Sat here across the pond, a Brit and no expert on these matter I watched the debate a couple of nights ago and thought McCain's continued use of "my friend" when answering questions made him sound a lot like a snake oil salesman........just my thoughts but how did that play out for you guys who get to cast a vote?
Seldom,
I'm not unbiased but it sounded like the rest of his performance -- canned. The few moments that seemed spontaneous -- like the "that one" comment -- didn't come across well at all.
It's a shame really. Once upon a time McCain would have done well and come across well -- back when he spoke of what he believed. He's made the mistake of pandering to "the base" -- the Religious Right, The Free Marketeers and the racists that had nowhere else to go -- instead of reaching out to the middle.
Man you are so one eyed. Did you ask the politics of the captain before you issued a clearance.
"Now, more than ever, it is time to bring change to Washington so that it works for the people of this country that we love."
Does "we love" mean his wife also? or only since BHO is a presidential candidate and she is not being held back because of her race/colour or whatever excuse she used.
You may think that things can’t get any worse — but they can, and if nothing is done in the next few days, they will."
Who is selling fear now, GTF? Two weeks ago, Krugman was selling the "bailout" as the solution. It didn't work, so this week's solution is coordinated government action OR the sky will fall!! Get off it and the let market figure out the bottom and start a return from there. More later.
More evidence that the CRA was a major factor in the housing bubble, especially the part about loans only had to made to meet CRA requirements, not perform-a perverse incentive, if there ever was one.
Economists Statement on Barack Obama's Risky Economic Proposals
100 Economists Warn That With Current Weak Financial Conditions Barack Obama's Proposals Run A High Risk Of Throwing The US Into A Deep Recession
ARLINGTON, VA -- Today, McCain-Palin 2008 released the following statement signed by 100 distinguished and experienced economists at major American universities and research organizations, including five Nobel Prize winners Gary Becker, James Buchanan, Robert Mundell, Edward Prescott, and Vernon Smith. The economists explain why Barack Obama's proposals, including "misguided tax hikes," would "decrease the number of jobs in America." The prospects of such tax rate increases under Barack Obama are already harming the economy. The economists conclude that "Barack Obama's economic proposals are wrong for the American economy." The proposals "defy both economic reason and economic experience."
The full economists' statement on Barack Obama's economic proposals and a complete list of economists who support it follows:
Barack Obama argues that his proposals to raise tax rates and halt international trade agreements would benefit the American economy. They would do nothing of the sort. Economic analysis and historical experience show that they would do the opposite. They would reduce economic growth and decrease the number of jobs in America. Moreover, with the credit crunch, the housing slump, and high energy prices weakening the U.S. economy, his proposals run a high risk of throwing the economy into a deep recession. It was exactly such misguided tax hikes and protectionism, enacted when the U.S. economy was weak in the early 1930s, that greatly increased the severity of the Great Depression.
We are very concerned with Barack Obama's opposition to trade agreements such as the pending one with Colombia, the new one with Central America, or the established one with Canada and Mexico. Exports from the United States to other countries create jobs for Americans. Imports make goods available to Americans at lower prices and are a particular benefit to families and individuals with low incomes. International trade is also a powerful source of strength in a weak economy. In the second quarter of this year, for example, increased international trade did far more to stimulate the U.S. economy than the federal government's "stimulus" package.
Ironically, rather than supporting international trade, Barack Obama is now proposing yet another so-called stimulus package, which would do very little to grow the economy. And his proposal to finance the package with higher taxes on oil would raise oil prices directly and by reducing exploration and production.
We are equally concerned with his proposals to increase tax rates on labor income and investment. His dividend and capital gains tax increases would reduce investment and cut into the savings of millions of Americans. His proposals to increase income and payroll tax rates would discourage the formation and expansion of small businesses and reduce employment and take-home pay, as would his mandates on firms to provide expensive health insurance.
After hearing such economic criticism of his proposals, Barack Obama has apparently suggested to some people that he might postpone his tax increases, perhaps to 2010. But it is a mistake to think that postponing such tax increases would prevent their harmful effect on the economy today. The prospect of such tax rate increases in 2010 is already a drag on the economy. Businesses considering whether to hire workers today and expand their operations have time horizons longer than a year or two, so the prospect of higher taxes starting in 2009 or 2010 reduces hiring and investment in 2008.
In sum, Barack Obama's economic proposals are wrong for the American economy. They defy both economic reason and economic experience.
Robert Barro, Harvard University
Gary Becker, University of Chicago
Sanjai Bhagat, University of Colorado
Michael Block, University of Arizona
Brock Blomberg, Claremont-McKenna University
Michael Bordo, Rutgers University
Michael Boskin, Stanford University
Ike Brannon, McCain-Palin 2008
James Buchanan, George Mason University
Todd Buchholtz, Two Oceans Fund
Charles Calomiris, Columbia University
Jim Carter, Vienna VA
Barry Chiswick, University of Illinois at Chicago
John Cogan, Hoover Institution
Kathleen Cooper, Southern Methodist University
Ted Covey, McLean VA
Dan Crippen, former CBO Director
Mario Crucini, Vanderbilt
Steve Davis, University of Chicago
Christopher DeMuth, American Enterprise Institute
William Dewald, Ohio State University
Frank Diebold, University of Pennsylvania
Isaac Ehrlich, State University of New York at Buffalo
Paul Evans, Ohio State University
Dan Feenberg, NBER
Martin Feldstein, Harvard University
Eric Fisher, California Polytechnic State University
Kristin Forbes, MIT
Timothy Fuerst, Bowling Green State University
Diana Furchtgott-Roth, Hudson Institute
Paul Gregory, University of Houston
Earl Grinols, Baylor University
Rik Hafer, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville
Gary Hansen, UCLA
Eric Hanushek, Hoover Institutions
Kevin Hassett, American Enterprise Institute
Arlene Holen, Technology Policy Institute
Douglas Holtz-Eakin, McCain-Palin 2008
Glenn Hubbard, Columbia University
Owen Irvine, Michigan State University
Mike Jensen, Harvard University
Steven Kaplan, University of Chicago
Robert King, Boston University
Meir Kohn, Dartmouth
Marvin Kosters, American Enterprise Institute
Anne Krueger, Johns Hopkins University
Phil Levy, American Enterprise Institute
Larry Lindsey, The Lindsey Group
Paul W. MacAvoy. Yale University
John Makin, American Enterprise Institute
Burton Malkiel, Princeton University
Bennett McCallum, Carnegie-Mellon University
Paul McCracken, University of Michigan
Will Melick, Kenyon College
Allan Meltzer, Carnegie-Mellon University
Enrique Mendoza, University of Maryland
Jim Miller, George Mason University
Michael Moore, George Washington University
Robert Mundell, Columbia University
Tim Muris, George Mason University
Kevin Murphy, University of Chicago
Richard Muth, Emory University
Charles Nelson, University of Washington
Bill Niskanen, Cato Institute
June O'Neill, Baruch College, CUNY
Lydia Ortega, San Jose State University
Steve Parente, University of Minnesota
William Poole, University of Delaware
Michael Porter, Harvard University
Barry Poulson, University of Colorado, Boulder
Edward Prescott, Arizona State University
Kenneth Rogoff, Harvard University
Richard Roll, UCLA
Harvey Rosen, Princeton University
Robert Rossana, Wayne State University
Mark Rush, University of Florida
Tom Saving, Texas A&M University
Anna Schwartz, NBER
George Shultz, Stanford University
Chester Spatt, Carnegie-Mellon University
David Spencer, Brigham Young University
Beryl Sprinkle, Former Chair Council of Economic Advisers
Houston Stokes, University of Illinois in Chicago
Robert Tamura, Clemson University
Jack Tatum, Indiana State University
John Taylor, Stanford University
Richard Vedder, Ohio University
William B. Walstad, University of Nebraska
Murray Weidenbaum, Washington University in St. Louis
Get the flick
Typical socialist rhetoric from you trying to make that idiot Obama look as if he is the hard done by as he takes money from "acorn" which seems to be false names front and democrats children break into Palins email account, Republican offices are broken into and voter fraud is high on the agenda yet again like a pale version of the Clinton years.
The standard Socilaist training book is in use from you, make the Socialist look like a martyr and the opposition look like the nasty ones.
Well the American people have seen through Obama and he is going to lose, which can only be good for the world as a whole.
Ha, ha, you used honesty and Obama right next to each other.
You're one funny dude man.
(Okay, okay, right above and below each other.)
Why do all Obama supporters believe that the change that Obama is supporting will be a change for the good?
Well, Obama's every increasing lead in the polls sure have changed all the stock markets in world. Not what I would call a good change, but never the less, a change. Today was the first time that the Wall Street Market dropped below 8,000 since March, 2003.
Now let's see here, during the administration of the dumbest President in history, according to all of the Obama supporters here, the Wall Street Market grew from under 7,000 to over 14,000. Then 'The Change' man, Obama starts leading in every poll less than three weeks before the election and the market/s tank.
Yup, you Obama supporters are getting an early 'Change', hope you're happy.
That's exactly what I've been saying, but that one-trick pony GTF is too blind to understand. Along with the other lefties here; they want prosperity for the working class and then break their legs out from under them. Finally, the gummit guy hands out crutches!!
And when a strict interpretation of the Constitution, according to the fixed rules which govern the interpretation of laws, is abandoned, and the theoretical opinions of individuals are allowed to control its meaning, we have no longer a Constitution; we are under the government of individual men, who for the time being have power to declare what the Constitution is, according to their own views of what it ought to mean.
I posted this comment from Justice Curtis, in his dissent to the Dred Scott decision. Since you, like so many today, subscribe to the "living" Constitution concept where it can be interpreted anyway Congress, the President and the Courts want to, what is the defining difference between FDR and, say, GWB and Barack Obama, but for the whether you prefer one outcome over another? Once powers beyond those enumerated in Article I, Section 8 are, actively or passively, given to the various arms of Government, only a partisan judgement defines there constitutionality. For example, Clinton went to war in Serbia twice with far less justification than Bush did in Iraq, but I haven't heard Word One about abuse of power. While you disagree with Bush's war in Iraq, what would you think about BHO's war in Darfur or Pakistan?
GF
One more question: Is an election about ideas and policy or about we won and you didn't?
LAKEVILLE, Minn. -- Sen. John McCain spoke out against the growing nastiness his Republican crowds have been demonstrating toward Sen. Barack Obama, demanding that his presidential rival be treated with respect.
At a town hall meeting Friday afternoon, he took four different opportunities to promise that he will treat the Democratic nominee with respect and to ask the same of his supporters.
./.
Sen. McCain replied that of course he hopes that Sen. Obama is not elected but added: "I have to tell you he is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared (of) as president of the United States." The crowd replied with a chorus of boo's.
And when another questioner said he could not trust him because "he's an Arab," Sen. McCain replied, "No, ma'am: no ma'am. He's a decent family man, citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues, and that's what this campaign's all about. He's not."
A magnanimous gesture on the part of Senator McCain and I applaud him for it.
For those of us who fear a BHO presidency's potential and never thought McCain a conservative.....fire at will!!
Quote:
Everyone of those actions is going to lead us into a FDR-style Depression for the same reason-bad economic policies.
It's no wonder you can't keep your history straight, GF.
Well, let's review the horrors of FDR's Depression. It was marked by FDR continuous tax increases combined with the Fed's deflationary monetary policy that keep made the Depression great. Throughout the 1800s there were numerous panics, the longest of which were the Panic 1873 and the Panic of 1873, five and six years, respectively. All ended without government intervention. Somehow, the Panic (Crash) of 1929 became the Great Depression lasting, under the Hoover & FDR administrations, for almost 12 years. Why? Well, Hoover, in an effort to balance the budget being in deficit as national income dropped by 50%, raised income taxes dramatically. They were 25% under Coolidge, the Revenue Act of 1932 brought them to a top rate of 62%. FDR raised taxes, corporate, individual and inheritance, throughout the 30s, bringing rates to 81% by 1940. The country's GDP never rose from 1929 levels until the war. Labor and capital were paralyzed by taxes, an ever-changing regulatory environment as the New Dealers passed programs that were ruled unconstitutional by the Supremes, Smoot-Hawley tariffs (sponsored, passed and signed into law by Republicans over economist's objections) and a severely deflationary monetary policy. Unemployment stood at 7.8% in 1930 (not bad) but was over 25% by FDR's inauguration.
Policies that hurt the economy were:
Instituting regulations to fight deflationary "cut-throat competition" through the NRA.
Setting minimum prices and wages, labor standards, and competitive conditions in all industries through the NRA.
Encouraging unions that would raise wages, to increase the purchasing power of the working class.
Cutting farm production to raise prices through the Agricultural Adjustment Act and its successors.
Forcing businesses to work with government to set price codes through the NRA. (Courtesy Wikipedia)
Everyone of those policies tried to raise prices during prolonged deflation, just when prices for everything should have been falling. Business could not operate productively. It is simply impossible to raise prices while the monetary supply is contracting. FDR and his team were prolonging the Depression because of ideological, socialist stubborness.
It is no mystery what policies cause good economies-free trade, low taxes, smart, predictable regulation and a fair, open legal system. Hoover and FDR violated every one of those tenets.
Yes, Bad Economics caused the Great Depression.
JFK was the one Democrat that actually understood how to make a good economy. He proposed his round of tax cuts, reducing the top rate from 91% under Ike to 70%, which would hold until Reagan. Arguably, JFK's cuts were more favorable to "the rich" than GWB's. GWB only reduced them from 39.6% to 35% and, as a percentage of GDP, the national debt was higher under Kennedy and he promoted the cuts against the advice of John K. Galbraith. To BHO, I offer this from John Kennedy:
"No American is ever made better off by pulling a fellow American down, and every American is made better off whenever any one of us is better off. A rising tide lifts all boats"
Enough of Democrat's desire of envy as politics.
BTW, the last Democrat politician devoted to Constitutional ideas was Grover Cleveland. This is what he had to say, vetoing the Texas Seed Bill, an aid package for drought-stricken farmers.
Quote:
I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution; and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard the limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadily resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that, though the people support the Government, the Government should not support the people.
Least we forget that FDR also tried to 'stack' the Supreme Court by adding more Justices when the sitting Supreme Court of day ruled that many of FDR's reform bills were un-Constitutional.
He tried to increase the number of Supreme Court Justices from 9 to 11. Of course the Justices he had planed to add to the court would have supported his viewpoints. Fortunately, even with the power that FDR had in Congress and the nation at the time, he lost.
Will we be so fortunate with Obama and Nancy this time if Obama wins?
Frightening times my friends, very frightening times.
Quite right, FDR's abuse of power was on a level that Tricky Dick could only dream of.
I do have to hand him this: unconditional surrender in WWII. His experience in WWI and in history told him that the only way to change the world, as he knew it. Churchill and the military commanders hated it, they knew it would lead to a fight to the death and so it was. But, Europe and Asia were changed forever.
A German Luftwaffe officer once told us at War College, that not may societies get a chance to fundamentally change their cultural ethos and, we did, courtesy of the US Army. I have met numerous Germans who are emotionally tied to Reagan's statement, "Tear down this Wall, Mr. Gorbachev". I had a tour of Berlin, by a German, and he took us to the exact spot where JFK and Reagan spoke, reciting some of the speeches. Another waited for hours in the rain to see Reagan's body in state in the Rotunda. He said he couldn't miss the chance to be there and how important Reagan was to Germans.
Frightening times, indeed, Con. The overwhelming push of the Dems to get this bailout through and the subsequential billions that have been passed before and after-- it's obvious that we, 'the people' are letting liberal gov't shove a trillion dollars worth of bubble gum into a bursting dam, without one bit of understanding how the dam was constructed, much less how ineffective the gum will be to keep it from coming down anyway. It's coming down because it's supposed to and we now need to let it happen without shovelling any more billions into it.
As the news has reported, AIG, after receving $85 billion, then taking a $440K corporate retreat, has the audacity to ask for $35-36 billion more? Sure...
I'm angry. I'm done with it. In the lovely state of WA, where my real estate value has gone down, but my property taxes have increased, if they raise my taxes any more, I'll have to think about selling my home because with inflation, I'm not saving what I need to in order to overcome the gov't ineptitude of liberalism and still be able to put away money to retire.
On another note...Funny thing about conservatives living in Oregon...they now refer it to the 'Republic of Oregon'. Washington is drifting closer to those ideals. I need to move.
All you need to know
Linear Mode
