John McCain was part of the Keating 5 -- he was partially responsible for the S&L scandal that required billions of dollars of taxpayer's money for bailouts. John McCain admits that he doesn't know much about the economy, but that he relies on his advisers to help him craft his economic plan. One of his main advisers was Phil Graham, who is responsible for many of the deregulations that caused the current economic crisis. BTW, McCain and Bush were both in favor of privatizing parts of social security. Imagine if they got their wish. So many old people will be jumping out of their windows right now. As for bigger government, I'm with you on that one. Obama will probably spend money on some worthy programs that you'll like (alternative energy, global warming, a new GI education bill) and some social programs you won't (there's always pork around). SO yes, Obama will bring a big government with him. But the GOP will bring big government too. Don't you think this never-ending war on terror has expanded the powers of the government at the expense of our civil liberties? At least when the Democrats are building a big government, it is one that semi works. Do you think Bill Clinton would've let New Orleans go under like that?
Neither candidate is remotely fiscally conservative. Not even close. A fair point. Yet you'd consider McCain better for the economy? It ain't the democrats that have created our defecit-based leviathan of government... Fair enough. Ummmm no. Good luck finding any republican advisor not tied to the ideology of "spend spend spend spend while lowering taxes". This is, naturally, popular (have your cake and eat it too!) until the bottom falls out from under you cough *Bush* cough. His chief advisor was Phil freakin' Gramm....
RileyDog, Great post, I have been thinking of doing one exactly like that....spelling out my stances and what matters....your views above are almost 100% the same as mine. Great post....and I think you made the right choice too. DD
This is basically why I'm voting democrat in a nutshell. You can't be fiscally conservative when you're spending HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS in Iraq. We just went without power for a week, my apartment for two weeks. Some people had no water. And we're building up IRAQ'S infrastructure? I can't believe how the Republicans have just taken their base for granted and manipulated and abused them to no end.
I'm starting to lose faith in the McCain/Palin ticket. I like both from the standpoint that I think they can be bipartisan and aren't afraid to go against their party. I hate what I'm seeing out of both of them. She has really showed her inexperience, and makes me think she would have been better served waiting until 2012. McCain just seems to be running around with his head cut off right now. I've been a McCain supporter for years now, but I'm wondering if he is the right choice. I'm not switching to Obama, I may just go with a no vote again.
Dont know if it helps or not, but Obama has said he wouldn't change the tax code until he was certain we were out of recession. Of course, he can't change the tax code alone, anyway.
Obama's Brain Trust Foreign Policy Advisers Obama's diverse group of foreign policy advisers includes former National Security Adviser Anthony Lake, prominent lawyer and State Department veteran Gregory B. Craig, and Africa expert Susan E. Rice. All three held top positions in Bill Clinton's administration. Like Obama, his advisers are critical of the Bush foreign policy agenda in Iraq and Afghanistan, on Darfur, and with respect to U.S.-Latin America relations, among others. Gregory B. Craig, a former Clinton White House aide, served as director of policy planning under former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. Craig is a partner at the Washington-based Williams & Connolly law firm. Among his most prominent cases was the defense of President Clinton against his impeachment. From 1984 to 1988, Craig served as senior adviser on defense, foreign policy, and national security issues for Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA). In March 2008, Craig criticized the Bush administration for "taking sides" in various Latin American elections. As a result, he said, the United States has become increasingly unpopular in the region. He also criticized President Bush for abandoning former President Clinton's strategy to work with Latin America "as a whole," rather than to try to take advantage of U.S. negotiating leverage and deal with the region on its trade considerations in bits and pieces." Above all, Craig faulted the Bush administration for having "ignored" Latin America. Anthony Lake was a national security adviser to President Clinton and is now a professor at Georgetown University's Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. Lake served under President Clinton during several major foreign policy crises, including the conflicts in Bosnia and Somalia, among others. Lake advocated keeping a U.S. presence in Somalia even after many voices in the United States called for a withdrawal. In an interview with PBS' Frontline, Lake said, "I still believe that if we had immediately turned tail in Somalia, there would have been other similar tragedies around the world." On the crisis in Sudan's Darfur region, in 2006, Lake, with Susan Rice, urged the United States to "press for a UN resolution that issues Sudan an ultimatum: accept unconditional deployment of the UN force within one week or face military consequences." In a Washington Post op-ed, Lake and Rice argued that the United States could also intervene in Darfur without UN approval. "The United States acted without UN blessing in 1999 in Kosovo to confront a lesser humanitarian crisis (perhaps 10,000 killed) and a more formidable adversary," they wrote. Lake, like Obama's other top advisers, is critical of the Iraq war. In a January 2007 Boston Globe op-ed, Lake wrote that the civilian leaders of the war effort have failed to understand that "you cannot fix another country's politics and resolve its internal fractures primarily through military means, coupled with floundering political, economic, and social programs that create as much dependency, corruption, and resentment as progress." Lake has said the United States has a "fundamental strategic interest in NATO [North Alantic Treaty Organization] and an expanding NATO that can help bring stability farther and farther East in Europe." Susan E. Rice, a Brookings Institution senior fellow for foreign policy, global economy, and development, served as assistant secretary of state for African affairs in the later years of the Clinton administration. Rice has been a critic of the war in Iraq and she said in September 2007 that the troop surge is not achieving "its intended and stated objective of giving the Iraqi political factions the space that is necessary to resolve their political differences." Rice has also advocated a tougher U.S. response to the crisis in Darfur, Sudan. In 2007, Rice published a position paper calling for more stringent economic sanctions on Sudan and for Congress to authorize the use of force to end the crisis, among other recommendations. In 2005, Rice urged the United States and international groups like NATO and the African Union to "embrace an emerging international norm that recognizes the 'responsibility to protect' innocent civilians facing death on a mass scale and whose governments cannot or will not protect them." Rice also categorizes global poverty as a factor in U.S. national security. In 2006, Rice warned in The National Interest that poverty "dramatically increases the risk of civil conflict" (PDF) and "prevents poor countries from devoting sufficient resources to detect and contain deadly disease." Rice has repeatedly said the Bush administration should devote up to 0.7 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, a target set as part of the UN's Millenium Development Project, to overseas development assistance by 2015.
Bill Clinton didn't have to let New Orleans go under because the Dems down there let it go by themselves. Democrats took care of those Levis real good down in New Orleans before Katrina alright. Democrats sure know how to run a city in New Orleans right? How those people could re-elect a mayor like Nagin is crazy! Democrats knows how to build big government that Semi-works? Like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac right? The very institutions that Dems like Franks, Maxine Waters, Schumer, Dodd, Obama, said there was nothing wrong with them back in 2004? Meanwhile they all get kickbacks for their campaigns.
I'm still very undecided, however, I would like to contend that I'll probably be OK with either candidate because I think this is one of the better choices America has had in a while. The fact that Obama has been in the federal government for about 3 years, 2 of which has been almost exclusively running for President worries me a little. The fact that he's still an extremely junior senator that doesn't even have that much authority in his own job bothers me a little. But in the long run, he'll probably end up being OK. If he'd soften his stance a little on taxes when we're in a bad economy, I'd feel a lot better about him. I'd hate for us to be wallowing in a recession and he gets into office and starts raising capital gains, taking away the social security limit, and starts taxing municipals. The fact that McCain has pretty much blown it in this bailout thing has bothered me too. If he lead his party one way or the other I would have liked it. If he had come to Washington to oppose the bill and gotten it defeated I would have been OK, or if he had gotten the bill passed when he came to "lead" I also would have been OK. The problem is the opposite happened. He came in to get it passed and it didn't pass. I understand that its hard to get the House to do anything a Senator says (they still try to keep their own power), but if he's a great leader he should have gotten it done. I think this is where the maverick mentality doesn't work. However, it may be better suited to an executive position so I'm still not sure. On national security, while I hate hate hate the fact we're in Iraq, I love love love the fact we haven't had a major terrorist attack since 9/11. After 9/11 I was sure we'd have another one in this country before now, even if they were smaller scale attacks. I have to think our defense plan is doing SOMETHING right to prevent attacks because I believe our enemies were still out there waiting to pull one off. Short of the joke that is the Iraq war, I would like to continue whatever policies in the intelligence and counter terrorism world that seem to be working, and I believe McCain would probably be more likely to do so. We can't become gunshy from flexing our muscle when we need to because of a stupid war that was a mistake and I feel like Obama may be influenced by that, but I don't know. I actually would benefit on Obama's income tax plan, but would be hurt by his plans for taxing munis, raising capital gains taxes and removing the cap on social security taxes, so overall I would probably benefit by McCain's plan. I still think that's why I'm leaning towards McCain a little. I might start leaning towards Obama if he softens his investment taxing in the face of a possible recession. The fact is I probably won't know who I'll vote for until right before I go vote.
Hrmmm. Levees (not Levi - those are jeans) are a bipartisan failure in funding, and a overwhelmingly enormous failure by the USACE. New Orleans remains one of the most corrupt major cities in the US, and this influx of federal money is not helping. Interestingly, one of the largest recent examples of corruption is directly tied to some Bush administration tactics and handy "connections". Speaking of Bush, I find the irony in b****ing about Nagin's re-election hilarious. Ahhhhh the Obama FRE kickback myth is still being propogated. Amusing.
you realize of course that the levees were built, maintained and controlled by the federal army corps of engineers right? that caused the problem. the criticism of the administration wasn't that they caused it...but that they knew of the risk and then, after the levees gave way, argued lofty notions of federalism while NOLA burned (or drowned, as it were).
Rocket Rich... I know you are from NY and all, but leave the Levis alone!!! They are a nice jewish family
So you are saying that city officials didn't know what was going on in their city right? No they knew just like the Government did. They chose to do nothing and waited for decades until a catastophe like Katrina happened.
I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying the levees were breached...because they weren't built well enough. Those were built and maintained by the federal govt. The feds assumed that role decades back. The Corps of Engineers issued a report in the summer of 2006 acknowledging the same and taking blame for the breach. I'm saying once that damage was done...and there were people left in that hell pit...the federal government played politics with the state government, arguing over who should do what...and they wasted precious time doing so. I'm suggesting that the job was so large in scale at that point that it required federal assistance. And I'm suggesting that the persons who were appointed to key leadership positions to deal with these sorts of responses was completely unprepared for that role. I do not have to affirm the state or local governments of Louisiana or NOLA to take that position. Katrina was absolutely, positively where this administration lost me for good. Where I very much regretted my vote. Human lives in peril > federalism concerns. When American lives are on the line I believe leaders should act and act decisively.
I'm curious at what point some of you vote on what's best for you and what's best for the country. The raises in capital gains taxes and social security taxes only impact people who earn $200,000/year or more, $250,000/year for married couples. If you're fortunate enough to earn $200k, that's great for you and you will be impacted by these taxes but realistically this increase affects a small percentage of Americans considering the median household income in this country is something like $45k. Is what's best for you in this regard better than what's best for the nation? You're not middle class wage earners and it's the middle class in this country that's in trouble. http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/election_issues_matrix.cfm
It did a lot of burning too. I'm one of the last to defend Bush, but this is a bad mischaracterization. The Federal Government asked for permission (that's the way this works) to go in before the storm, and were refused. That's not "arguing lofty notions of federalism". That's obeying the law. Neighboring state emergency management mutual aid asked for permission to help, they were refused. Even after the hurricane hit and the Louisiana National Guard was nationalized, Blanco was giving conflicting orders and demanding that they obey. Here's a great article from immediately after the storm that clearly shows the disregard of human life and conditions by the Louisiana State government: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/03/AR2005090301680.html
