Finally - A Real Debate!

I have to admit, my hopes were not high going into last night's debate between McCain and Obama. The last two debates were so dull I couldn't even make it through. But I was pleasantly surprised on many fronts, although it didn't start out looking like I would be. McCain started out by saying, "Americans are hurting right now, and they're angry... They're innocent victims of greed and excess on Wall Street and as well as Washington, D.C." At this point, I thought it was going to just be more of the same... and I thought, "What about those of us who are frustrated and angry because we're innocent victims of the American government taking money from us to fix the bad choices of our neighbors?"

I was somewhat gratified, however, to hear from McCain that the $300 billion he wants to use to shore up the housing market comes from the $750 billion already passed. I highly doubt that he will have any success in extracting this from congress at this point, since they're already working on even more bailouts, but at least his idea wasn't to pass an extra bill for that.

McCain launched into Joe the plumber right at the beginning of the debate. Most people had no clue about Joe the plumber until last night... so a bit of background on this for you. Joe Wurzelbacher approached Obama in Ohio and asked him a question about the taxes on a plumbing business he is preparing to purchase. According to Joe, the business makes between 250K and 270K each year. He took issue with Obama wanting to charge him a higher tax rate. Here's Obama's somewhat lengthy response:

"Well, here's what's gonna happen... First of all, you get a 50 percent tax credit, so you get a cut of taxes for your health care costs. So you would actually get a tax cut on that front. If your revenue is above two-fifty, then from two-fifty down your tax is gonna stay the same. Now it's true that from two-fifty up, say from two-fifty to three hundred or so...(Joe tries to interrupt and Obama talks over him) I just wanna answer your question. So for that additional amount, you go from 36 to 39 percent which is what it was under Bill Clinton. And the reason we're doing that is because 95% of small business make less than two-fifty. So what I wanna do is give them a tax cut. I wanna give all these folks who are, you know, bus drivers, teachers, auto workers who make less, I want to give them a tax cut. So what we're doing is we are saying that the folks who make more than two fifty, that marginal amount above two-fifty is going to be taxed at a 39 instead of a 36% rate... There are two ways of looking at it. I mean, one way of looking at it is - now that you've become more successful (Joe interjects 'through hard work') through hard work, you don't want to be taxed as much, which I understand. But another way of looking at it is, 95% of folks who are making less than two-fifty, they may be working hard, too. But they're being taxed at a higher rate than they would be under mine. So what I'm doing is... project, put yourself back ten years ago when you were only making whatever - sixty or seventy - under my tax plan, you would be keeping more of your paycheck, you would have lower taxes, which means that you would have saved and gotten to the point where you are faster... My attitude is that if the economy is good for the folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody. If you've got a plumbing business, you're gonna be better off if you've got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you. Right now, everybody's so pinched that business is bad for everybody. And I think when we spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody."

So McCain accuses Obama of making the American dream of owning your own business more difficult. Obama responded by saying that McCain wants to give $200 billion in tax breaks to the wealthiest corporations in America. (This is funny... because the idea of a plumbing business bringing in 250K per year being one of the wealthiest businesses in America is ludicrous - and yet Obama is wanting to raise their tax rates, too.) He also said that independent studies have looked at their respective plans and concluded that Obama gives three times the amount of tax relief to middle-class families than Senator McCain. (Of course, this becomes an easy thing to achieve when you're even mailing checks to people who don't pay any taxes at all.) Obama also claimed that 98 percent of small businesses make less than 250K, which doesn't hold up under the microscope of government statistics. According to the numbers available through the economic census, only 54% of small businesses make under 500K. (I couldn't find any statistical information that went only to 250K.)

In going round and round on the tax issue, Barack Obama says this:

"I want to cut taxes for 95 percent of Americans. Now, it is true that my friend and supporter, Warren Buffet, for example, could afford to pay a little more in taxes in order to give additional tax cuts to Joe the plumber before he was at the point where he could make $250,000." And then on and on to the people who are trying to figure out how they're going to afford food and save for their kids college education. (Maybe it's just me, but I think if people don't know where their next meal is coming from, they're probably not thinking about college.) So Obama knows that nobody likes taxes, but that "ultimately we've got to pay for the core investments that make this economy strong, and somebody's got to do it." Call me crazy, but I didn't know that our economy was ever made strong by taking from the rich and doling it out to people who aren't as rich. Because let's get real here... if you're working, and you're coming home to cable television and X-Box and internet access... if you're smoking cigarettes and buying beer and going outside on your four-wheeler, you're not poor. If you have those things and you don't know where your next meal is going to come from, you need a lesson in budgeting. 

After Obama once again tried to connect McCain with President Bush (which is pretty funny, considering how often McCain went against Bush in the last eight years), McCain said, "Senator Obama, I am not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago. I'm going to give a new direction to this economy in this country." Not a bad response, really. 

And on the issue of reform, McCain challenged Obama to come up with one issue where he stood up to the leaders of his party. Obama answered that with supporting tort reform which wasn't very popular with trial lawyers (so?) and supporting charter schools which isn't popular with teachers' unions. But neither the teachers' unions or trial lawyers are the leaders in the Democrat party, so I guess he doesn't have one.

Both men were asked about the tone of their campaign. McCain responded by saying that he regrets some of the negative aspects of both campaigns - and then went on to cite Congressman Lewis' remark about McCain and Palin being like George Wallace (segregation, deaths of children in church bombings, etc...). Then he said, "And Senator Obama, you didn't repudiate those remarks. Every time there's been an out-of-bounds remark made by a Republican, no matter where they are, I have repudiated them." He also reminded people that Obama had signed a piece of paper that said he would take public financing for his campaign if McCain did and he didn't keep his word.

Obama's response? "Well, look, you know, I think that we expect presidential campaigns to be tough." He goes on to say that the impressions of the American people according to polls is that McCain is more negative than Obama. Well, hoooeee! I guess if the American people have that impression (even though it's not true) we'll just keep it that way, huh? Nice. McCain ended up holding Obama's' feet to the fire on this one and said, "But again, I did not hear a repudiation of Congressman Lewis's remarks." Obama's response was to defend Congressman Lewis.

McCain was asked about Obama and "terrorists" and he responded by saying he didn't care about an old washed up terrorist, but that we need to know the full extent of that relationship. He also brought up Acorn - and the fact that the Obama campaign has paid Acorn 832K for "lighting and site selection." Obama was not honest on either the Ayers point or the Acorn point in his response and I wish McCain had held his feet to the fire on that as well.

A couple of times in the debate, McCain commended Obama on his eloquence right before pointing out his slippery words. I think he scored a few points there. 

And on to the Supreme Court. McCain did a good job of communicating his view on the justice nomination process. He said that he voted for Breyer and Ginsburg not because he agreed with their ideology but because they were qualified and selected by the president.

McCain attacked Obama on the issue of abortion and cited the fact that Obama voted against legislation in Illinois that would require medical attention for the surviving babies of botched abortions. Obama responded by saying, "If it sounds incredible that I would vote to withhold lifesaving treatment from an infant, that's because it's not true." Unfortunately, though, it is true. You can look it up.

To sum up, I think that McCain did a really good job. I don't know if it's enough to help boost him to win in November, but he stood up and held his ground. And I have to say, I was impressed. Thank you, Senator McCain for finally not trying so hard to be nice that you don't say anything at all. 

John McCain And His "Jobs for America"

After doing my duty looking into Barack Obama's economic plan for the good old US of A, I decided I needed to be "fair and balanced" and look into McCain's as well. The good news is that McCain's plan cannot possibly be worse than Obama's. The bad news is that I won't be throwing any parades in honor of John McCain based on his plan for the country, either. But I guess we already knew that. 

Let's start with McCain's idea for meddling in the workplace, titled "Workplace Flexibility in a Changing Economy." Here, John McCain is said to understand that today's changing economy is making it harder for parents to balance the demands of family life and their jobs. This irritates me, and I'll tell you why. (I'm sure you were sooooo afraid that I wouldn't.) We had our first child back in 1997 and at that time made the decision that I would stay home with our kids. My husband has a college degree in English, and was (at that time) working in credit card collections. As you may already know, people who work in credit card collections are making their entire living off commission - yes, that's right. 100% commission on how much you're able to collect from people who don't pay. Needless to say, we had some exceedingly lean times on that income. 

From there, we moved across the country and my husband got a job in a different industry making 30K per year. It wasn't easy to live on that - we did without many things that others may consider to be necessities. But we had food, diapers, and as much clothing as we needed - and I was home with our son, which was what really mattered to us. It wasn't easy, just important. 

McCain is also said to understand that our "changing economy forces many families to deal with the disruptions that come with a job change." Because of this understanding, I guess, he believes that workers should be able to "choose new training that fits their personal situation so that they can build new skills as their careers change." Are you serious?? Is there some goober somewhere telling people what training they can and cannot experience? Or does McCain believe that I should be paying for their training? 

He also believes that "as our workforce ages, many older Americans want to continue to stay in jobs." He thinks that more flexible arrangements would enable these folks to continue their careers. Well, fine... start a company and implement that, then. But coming up with the "Wish I Were Retired Act of 2010" isn't probably a good idea.

To sum up, here are the things McCain finds important to mess with in the workplace:

Modernizing labor laws to allow for more flexible scheduling arrangements.

Ensuring labor laws don't get in the way of working at home.

Promoting telework.

Making health care more portable.

Ensuring that workers can "choose retirement plans" that suite their needs.

Providing workers job training assistance.

In health care, McCain is offering the following:

Cheaper drugs.

An emphasis on prevention, early intervention, healthy habits, etc...

Coordinated care, collaborating providers.

Government walk-in clinics in retail outlets.

Reform Medicaid and Medicare.

Smoking cessation programs.

Tort reform.

McCain's tax plan is "Taxes: Simpler, Fair, Pro-Growth and Competitive." He wants to keep tax rates low. Top tax rate of 35 percent, maintain the 15 percent rates on dividends and capital gains, and phase out the AMT. He wants to cut the corporate tax rate from 35% to 25%, saying that keeping the corporate tax rate low is essential to keeping good jobs in the United States.

He wishes to ban internet taxes and cell phone taxes.

McCain is also promising "Immediate Relief for American Families." According to his site, "John McCain will help Americans hurting from high gasoline and food costs." He'll act immediately to reduce the "pain of high gas prices." How will he do this? He's going to send a strong message to world markets. Yes, he's going to be "telling oil producing countries and oil speculators that our dependence on foreign oil will come to an end - and the impact will be lower prices at the pump." Uh-huh. Now why didn't anybody else think of that?? We should have told them that a long time ago!! Sheesh.

Also, John McCain is going to "increase the value of the dollar and thus reduce the price of oil." Somehow, we're supposed to believe that by the mere existence of John McCain in the White House, Americans "will have a stronger economy, a stronger dollar and greater purchasing power for oil, gas and food." C'mon, dude. I'm a Republican... and I really want to be on your side here... but I'm going to need a little more to go on than that. 

He also says he wants to begin a summer gas tax holiday. But John, I'm not thinking you're going to have much success in getting something like that to pass in the House and Senate. Sorry.

McCain wishes to "keep well-meaning, deserving home owners who are facing foreclosure in their homes." Yes, there must be some folks out there who are not paying their mortgages who still deserve to keep their home. O-kay. Here is his approach:

No bailouts for investors or speculators. Only homeowners.

Holders of a sub-prime mortgage taken after 2005 on their primary residence who 1, can prove creditworthiness at the time of the original loan, 2, are either delinquent or can demonstrate that they will be delinquent, and 3, can meet the terms of a new 30 year fixed-rate mortgage will be eligible. All they have to do is pick up a form at any post office or download the form over the internet to apply. The FHA certifies that the individual is qualified and contacts the individual's mortgage servicer. The FHA replaces the existing mortgage with a new one. I have to be honest with you and tell you that I don't get this. Not that I don't understand what he's trying to do -- but I don't understand why it's a good idea. Why cut it off at 2005? Why would you have people apply who are still making good on their current mortgage payments? Why would you bail some people out of their bad decisions and not the others? How is this right?

McCain is also dedicated to "Reforming Washington to Regain the Trust of Taxpayers." I have two words for this idea: TOO LATE. Seriously, he does go into some reforms he would like to see -- they're on his website if you want to know what they are. Call me jaded, but I just don't believe it for even a minute.

That being said, I still think that McCain is less scary than Obama. He's still scary, but much less so. So here's how I feel about this whole mess... I don't much like horror films. I'm just not into the scare-me-silly-by-showing-me-a-slaughter thing. (Call me crazy.) And if somebody told me that they were going to take me for a night out and I had to choose between two films, one of them being petrifying and the other being less scary, I would opt out of the entire night out. Unfortunately, there will not be a place on the ballot for scrapping it all and starting over, so I'm probably stuck with the less scary film choice here. I'm in for a night out that I didn't ask for - and I'm not going to like it either way. 

How Obama Will "Jumpstart" the Economy

According to Barack Obama, the economic struggle can be laid out in two main problems. One, wages are stagnant as prices rise. Yes, this is the case. Prices are getting a bit out of hand (even the basic necessities are becoming ridiculous). And two, there have been "tax cuts for the wealthy instead of the middle class." No, this is not the case. The tax cuts were for everybody. We all got some. It's true that the more money you make, the bigger your tax cut -- but that's because the more money you make, the more taxes you pay. 

Also outlined as a problem in the "tax cuts" section is the fact that the Bush administration has not "tackled health care, education and housing in a manner that benefits the middle class." Oy. Well, I don't think the government tackling health care is going to benefit anybody, regardless of class. And the Bush administration DID try to tackle education and made a holy mess of it. Unfortunately, it looks like somebody might be tackling housing, too, before the end of the year. 

So... on to the Obama fix! First things first, right? They're going to "jumpstart the economy." How are they going to do this? It's all somewhat vague... but they're going to start by imposing a "windfall profits tax" so that they can send a $1000 emergency energy rebate to American families. Common sense would say that American families are going to still be paying their energy costs... it's just that the energy is going to need to cost more so that the oil companies can afford to pay the "windfall profits tax" that needs to be generated in order to make this work. Please keep in mind, companies don't pay taxes - consumers do. It all gets passed on.

Then they're going to provide $50 billion to jumpstart the economy and prevent 1 million Americans from losing their jobs. They're going to do this by making sure they're preventing state and local cuts in health, education, housing and heating assistance or counterproductive increases in property taxes, tolls or fees. Somehow, with a mere $50 billion, Barack Obama is going to save the day by preventing excess property taxes at the state level, tolls and fees... and he's going to pump up the governments with enough money to prevent them from having to make cuts in any of their services or employees. Really can't figure out how he's getting the numbers to work... but maybe it's like Jesus with the loaves and fishes and I just need more faith. 

After the generous jumpstart to the economy (which is better translated as a jumpstart to big government, because his injections are all for government jobs), he's going to provide middle class Americans with tax relief. Well, whew!! Here comes that relief that 95% of Americans are going to get!! 

The first step is to "restore fairness" by providing 150 million workers tax relief. This is done with a "Making Work Pay" tax credit of $500 per person or $1,000 per family. According to Obama's website, the "Making Work Pay" tax credit will completely eliminate income taxes for 10 million Americans. And yes, he really does appear to think that this somehow "restores fairness." His logic to get there must be a bit dizzying, but I digress...

Secondly, he's going to eliminate income taxes for seniors making less than $50,000. Okay... I don't really have an issue with seniors' IRAs not getting taxed as they pull that money out. According to Obama, this will eliminate income taxes for 7 million seniors and provide an average savings of $1400 per year for them. Under the Obama plan, 27 million American seniors will not need to file an income tax return. 

Thirdly, he's going to simplify tax filings for the middle class. According to their plan, they're going to "dramatically" simplify things so that Americans can do their taxes in less than five minutes. Maybe it's going to be a simple form such as:

"How much did you make? _______________

Go ahead and send it in."

Frighteningly enough, Obama's plan counts on having the IRS use the information it gets from banks and employers to give taxpayers "pre-filled tax forms to verify, sign and return." Got that? He doesn't even trust us to do our own paperwork. He wants to tell us what we owe and have us send it in. 

He then goes on to say, "Experts estimate that the Obama-Biden proposal will save Americans up to 200 million total hours of work and aggravation and up to $2 billion in tax preparer fees." Oh, yeah... that's funny. He's going to increase government jobs and that's how he's going to "jumpstart" the economy... meanwhile he's putting the tax accountants in the country out of business. 

On trade, they're going to "fight for fair trade." They want to open up foreign markets to support good American jobs. They're going to stand firm against agreements like the Central American Free Trade Agreement (DR-CAFTA). They will work with Canada and Mexico to "fix" NAFTA... and he doesn't mention the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), possibly because the FTAA is not yet in place, but the DR-CAFTA was looked at as a stepping stone to an FTAA treaty.

Obama wishes to increase what was once known as the "School To Work" program. Supposedly to help workers adapt to a "rapidly changing economy," they want to create "flexible education accounts to help workers retrain" and provide "retraining assistance for workers" where people are "vulnerable to dislocation." I'm sorry, but what happened to people taking responsibility for themselves? If you can see that the industry in which you work is in deep trouble, then go get some training for yourself and change jobs! (Hint, hint -- people working for GM.) They're also going to create a new jobs training program for "Clean Technologies." 

Somehow Obama is going to make sure that companies are not financially benefited by moving their operations overseas. I'm not sure how he's going to do this because he doesn't say. Maybe he's not sure, either. 

Also, Obama "will create new federal policies, and expand existing ones, that have been proven to create new American jobs." He doesn't state what these specific policies might be, but I have a question. How can he create a new policy that has already been proven? 

Barack Obama is also going to improve our economy by creating "new jobs through national infrastructure investment." I am beginning to think this guy has no interest whatsoever in the private sector except to dismantle it. He is going to create a "National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank" to expand and enhance, not supplant, existing federal transportation investments.

And this one? I  just need somebody to tell me what it means:

Barack Obama and Joe Biden will support entrepreneurship and spur job growth by creating a national network of public-private business incubators. Business incubators facilitate the critical work of entrepreneurs in creating start-up companies. Obama and Biden will invest $250 million per year to increase the number and size of incubators in disadvantaged communities throughout the country. What in the heck is a public-private business incubator??

Obama will increase the minimum wage and ensure it rises every year.

He will ensure freedom to unionize. I really hadn't realized this was in jeopardy. I know more people who would prefer to opt out of the union and are not able to than I do who would like a union and can't have one. (Or perhaps this is again directed at Wal Mart?) Obama will work to ban the permanent replacement of striking workers. See, I have an issue with this, too. If a group of employees are refusing to come to work, and there are other able bodied people there willing to fill those places, why shouldn't the company be allowed to replace those refusing to work? Rendering the employers completely powerless doesn't seem like such a good idea to me.

Obama is going to "reform bankruptcy laws." He is going to cap interest rates on payday loans at 36 percent. Frankly, anybody willing to pay that has to be insane anyway... and should probably seek some sort of help. They're going to "encourage responsible lending institutions to make small consumer loans." Get this: "Obama and Biden will encourage banks, credit unions and Community Development Financial Insitutions to provide affordable short-term and small-dollar loans and to drive unscrupulous lenders out of business." Well.... kind of hard to drive them out of business when you're handing them billions of dollars in bailouts! And I don't know that I would want the government "encouraging" my bank to make certain kinds of loans anymore. We all saw what happened the last time they did that! And he's going to create an exemption in bankruptcy law for individuals who can prove they filed for bankruptcy because of medical expenses, creating a process that forgives the debt and lets the individuals get back on their feet. Does anybody else see how all this costs an incredible amount of money? Where is it going to come from?? Back to that loaves and fishes thing again...

They're also going to balance work and family life for us. "Obama and Biden will double funding for after-school programs, expand the Family Medical Leave Act, provide low-income families with a refundable tax credit to help with their child-care expenses, and encourage flexible work schedules." That's a tall order, really. 

They want to expand the FMLA to be enforceable with even smaller businesses and to cover more purposes. Employers would be required to allow time off for elder care needs, for parents to participate in their children's academic activities, and leave to address domestic violence.

This is an awful lot to take on -- and some of it is just downright scary. But since, according to Louis Farrakhan, Obama is the new messiah, I guess it really is a loaves and fishes thing. 

My best advice to you is this: grab your wallet, grab a shovel. Go to your backyard and dig a big hole, insert your wallet. Fill in with dirt, packing it down hard so the government can't find it. Because this economic plan is what they're all saying is a shoo-in come November.

The Investigation of Governor Palin

I think we all know by now that politics can be a very dirty business. A thick skin (preferably one tanned into leather) is required. But I have to say, I find the hoopla over Governor Palin to be one step short of hilarious. One step short simply because while ridiculous, I cannot actually find it funny - and I'm a twisted soul, thinking politics is usually full of some good humor. But this stuff is just downright ugly. Let me explain.

I opened my browser today to the headline, "Palin Denies State Report She Abused Power." I thought, "Well, this one I have to see..." And I'm glad I did. What I would like to do is highlight the scandal for you in its entirety - so that you can see this in the same light as I do. 

Back in 2005, Mike Wooten was on his third marriage, being married to Sarah Palin's younger sister, Molly. Their marriage was not a fun one, apparently. On April 11, 2005, Molly filed for divorce and a protective order against her husband. They had been married for four years. After several complaints, the state police opened an investigation into Wooten's conduct. This investigation led to the Grimes Report, which noted that "unacceptable conduct appears to have continued and even escalated," and "clearly indicates a serious and concentrated pattern of unacceptable and, at times, illegal activity occurring over a lengthy period." And that, "a civilian investigated under similar circumstances would have received criminal sanctions."

In spite of this, Wooten continued to be assigned to patrol the neighborhood of the Palins' family.

There were further accusations (of death threats made by Wooten, of Wooten scamming disability pay while not injured, etc...) but these things, as far as I can figure out, were not included in his suspension. Whether this is because the accusations were not substantiated or because the suspension had already taken place, I don't know. 

Palin herself never contacted Commissioner of Public Safety Walter Monegan regarding Mike Wooten. Todd Palin, however, did. And Frank Bailey (of Palin's administration) did on February 29th of 2008. They wanted to know why a person with this checkered past was (and is) still serving as a police officer. Monegan refused to fire Wooten. 

On July 11th, Governor Palin decided that Monegan would be a better fit for the state Alcohol Beverage Control board, and she asked him to transfer. He refused and was relieved of his duties. According to Palin, Monegan was not supportive of the direction she wanted to take Public Safety (disputes over budgetary issues and the filling of trooper vacancies) and was insubordinate. 

An investigation of Monegan's firing was launched on July 28th of 2008. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Hollis French (a Democrat) managed the inquiry. On September 2nd, French told ABC News that the investigation could lead to an "October Surprise" for the GOP ticket.

The official report concluded that Palin abused her power as governor and violated state ethics law in trying to get her brother-in-law fired from the state police and that Monegan's refusal to fire Wooten from the state police force was "likely a contributing factor" to Monegan's July dismissal, but Palin had the authority as governor to fire him. 

A few more facts to consider when making our judgment:

Since Mike Wooten's divorce from Molly, he has already been married and divorced again.

In an interview with CNN, Wooten admitted to tasering his stepson "in a training capacity." His stepson was ten years old. He admitted to shooting the moose illegally. He denies drinking and driving, although there was sufficient evidence of this that he was disciplined for it, and he denies having made death threats against the Palin extended family. He admitted to the interviewing reporter that he has "issues" with relationships.

In the same interview, CNN asked Wooten what he would like people to know about him and his response was, "My priorities are my children, being the best father I can be... my job, being the best trooper I can be for the state, for the citizens... I was young, I made mistakes. I was punished for those mistakes, learned my lesson. They're behind me, I'm trying to move on and be the best dad I can be to my children and be the best trooper I can be. You know, I love my job and I love this state and those are my priorities." Really??? You were young? That's your thinking? This was three years ago. The I-was-young excuse usually needs a little more growing room before one can effectively use it. Also, the man was suspended for five days - five days!! And we are to conclude from this that the severity of that punishment enabled him to realize his grievous error? Sorry, but... I really doubt it. 

In light of all this, here's how I see things:

Why in the world are they investigating Governor Palin and not the Public Safety Commission? Why would they allow someone with this history to continue "serving" as "public protection?" Does it strike anybody odd that the government officials are this unconcerned with public safety? Would anybody like to volunteer to have Mike Wooten come and patrol their area?? I sure wouldn't!

But here's where the politics of the matter get really interesting. Alaska State Senator Kim Elton said that about 1,000 or more pages of documents compiled during the inquiry against Sarah Palin will remain confidential because they "involve private personnel matters." Isn't that interesting? They get to publish a conclusion without revealing a bunch of facts... and then Elton goes on to say, "I believe that these findings may help people come to a conclusion on how they should vote" in the presidential election. Guess what? Elton is a Democrat.

Isn't it interesting how partisan our politics have become? And to try and take down the Republican ticket this way is... well, yucky. 

You can all look back on my previous posts to see how disenchanted I am with the Republicans right about now... so I'm certainly not feeling like a partisan myself in writing this particular blog. But given all the evidence, I think they're really hitting Palin below the belt here. It's just not right.

A Powerless People

Sometimes following politics can lead to depression. How did we become so powerless? Supposedly, we are a country "of the people, by the people, for the people." But in reality -- not so much. 

I am a registered Republican (no surprise there). But I must say, my loyalty is beginning to wane. I find myself wondering, first of all, how we ended up with John McCain as our candidate. I have not yet talked to a fellow Republican who is on his wagon. He's driving the thing, and Republicans are grudgingly following - with the dust being kicked up in their faces... They're generally irritated by both the wagon and the driver. Ever since McCain chose Palin as his running mate, she's been dutifully riding the back of the wagon, fanning a rug in an effort to disperse the dust off to the sides. But as McCain whips the horses at the front into a frenzy, Palin's fanning is becoming less and less effective. 

I am usually a glutton for political punishment... but even I cannot stomach sitting through an entire debate between McCain and Obama. It's like watching two children arguing over "who is worser." 

Explain to me this: Why would a Republican presidential candidate, after seeing the American people up in arms over the idea of a "bailout," suspend his campaign and rush back to Washington in order to ensure a bailout? September 23rd, CNN ran the headline, "Needed Financial Bailout Rewards Bad Behavior." On the 26th, the headlines "Poll: Most Americans Against Bush's Bailout Plan" and "Poll: Bush's Bailout Plan Not Popular" both ran by FOX News and UPI, respectively. It almost seems like McCain decided to stick his finger to the wind, figure out exactly what would alienate his base the most, and then took that course of action. It was the worst political move he could have made. 

We appear to have a bunch of nimrods in both the House and the Senate who refuse to listen to what the people want. Fine... but then the House should have just passed the bill the first time instead of waiting until it was laden with so much pork it was actually "oinking" while sitting at the trough of the public treasury.

Now here we sit, 700 billion dollars later -- the stock market still crashing, the financial system still crumbling... and McCain gets out on the campaign trail and pushes forward the idea of another 300 billion dollar bailout for homeowners who aren't paying their mortgages on time. Well, now... THERE'S an idea! Why didn't we all think of that?? That will certainly fix things! After all, these unfortunate souls were "taken advantage of" by a greedy Wall Street, right? It's only right that we offer to pay down their mortgages for them to a more affordable level. That's certainly going to fix a volatile situation in the housing market... OH! But wait! What about all those people who also bought at market peak? Those who are upside down by sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars and yet are still dutifully paying on their mortgages? Have we thought about the fact that those people are also being asked to pay yet an extra measure? And what about those who didn't purchase at peak, those who watched their equity go up, up, up... and then down, down, down... without purchasing all that fun stuff with the equity in the meantime? Yes, those people are then being asked to pay for the fluff of others. I honestly can't think of a better way to make a wreckage out of our system. But bully for McCain... way to win the trust of the people. (Do you detect a moment's sarcasm? Can you see my eyes rolling way back into my head??)

So now I'm being asked to go to the polls and vote. My choices are between foolishness and utter recklessness. Hmmm... which one shall I choose? Do I want to watch my country die a slow and painful death? Or do I want to order a quick trip to the guillotine? Lovely.

I recently told my husband that it's like McCain is trying to make it more difficult for me to vote. I'm once again thinking I might as well stay home. And my husband jumped on that Bob Barr wagon again... telling me I should go and cast my vote for him. Well, I just might do that. I don't know... of course, the only way I would is if we carpool. A vote for Barr isn't really worth the gas it will take to get me to the voting booth.

Ah, well... maybe I should vote for McCain. Maybe I should vote for Barr. Maybe I should stay home that day... or maybe I should stop blogging when I'm so angry. 

Oh, Woe Is Our Economy!!

Well, they did it. They passed the legislation -- a pork-filled-piece-of-junk legislation, but they passed it anyway. They passed it warning of dire consequences if it didn't pass... and no real promise of a rosy future once the money was promised and spent. 

Of course, it's a good thing they didn't promise any such thing. Have you been watching the stock market lately?? The DOW closed today at 9955.50. The year to date change in the DOW has been a whopping -2939.44. Anybody care for a spoonful of economic doom and gloom? 

The one good thing that seems to be coming of all this is that Americans have stopped spending everything hand over fist and living large. Better late than never, I guess. This could have something to do with the fact that many Americans aren't making enough to cover living that large even on credit, but I think there are a decent number of responsible Americans out there still... Americans who are seeing the downward trend in the markets and are trying to tighten their belts early, knowing that it's going to be a necessity to do so down the road. 

I talked with a neighbor the other day. She had been watching the nightly news and they were saying, "Don't buy anything unless you absolutely have to." And while I think this is probably good advice, I also think it rather obvious that this action is going to further slow the economy. 

The fact that people have been living on credit to such a large degree in order to grow the economy should tell us something. This recession is a market correction of its own sort. Credit has dried up and people can't spend... the economic growth up to this point hasn't been real growth. It's a bit of a mirage. Almost like claiming my salary grew simply because somebody enlarged my credit line. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not hoping for some vast depression to sweep the United States to teach us a lesson. But if we're hit by a serious recession, even a depression, I sure hope that we're willing to learn a lesson from it.

Joe Biden Got Beat Up By A Girl

I've been sitting here for some time, writing and writing about the Vice Presidential debate -- going over it, point by point, until I've quite bored myself to death. Rather than posting that nightmare of a post, I've decided to start over.

Here are some of Palin's finer moments during the debate:

"...in fact, when we talk about the Bush administration, there's a time, too, when Americans are going to say, 'Enough is enough with your ticket,' on constantly looking backwards, and pointing fingers, and doing the blame game... but for a ticket that wants to talk about change and looking into the future, there's just too much finger-pointing backwards to ever make us believe that that's where you're going."

"Oh, yeah, it's so obvious I'm a Washington outsider. And someone just not used to the way you guys operate. Because here you voted for the war and now you oppose the war. You're one who says, as so many politicians do, I was for it before I was against it or vice-versa. Americans are craving that straight talk and just want to know, hey, if you voted for it, tell us why you voted for it..."

"I beg to disagree with you, again, here on whether you supported Barack Obama or John McCain's strategies. Here again, you can say what you want to say a month out before people are asked to vote on this, but we listened to the debates."

"Say it ain't so, Joe, there you go again pointing backwards again. You prefaced your whole comment with the Bush administration. Now, doggone it, let's look ahead and tell Americans what we have to plan to do for them in the future. You mentioned education and I'm glad you did. I know education you are passionate about with your wife being a teacher for 30 years, and God bless her. Her reward is in heaven, right? I say, too, with education, America needs to be putting a lot more focus on that and our schools have got to be really ramped up in terms of the funding that they are deserving. Teachers need to be paid more. I come from a house full of school teachers. My grandma was, my dad who is in the audience today, he's a schoolteacher, had been for many years. My brother, who I think is the best schoolteacher in the year, and here's a shout-out to all those third graders at Gladys Wood Elementary School, you get extra credit for watching the debate."

Joe Biden's role as Vice President according to Joe: "And the primary role of the vice president of the United States of America is to support the president of the United States of America, give that president his or her best judgment when sought, and as vice president, to preside over the Senate, only in a time when in fact there's a tie vote. The Constitution is explicit."

Well, let's just take a quick look at that "explicit" wording in the Constitution. Under Article II, "Executive Branch," the Vice-President is mentioned twice. Once in this statement: "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice-President chosen for the same Term." The only other time in Article II that the Vice-President is mentioned is when the Constitution is laying out who takes power in the case of the President being removed from office, either through death or impeachment.

However, in Article I, "The Legislative Branch," the Vice President's job is laid forth. "The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided." Yes, I agree - the Constitution is explicit. The Vice President is the President of the Senate - but has no voting power unless there's a tie. 

But, according to Biden, his job is to be the White House slug. And unless his opinion is sought, he's supposed to sit in the waiting room - hoping for a tie in the Senate so he can actually do something. 

Joe Biden lied a minimum of 14 times during the course of the debate. On the tax vote, meeting with Ahmedinijad, on offshore drilling, troop funding, opposing clean coal, alternative energy votes, health insurance plans, oil taxes, principles of the surge being used in Afghanistan, stances on regulatory procedures, the Iraq war, tax increases, the bailout, and the tax rates under Reagan. While watching the debate, I was bummed that Palin didn't call him down on more of his "misstatements," but... it all turned out alright since she kicked his butt. 

Why do I say this is the case? Joe Biden, throughout most of the debate, was kept on the defensive. He was clearly uncomfortable through part of it -- reading his body language, sometimes it appeared that he was saying whatever he had to in order to get through the moment. 

Palin, on the other hand, was (through most of the debate) comfortable being herself. She used the fact that she's a relative newcomer to the scene to her advantage, even going so far as to highlight "how long she's been at this" and saying she hadn't had much of a chance to promise things to the American people, other than the fact that she's going to put government back on their side. She effectively used Biden's previous comments against him, she used plain and simple language to get her ideas across, and she often spoke directly to the American people. Even the New York Times said she "used a steady grin, folksy manner and carefully scripted talking points to punch politely and persist politically." I didn't find Palin's performance scripted, but I guess it's all in the eye of the beholder. The Times, in an editorial piece, bemoaned the fact that Palin started out with such low expectations and she "had to do little more than say one or two sensible things and avoid an election-defining gaffe." 

Well, congratulations to the media for that. All their attacks only fed the idea that Sarah Palin was going to come out on stage drooling, she had so little in her head. 

Regardless, Joe Biden got beat up on Thursday night by a girl.