries, as well as the oil companies, that prices are too high. Um, I think they already know this. They know they have us by the energy-throat and they are taking advantage of that. We need their services and they know it. Hrmmm… isn’t that the deregulated-corporate way McCain is in favor of? Doesn’t anyone else find it ironic that US oil companies are making windfall profits² while the rest of us head into a economic (and quite possibly an emotional) depression? And yet, there is nothing in McCain’s plan to stop this corporate tomfoolery. No regulations? No consumer-assistance? No way! He is all about Corporate-welfare and idle threats. Neither will bring the prices down for us. Businesses want to make money. If they know you need a product, they will demand your first born, if they are allowed (READ DEREGULATION). But I will not even get started on how deregulation brings about corporate monopolies, resulting in the necessity to bail corporations with federal funds, ahem…AIG, which negates those greedy mongrels every argument about “welfare”. The difference between Republican spending and Democrat spending is who gets helped and why. Republicans wish to ensure the good “welfare” of corporations. Democrats wish to ensure the good “welfare” of people. Which category do you fall under? Which is more important to you?

McCain also plans to increase the value of the dollar (no mention of HOW he will do this btw, simple a pretty promise with no intellectual support) and theoretically this is supposed to reduce the price of oil. The idea that the value of the dollar directly affects the cost of oil is not that straightforward nor is it accurate.³ I understand it is easier to just believe what they are saying because it is frightening to think they may not have our best interest at heart after all, but WAKE UP AND THINK FOR A CHANGE!

What about McCain’s HOME PLAN? He plans on helping 200,000 to 400,000 homeowners facing foreclosure. That is nice, isn’t it? What about the other 1.8 to 1.6 MILLION homeowners facing foreclosure? Oh and his HOME plan EXCLUDES those who were victims of the predatory lending he advocated through deregulation, in the first place. How will this help the housing crisis?

And how will John McCain pay for his proposed tax cuts? His plan is to halt all discretionary spending for an entire year. Let’s see what falls under discretionary funding. The following programs (and this is not the majority, just some I found)…

Office for Victims of Crime
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
Mental Health Facilities/Services
Drug and Alcohol Facilities
K-12 Education Budgets
Health Research
Housing
AmeriCorps (Full-time Community Service program)
HeadStart/ECEAP (Pre-school)
Rural Housing Services and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)

So, as far as I can tell he plans on cutting programs, such as mental health, educational funding (K-12 people), crime victims assistance, etc. It seems this is not going to benefit the American people. No, no, he plans on cutting these programs rather than corporate taxes. Hrm, which will benefit you or harm you? Oops sorry Sally Victim, that guy who tortured you and your daughter… yea, he got out of prison today but you won’t know about it because that program was cut for a year. Oh, yea those pesky science labs in your 7th grade class… oops, those are gone too.

Perhaps the Obama campaign should start asking how McCain plans on funding his wars (Iraq, Afghanistan, Russia, Iran…etc.) Or his corporate welfare… including the 3trillion dollars of debt for bailing out AIG. It was the deregulation policies that he (and others like him–like Bush) emphatically endorse which got us into this mess in the first place.

In theory, it sounds like a perfect plan to deregulate corporations. Theoretically, they will begin to flourish without extra costs and this will have a trickle down effect. The wealth they are making hand-over-fist, theoretically, will spill down to the rest of us, leaving lots of wealth for us to pick up at their feet. Now, this is quite possibly accurate in some respects. For example, it is true the deregulation policies have helped a lot of big corporations make a lot of money. However, these same corporations will step on anyone and everyone ensuring no one does take any of the trickled-down wealth. They hire middlemen to collect and return as much of that as possible. The middlemen’s reward for doing so? He too can keep a little of the trickled-down wealth but rest assured he’s not getting rich, he’s in foreclosure so he reallyneeds that extra money. And he’ll do just about anything to ensure he gets, including voting against his own best interest. This is where the majority of McCain voters are… at the feet of corporate America, groveling, begging, complaining, screaming, hoping they will survive financially. But are they?

When the corporations start to shove the excess money into their pockets, the windfall, record profits (as are seen with the oil companies for example, even while we are amidst an energy and economic crisis), where are the majority of the rest of us in this wealth-blizzard they are experiencing? Are we reallyseeing a trickle down effect? Or are they simply kicking us to bankruptcy, while lining their offshore bank accounts to ensure they do not have to pay taxes on their wealth?

And while we hear so much about pork-barrel spending… does anyone even really know what the helinski that means? They assume it is liberal spending on personal welfare, a concept attached to some deceptive, lazy person milking the system while everyone else works so hard. This is a fallacy. Look, liberals don’t want to reward lazy people. They simply believe the government should help people, citizens, not corporations. What is it you want to see your tax dollars spent on? The Republicans try to make it sound like liberals or Democrats waste your money. What in tarnation are they doing themselves with the money? Did the government bail us out, did it spend our tax money ensuring our children had a good education or that our homes were saved? Or did it get us into 3trillion dollars worth of additional debt to save us or a corporation? The Republicans do not save us money, they simply twist the facts to make it look as if the spending of money on people is somehow ludicrous and wasteful. How is spending tax money on taxpayers wasteful? But they will use an isolated account of one system-moocher to invoke the irritation you feel each time you pay a significant amount of your check towards taxes to throw you into a blind flurry about the excessive use of government funds used by the Democrats. This is nonsense. Do a little research. I dare you. Go look up the annual amount of corporate fraud.

The results of deregulation are a battered economy, a mortgage crisis, disproportionate wealth distribution; and disgruntled, disenfranchised customers left with no recourse…forced to deal with companies who couldn’t care less about them as individual consumers or even as groups of consumers. These corporations have fewer and fewer laws to bind them to the consumer, to stop them from taking advantage of the American people when we can least afford it. Smaller companies run by everyday people are gobbled up by the bigger companies and consumers are forced to do business with those 1 or 2 corrupt, multi-national conglomerates. And the corporations know this, anticipate their level of service being less than par and raise their prices accordingly. They know we are in need of oil, energy, communications, health care services, medicines, etc.

So you tell me…who has been and continues to prosper financially while the rest of us suffer? Drug companies, military industrial complexes, communication services, oil companies, electric companies, health-care insurance providers…etc. Saving money, second only to making money, motivates companies to outsource customer service, not only to other countries but simply to other companies or departments of their own corporation who do not care at all about consumers. Consumers get aggravated, but with no where to turn, are stuck getting their needs met by these corporate vampires. Diversity in the marketplace should buffer this, in theory, but in reality, with the deregulation of the big guys, the diversity in the marketplace is dwindling or simply not a realistic, viable option anymore.

Deregulation is not the answer. McCain supports deregulation emphatically. McCain is NOT the answer. We’ve seen what these policies have done for the people. We’ve seen what it has done for the business market. NOTHING good. NOTHING GOOD HAS COME FROM THE PAST EIGHT YEARS, unless you own an oil, telecommunications, financial or pharamceutical company. Since most of us do not, the tangible realities of their theoretical trickle-down effect are staring us in the face in the form of a mortgage crisis or a 500 point drop in the stock market, in the disappearance of our life’s savings, in the bill sitting on the table of the woman who worked every day since she graduated college only to lose her health care insurance a month after being diagnosed with cancer.

Enough is enough. Stop asking how Obama will pay for his economic plan when his includes helping improve the every day lives of the people funding the Federal Budget. Start asking how and why John McCain would rather focus on corporate welfare and illegitimate, unnecessary wars to the detriment of the everyday people, with our tax dollars. If he and Bush and the other billionaires want to rescue corporations or wage wars all over the world…let them do it with their own money. Our tax dollars should help US have a better life. Where was the referendum on bailing out these corporations? Where is the trickle-down effect from the deregulation policies?

Think people, think.

1. http://www.johnmccain.com/Images/Issues/JobsforAmerica/briefing.pdf [↩]
2. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/01/exxon-posts-record-profit_n_84463.html [↩]
3. http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2007/10/does_dollar_wea_1.html [↩]

I have read my fair share of ranting asking how Obama will pay for his expansive budget plan. In particular the following parts are controversial to the Anti-Obama voters:

• A $65 billion-a-year health plan
• $15 billion in green energy spending
• $85 billion in tax cuts and credits
• A $25 billion-a-year increase in foreign aid
• $18 billion a year in education spending
• $3.5 billion for a national service plan

Oh the avaricious right would have you believe Obama is planning on spending, spending, spending…with no means to pay for it. This is a silly accusation. We, lefties, think in terms of people but we are not stupid. Some prefer numbers, even if they distort information to get them. But for the sake of prosperity, let’s discuss Obama’s economic plan on terms they can comprehend, figures. I was digging around in the federal budget for 2008 today, searching through hidden drawers, finding little tidbits to see what numbers I could use that would be fair and accurate. I found some.

In 2008, Bush requested a sum of $141,700,000,000¹ (yes, folks BILLIONs) in appropriated (discretionary) funds to be allocated for Department of Defense emergency operations in the Global War on Terror. This is not base funding, it is not the mandatory funding allocated for defense…it is in addition to it, it is extra emergency SUPPLEMENTAL funding allocated for the “War on Terror”. This money is even above and beyond the $70,000,000,000 ($70.0 BILLION) allocated in the 2007 Defense Appropriations Act for such purposes. This is $388,219,178.10 per day in ADDITIONAL emergency supplemental funds (back-up to the back-up emergency funds) allocated to a war that should have never been started and will not continue, if Obama becomes President.

This is a good number to begin with, don’t you think? It is not the regular budget. It is not the defense budget (which can be argued and skewed in every direction). This is simply surplus-surplus funds (not as in extra money we have to spend frivolously but simply extra money allocated frivolously) sent over to this illegitimate war, a war Obama never wanted us to get into and fully intends on pulling us out of as soon as safely possible, upon election. A war McCain supported from the beginning and has no solid intention or concrete plan on ending.

That money alone would pay for the majority of “spending” Obama has planned. Let’s look at the remaining amount. $211.5 Billion dollars was the original amount of the “offensive suggestions”, right? Subtract the $141.7 billion (just one year’s supplemental back-up emergency funding for the war that will end under Obama) and this leaves a balance of $69.8 billion.

Let’s not forget Obama’s budget will provide a comprehensive health care plan for everyone, green energy spending (READ: LEGITIMATE MEANS TO END DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL AND GET US OUT OF THE ENERGY CRISIS WE ARE IN), $85 billion in tax cuts and credits for 95% of American households (immediate and long-term financial relief), more foreign aid (which will help improve foreign relations, which…um, will, uh, help reinforce the allies we have not alienated in the past eight years through our excessive use of military might, ignoring our own international agreements and throwing diplomacy out the proverbial window), a better educational system (paying teachers more, focusing on math and science to ensure our future generation is competitive in the technology of tomorrow, helping families afford college etc.) and expands our national service plan (helping people to work within their own communities to improve their own lives and the lives of others, to improve the community and the country as a whole).

However, I digress, back to the $69.8 billion dollars that needs a home in the budget.

Let’s eliminate the tax cuts for the richest 10% of Americans (who hold over 70% of the nation’s wealth)² GASP! Or we can simply deny the additional $70 billion Bush requested for the 2009 version of the $70 billion extra supplemental funds asked for this year, to fund his War on Terror. Looks like the rich don’t even have to help. Simply ending the excessive spending on a war that Obama does not support will pay for all of his proposed spending with some left over ($200,000!).

But, now that I have done all this research, let’s play with the numbers a little, shall we?.

Pretend for a moment, not that we steal from the rich, but that we make them pay the taxes they should already be paying. After all, our taxing system is progressive. It was introduced as progressive, accepted as such and should remain as such. Translation: each person pays as per their income. The rich will pay more than the poor, but such is the progressive tax system in the United States.

The rich can afford more, so they should pay more…period.

If Richie Rich earns a billion dollars, he should have to pay the appropriate amount of taxes. Lisa Lackey is underemployed, she still pays her fair share even if she can’t afford them. Joe Average, gets a promotion and doesn’t see it all reflected on his next paycheck but he continues to pay his taxes as well. Lisa and Joe continue working hard to get promotions, hoping someday they can retire without financial worries. And both still pay their fair share year after year because neither can afford the same accountant who ensures Richie Rich receives fat and unnecessary tax-breaks.

Let’s for fun (hypothetically) take away the $116.6 billion in tax cuts for the richest 10% in FY 2009 and see what sort of fun we can have…

We could provide:³
34,365,274 People with Health Care for One Year OR
120,711,046 Homes with Renewable Electricity for One Year OR
2,518,359 Public Safety Officers for One year OR
1,999,571 Music and Arts Teachers for One Year OR
18,027,211 Scholarships for University Students for One Year OR
907,020 Affordable Housing Units OR
51,391,674 Children with Health Care for One Year OR
16,001,098 Head Start Places for Children for One Year OR
1,915,400 Elementary School Teachers for One Year OR
1,684,667 Port Container Inspectors for One year

Healthy, smart fun for everyone! Why don’t we discuss the realistic trickle down effects of this kind of spending rather than the non-existent theoretical trickle-down effects of laissez-faire type of economy the right-wing philistines prefer? Those who consistently bark about the unnecessary governmental spending by the Liberals, conveniently forget or justify their own spending (unnecessary wars, big corporations, corporate welfare due to excessive to excessive de-regulations, tax cuts for the rich…etc.)

Make no mistake about it, we are not talking about our everyday budgets here. We are talking about the country’s budget. Numbers look larger, more frightening, perhaps even irritating when we, the citizens, are struggling to make ends meet but Obama’s numbers are no bigger than McCain’s or any other President in the past for that matter. And Obama does have a plan on how to come up with the money. Numbers, such as these, seem astronomical to the average American but every national budget plan is more or less the allocation of our tax dollars to different priorities. So, ask yourself, do you want to take care of the economy with the same policies that got us here? Or do you want to try a sensible way?

1. http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy08/pdf/budget/defense.pdf [↩]
2. http://solutions.powersimsolutions.com/Ranking/HistoricalPerspective.aspx [↩]
3. http://www.nationalpriorities.org/tradeoffs?location_type=1&state=888&program=276&tradeoff_item_item=999&submit_tradeoffs=Get+Trade+Off [↩]

Our Presidents (and presidential candidates) are struggling. Time after time we see them battle with the names of the other foreign leaders. It is heart-wrenching to watch the dreaded confusion engulf their faces when they are forced to locate another country on the map. They don’t even know the fundamentals of the economy. The poor things think negotiation tools include nuclear weapon and AK47′s. We must stop the madness. We must not let them fall through the international cracks, or to create even more of them. This is everyone’s future we are talking about. WE must ensure our Presidents (and the candidates running for Presidency) are educated properly to meet the growing needs of the White House. It is IMPORTANT TO ACT NOW! We must not leave any President behind!

Please help me to ensure this ACT is signed by Congress before it is too late.

Note: I thought I was so clever coming up with this idea inspired by McCain not knowing where Spain is located or who the Prime Minister of Spain is exactly. However, after preparing it and posting it…graphic and all, I did a google search and well, I was not the only one to come up with this clever idea. Kudos to the great comedians of the world…and let’s say thanks but no thanks to the road that led us here.

Other links for the NO PRESIDENT LEFT BEHIND ACT:

AVANT NEWS
HUFFINGTON POST
CAFE PRESS

Is foreign policy John McCain’s strong suit?

In an interview with Radio Caracol Miami John McCain demonstrated his lack of even the most basic knowledge of the leaders of the world, not even knowingeven a leader of a country that is a member of NATO and our ally.

He stumbled over some pre-planned script in his head that was irrelevant to the question she was asking. She simply wanted to know if McCain is elected President of the US, if he will meet with Prime Minister Zapatero, of Spain. Finally, after listening to him ramble on and on about Mexico and Latin America she had to cut to the chase because it was clear he simply wasn’t getting who Zapatero was at this point in the interview:

“Ok, what about you? I am talking about the President of Spain…ok are you willing to meet with him if you are elected President?”

There are three possibilities for his use of doublespeak in this interview:

1. He confused Spain’s Prime Minister Zapatero with a Zapatista, an armed revolutionary group based in Chiapas, Mexico,
2. He thinks Spain is really south of our border and part of Latin America,
3. He simply doesn’t know who the Prime Minister of Spain is and isn’t willing to admit not knowing.

Not one of these options demonstrate a solid foundation for “good” foreign policy. It sounds eerily reminiscent of Bush to me. How is this basic foreign knowledge change?

(more…)

The only policy change McCain has demonstrated during this election is his willingness to forego his own honesty, transparency and straight talk policies. Change is not John McCain’s strong suit (please see the following footnote for some examples reinforcing this statement)¹. Does anyone, besides me, remember that this was NOT even his campaign slogan before the Republican National Convention? That he basically stole Obama’s campaign slogan?

McCain voted with Bush policies over 90% of the time.² So, why should we believe he will do anything differently if he is elected? We already know he lies.

McCain mocked Obama for wanting change, until the polls indicated Obama was ahead. In response, he chose Sarah Palin as his running mate. And together they jumped off the Straight Talk Express and hijacked the change bandwagon. Desperate for a few extra voters, he chose an inexperienced, unknown Palin to get some attention. Did he really think picking a woman would somehow shock or enamor people enough to believe he really wants change despite his own voting record and words indicating otherwise? Did he really think he could sway Hillary supporters simply because Palin was a woman? Did he assume we were vagina voters?

(more…)

1. http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/000994.htm [↩]
2. http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_it_true_john_mccain_voted_with.html [↩]

Economy is not John McCain’s strong suit. Don’t take my word for it…take his.

“The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should.¹”

“I know a lot less about economics than I do about military or foreign policy issues.²”

“I don’t know how bad it [the mortgage crisis] is gonna get, and obviously the worse it gets then the more there is a role for government. But I can’t come down yet and give you a specific solution because I don’t claim to be smart enough….I’d love to give you a solution, but I don’t know.³”

“I don’t believe we’re headed into a recession. I believe the fundamentals of this economy are strong, and I believe they will remain strong.⁴”

“I am not an expert on Wall Street, I am not an expert on some of this stuff.⁵”

In an interview on Fox News on April 6, 2008 Chris Wallace asked McCain the following question: “What would you do to help the thousands of Americans who right now are in the process of losing their homes? Or do you feel, as you said in your speech, that’s not the duty of government?”

McCain replied, “Look, Americans are hurting right now. They don’t know if they have to get another job. The challenges are enormous right now. The key to it is not to bail out people who speculated or people who engaged in unsavory practices. The key to it is get the lender and the borrower together. We know how hard that is because of identifying the lender, but there’s ways to do it. Of course there’s a role for government, but it’s not to reward greedy speculators. It is not to reward people who misbehave. And it certainly isn’t a huge expenditure of taxpayers’ dollars which, in the long run, could exacerbate the problems that exist.⁶”

When asked if Americans are better off now (in the beginning of 2008) than they were eight years ago, McCain replied as follows:⁷

“You could argue that Americans overall are better off, because we have had a pretty good prosperous time, with low unemployment and low inflation and a lot of good things have happened. A lot of jobs have been created. But let’s have some straight talk. Things are tough right now. Americans are uncertain about this housing crisis. Americans are uncertain about the economy, as we see the stock market bounce up and down. But I think what we’re trying to do to fix this economy is important. We’ve got to address the subprime housing problem. We need to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, which I voted for twice to do so. I think we need to eliminate the alternate minimum tax…I think we are better off overall if you look at the entire eight-year period, when you look at the millions of jobs that have been created, the improvement in the economy, etc.”

At least he recognized and expressed some economic concerns coming into this year. Maybe he is an optimist? I have my doubts based on the campaign he has been running thus far and his voting record but we will give him the benefit of the doubt until we do a little more research.

Even on the same day we saw a 500 point drop in the market, McCain insisted the fundamentals of our economy were strong. See previous post: McCain not economically fit to be President. I digress, I will address, in detail, the fundamental difference in what is fundamental to the average citizen, how that differs from what is fundamental to John McCain and how his policies clearly demonstrate this, in another post.

I could continue to cite quotes made by John McCain indicating his own inexperience and ignorance with regards to the economy but I will allow you to do some research yourself. Here is an informative link to begin.

Economy is the biggest concern right now.

It is irresponsible and foolish to assume all information presented in commercials is true, even the approved commercials. It is irresponsible to blindly take anyone’s word on it, even mine! This is why I try to provide links, sources, etc. I realize you are tired. I know you are busy. But it is our responsibility as citizens to be informed. Do not take commercials at face value, especially commercials endorsed by either party or anyone else for that matter. I beg you to research the information presented for yourself. This is exactly what I’ve done with this entire election. I have researched the candidates, the issues and even the economy.

I went to McCain’s website and read his economic plan, though much to my dismay it was written in doublespeak.⁸ Luckily, I am a diligent researcher who can and will dig through the hyperbole and fluff to find out what he is really saying.

I will save this discussion for another post.

1. http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2007/12/mccain_its_abou.html [↩]
2. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22867407/page/2/ [↩]
3. http://www.nhelects.com/NHPrimaryVideos.asp?MultiID=77&HTitle=VLTitle [↩]
4. West Palm Beach Town Hall, 1/24/08; “Face the Nation,” 2/3/08; Town Hall at Dell in Texas, 2/29/08; “60 Minutes,” 3/9/08, GOP Debate, Myrtle Beach, S.C., 1/10/08 [↩]
5. McCain Town Hall, Concord, NH, 12/17/07 [↩]
6. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,347033,00.html [↩]
7. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/30/GOPdebate.transcript/ [↩]
8. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak [↩]