HOME
SOAPBOX
ARTICLES
FEATURES
LINKS
Politics
subprime crisis
Tax Plan Analysis
There are two ways at looking at John McCain continuing to run commercials that claim Barack Obama will raise taxes: 1) He is lying or, at best, dramatically misrepresenting the facts - OR 2) McCain's only real audience is his peers of super-wealthy people. This would explain the disconnection of his statements about the economy being basically healthy during the Bush years, about "middleclass" including people with only several million dollars, and his intention to slash taxes even further for the highest income groups.
This graph above clearly shows that Obama's plan would provide genuine benefit to the middle class and working poor. McCain would provide almost all of his tax breaks for the wealthiest. The table below shows the typical tax SAVINGS for three income brackets.
Under the Obama plan, taxes would increase ONLY for the very wealthy, those with annual incomes over $600,000. Those increases, however, would still put the wealthiest people at tax rates below levels in effect during the Reagan administration.
Under the McCain plan, these super-wealty would receive the biggest tax break of ANY income group.
We have had enough of this experiement called "Supply Side" economics - let's try something called "Demand Side" economics where we put money back in the pockets of the middleclass and working poor so that they can afford to purchase the goods and services that are the backbone to our standard of living. Henry Ford recognized this 100 years ago when he pioneered paying his employees enough that they would actually be able to afford the fruit of their very own labors.
Thanks to Chili for finding the graph - Chili Dog Blog
Release the Swift Boats
September 15, 2008
WOW! I finally heard a press report that included a more complete and in context "lipstick on a pig" audio. It does not come close to referencing Palin - it clearly refers to the policies of Mr. McCain being a continuation of those of the Bush administration and NOT those of an agent of change.
The Bush neo-cons running the McCain campaign have put their candidates good reputation at risk by again stooping to such tactics. Further, by ignoring the fact that their candidate, Mr. McCain, used the same phrase about Hillary earlier in the year they have set him up as a hypocrit.
Much is now being made of McCain in some way selling his soul to try to win this election. Some conservative commentators are able to be truthful and admit the choice of Palin reflects very badly on McCain and his judgement and are concerned at the security risk our country could be subjected to by this choice. Most are trying to put the best possible face on a bad situation.
The press and the Obama camp are both likely to get their feet back under them at this point after being spun dizzy by the Palin choice. Balanced coverage, serious reflection by the media and voters, and Obama getting back on his message will allow issues of substance to come again to the front and should reflect well in the numbers for Obama in about 10 - 14 days.
September 10, 2008
The Swift Boating of Barack Obama is in full throttle gear now. While the Democrats are trying to frame a policy debate worthy of the most bookish of wonks, Bush's neo-con election team working for McCain have crafted messages that create an impression and frame the discussion, granted they frame the discussion often without regard for the truth and largely devoid of any relevance to actual governance issues.
The Obama team has been caught flat-footed. They should have been prepared for any eventuality following the Republican Convention including a new series of speeches and proposals to seize the discussion and commercials to criticize McCain/Palin. Now is not the time to play nice. McCain and the Republicans understand that short vivid messages are what voters want and are not above distorting (lying) anything to reinforce their messages.
For example - in reality it is irrelevant if the surge worked or didn't work. In fact, who could doubt that our military could accomplish any military objective? No one! Allowing McCain to carry the message "the surge worked; Obama was against the surge" makes the public think Obama thought the US military would fail. He did not - rather the war was misdirected in the first place and Iraq is not ready to take control once we clear neighborhoods of insurgents.
The message the Democrats should have is that the Bush War with Iraq has resulted in high fuel costs here at home which has contributed to high unemployment and, insult to injury, there are billions of dollars in surpluses for an Iraqi government, a government that is unable to stand up and take control of the peace we won for them. Avoid talk about the deficits or future generations, it will sound like blah blah blah - it may be correct but it will lose the attention of voters instantly.
Now we have the Democrats retreating from the "political-correct" police over the old political line "lipstick on a pig, it is still a pig" line. The line works great, especially in the context of Palin bragging every speech she gives about the difference between her and a bulldog is only the lipstick. But the Republicans cried foul - "sexism". Watch how the press falls in line behind this as well because the neo-cons know how to frame these issues for quick easy stories - report on the horse race not the issues!
McCain is not apologizing for lying about the Obama record and laughs it off as "having some fun." The Obama camp needs to show the same focus, assertiveness, and maybe even sense of humor. The Democrats own the issues lock, stock, and barrel. They have precious little time now to frame the issues correctly, definitively, and concisely so that they own the discussion as well.
Latta v Buehrer
Friday, October 26
Judging by the commercials running on television and the excellent reporting in today's Toledo Blade, my intial assessment of Steve Buehrer appears to have been a little mild - he now appears to be a complete jerk.
He has misrepresented the truth and degraded the level of discourse in the primary race. And while reporter Josh Boak of the Blade stuck to the "fund raising" facts in his article, I'll take them to their logical conclusion; based on the sources of money Buehrer has raised, a Washington Political Action Committee (PAC), I wonder if he would be beholden to the voters of rural northwest Ohio or rather to special interest groups that have proven to be out of step with the majority of voters.
Now, as a Democrat, I would rather face Buehrer in the general election because his extreme far right views and his abrasive behavior would put many more moderate votes (and voters who care about decency) up for grabs and increase the Democrat's chances of winning. But, especially given the circumstances of the election, the sudden unexpected death of Rep Paul Gilmore, the win at any cost campaign of Buehrer seems tawdry and crass.
Latta seem like a good guy who has kept his nose to grindstone and been a faithful public servant. He has lived up to the family name and not merely rested on it. His measured thoughtful approach is more likely to get results. The people of northwest Ohio I suspect are much more comfortable with this type of representative.
The President of Toledo City Council Issue
Thursday, September 13
“Politics at its very worst," was how Councilman Ludeman characterized the effort that ultimately saw his ouster as President of Toledo City Council to a Toledo Blade reporter. Rose Russell, a Blade editor, stated in a special editorial piece that “no segment of the population clamored for a change in the Toledo City Council president.”
I would contend that both of those statements are wrong.
The “politics at its worst” occurred when the Mayor teamed with Republicans to install a minority-party Member, Mr. Ludeman, as President of Council. This went against the will of the voters who elected City Council Members based on their positions on issues. 8 Democrats to 4 Republicans is a pretty clear message as to the general population's priorities. The actions that saw Mr. Ashford become Council President merely rectified the problem.
The recent primary election that saw no Republicans advance to the general election, including those running in Mr. Ludeman’s south Toledo district, is a strong indication that voters still support a Democratic party agenda. Once the voters speak, they should not be required to take to the streets to “clamor for a change,” as Ms. Russell wrote; they already have at the ballot box.
"I think there will be more potential for continued head-butting between the council and the mayor," Mr. Ludeman told the Blade after the change. I certainly hope so. The go-along agenda that Mr. Ludeman carried forth stifled free debate and, lest we forget, Council was intended to be a deliberative body. Further, Mr. Ashford is the correct person to lead Council because of his mix of experience, intellect, and positions on the issues facing Toledo.