Political Frenzy

This is a side by side comparison of the two presidential candidates tax plans that was posted on WashingtonPost.com. Here is the link.

To enlarge it you can click on the image.

Well the RNC has finally concluded and the general election campaign has ‘begun.’

I noticed a few things from the convention.

1. More handmade signs from the crowd
2. I was more bored than when watching the DNC
3. Former rivals of John McCain were saying good things about him! I say this in a sarcastic tone because after Obama picked Biden as his VP nominee McCain made commercials with Biden saying bad things about Obama. I do believe Mitt Romney had some choice words for McCain during their debates. But he was singing like a canary in the Twin Cities. (I’m mocking this because it is something that happens in EVERY political race, but McCain seemed to want us to think only Biden said bad things of Obama.
4. Sarah Palin established herself as an attacker. I found it odd that a women who has less than two years of political experience attacking a US Senator, and former State Senator, but who am I to judge? I say things about candidates and I am not an elected official.

Honestly I was annoyed by Palin’s speech because instead of introducing herself to us (which is what a candidate should do when NOBODY KNOWS HER), she chose to spend her time not just attacking Obama, but mocking him. It was tasteless. I wanted to hear more about what she has done and what her plans for the country are. I don’t want to hear cheap shots at a proven and tested candidate from a woman who most people think shouldn’t have been anywhere near this race. Palin can say what she wants about Obama, but he has been chosen by millions of voters to be there candidate. One man choose her, and it is time to prove to everybody why. It is tasteless for someone who is still trying to get our respect to mock someone like Barack Obama, who has earned it. Because if that is all she is going to do she will just be a flash in the pan.

It was also interesting how the Republicans have starting using the word REFORM all the time now. They might have caught on that we don’t like what is going on in our government! Imagine that!

If they can reform Washington, it’s about time they told us how they will do it. I’m listening!

From what I saw before I fell asleep McCain’s speech was good. He needs to take some risky moves by saying the word reform, which will rattle his base but it will also get him more votes. And the hecklers, or whatever they were trying to do in the middle of his speech to get attention, come on! What are you thinking, let the man speak!

I liked the video about McCain. The man is a hero. But do we really need his wife telling us about adopting a child from Mother Teresa’s arms then tell us about it again 5 minutes later in a video?

I feel asleep during a lot of it, were President Bush or Vice President Cheney there? Because if I supported someone’s decisions 90% of the time that would mean that person is a great politician and I would want him to come and tell everybody how great I would be as his job.

(Matt Sullivan/Reuters)

The choice of Sarah Palin as John McCain’s VP candidate seems to be confusing everyone, and I’m no exception.

Last Saturday when Obama choose Biden as his VP candidate a McCain spokesman said that it was “a concession” by Obama admitting that his lack of experience means he is not ready to be our president. Then McCain chooses someone with ZERO foreign policy experience? I want to know what that particular spokesman has to say about this.

One of McCain’s main arguments is that he is ready to “Lead on Day 1.” Is Palin?

We can argue about which experience is better, executive (like being a Governor) or legislative (being a Senator) until we are blue in the face. But one thing is clear, having no foreign policy experience is a huge problem. Having no executive experience is tolerable I think. No wars are going to be started because a part of the budget is labeled incorrectly.

It is argued, although not much longer, that Obama has ‘no experience.’ But I can promise you that he is competent in the issues that face America today, and that foreign leaders know and respect him.

Palin, at the moment is not known by foreign leaders. Sure, if McCain tells them that Palin is going to visit and that she is a great women then they will respect her. But wouldn’t they respect anyone if they are told to? McCain can tell a foreign leader that a blogger named Ryan is coming and that I am a great man. But that doesn’t mean I am ready to lead the country (not yet at least!).

I am looking forward to the Vice Presidential debate. Joe Biden has been involved in foreign policy issues for decades, he it going to blow her out of the water.

If something were to happen to President Obama, Vice President Biden could step in and deal with a foreign policy emergency without hesitation. If something were to happen to President McCain, would Vice President Palin be ready?

I’m sure she is a great Governor for Alaska, and it looks like she is a reformer which is what Washington needs. But a vice president needs to know what is going on in the world, not just in Juneau.

I just hate how McCain is showing that he thinks that people who voted for Hillary will vote for Palin just because she is a woman. This is an unfortunate political stunt.

http://www.politicalfrenzy.com/vice-president-sarah-palin/

Sarah Palin

This morning at an event in the swing state of Ohio, with the music from ‘Rudy’ playing in the background, John McCain tapped Alaska Governor Sarah Palin to be his VP nominee.

Who?

I am very proud of McCain showing that he can think outside the box. Is it risky to pick a female Governor who not many people are familiar with? YES! Which is exactly what the McCain campaign needed. His campaign has suffered a lack of enthusiasm from the start, picking an unknown woman does give it that little bit extra doesn’t it? It doesn’t hurt that she is also a former beauty queen.

Who is Sarah Palin? She got her degree in Journalism from the University of Idaho on a scholarship from being the runner-up in the Miss Alaska pageant, she served two terms on the Wasilla City Council, in 1996 she was elected mayor of Wasilla (population 5,470), she unsuccessfully ran for Lieutanant Governor of Alaska in 2002, she was elected Governor of Alaska in 2006. (source: Wikipedia, it’s correct I promise!).

This is a huge risk for McCain, but not as risky if he chose who he really wanted to choose, Joe Lieberman. His party would not allow that, it must be tough to stand up to your party.

I find it odd that McCain choose someone who has so little experience because for months he has been attacking Obama’s lack of experience. This officially takes the issue of experience off the table. I wonder how McCain will attack Obama now.

Palin is known for her record of reform. Another word for reform is CHANGE! Sound familiar? This shows that the McCain campaigns acknowledges that change is needed in Washington. They don’t want the election to be change v. the old ways, and now it won’t be.

Part of me wonders if the pick is to try to grab Hillary voters strickly because Palin is a woman, the other part wonders why McCain had to throw a hail mary.

One person who has to be happy is Tina Fey, she will be busy over the next few months!

http://www.politicalfrenzy.com/mccain-logic/

Youth and experience is bad Mr. McCain?

In response to Barack Obama’s (late night) announcement that Joe Biden will be his running mate, John McCain was quick to attack.

An ad (which had to be put together weeks ago) showed quotes from Biden during the debates earlier this year in which he criticized Obama’s experience.

A McCain spokesman went on TV saying that because Obama picked the experienced Biden it is a ‘concession speech’ by Obama because it shows that he has no experience.

Do you really want to go there McCain?

First of all whoever McCain picks there will be similar, if not more harsh, videos of this new candidate criticizing McCain during the primary. This is politics folks, you attack your opponent and when they beat you, you tell everyone how great they are…it’s weird I know.

Does everyone remember the exchanges between McCain and Romney during the debates? If you don’t you sure will see the clips (immediately) if he chooses Romney as his running mate.

Now to the ‘concession speech’ remark…McCain you need to get some smarter help! This idiot is saying that because Obama chose a man who is very experienced it means that Obama himself is not experienced. If that is so,then why did McCain support the Bush-Cheney ticket?

By McCain’s logic Obama should have picked a retarded person, because that would mean that Obama is so smart he doesn’t need advice.

Also does this mean that because McCain will be picking a younger man that he is too old?

McCain, what does it imply when you have dumb campaign staff say stupid things on TV?

The floodgates are open, nice job McCain.

http://www.politicalfrenzy.com/obamas-1am-text/

Yesterday Senate Republicans blocked the vote of a bill that would tax the windfall profits of oil companies as well as end their tax breaks. The Republicans said that we need to focus on more sources for oil.

Does this rub anyone else the wrong way? We are paying over $4 a gallon for gas in this country, Exxon makes billions in profit PER MONTH, we do not tax their absurd profits, and we give them $17 billion in tax breaks??? The Senate proposes a bill that would tax the windfall profits of these companies and end their billion-dollar tax breaks and elected officials have the gall to say no?

The Republicans said that raising the taxes on the oil companies will not lower the price of gas at the pump. This may be true, but wouldn’t that be the first step?

The oil companies have us by our throats, and this response by the Republicans only solidifies their grip. We need to start to shake free of these oil companies, there must eventually be a first step. Whats the worst that could happen $5 a gallon? That’s probably going to happen soon anyway!

“Besides the new levies, the bill would also have given the government more power to address oil market speculation, opened the way for antitrust actions against countries belonging to the OPEC oil cartel, and made energy price gouging a federal crime.” Does any of this sound bad?

Taxing windfall profits of oil companies, getting rid of their tax breaks (it should be a joke that they even get tax breaks), opening the way for antitrust actions against the OPEC oil cartel, and making energy price gouging a federal crime are things that should already be the norm.

It is absolutely absurd that it costs more for a gallon of gas than some people make an hour, the companies who sell gas are making billions in profit per month, and we give them tax breaks, and the freedom to price gauge.

We have all heard our members of Congress mention the need for alternative energy, but today they blocked a bill that would give $50 billion in tax credits to renewable energy research and development.

So let me get this straight, we give Exxon tax breaks, but not the companies who create renewable energy?

I guess it does make sense; oil companies have more money to contribute to politicians than renewable energy companies do. I wonder why nothing ever gets done?

Other blogs:
http://www.radicalavenue.com/press-babble/

Today while defending her decision to stay in the presidential race Senator Clinton said,

“We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California.”

Nothing like a good ol’ Freudian slip!

The Clinton campaign immediately responded to the remark saying, “She was simply referencing her husband in 1992 and Bobby Kennedy in 1968 as historical examples of the nominating process going well into the summer.”

This point of reference is simply not valid.

In 1968 the nominating season was far different than today’s. On June 5, the day of Bobby Kennedy’s assassination, there were primaries held in 13 states. It was their equivalent of our ‘Super Tuesday.’

Of course the candidates stayed in the race well into the summer, they had 13 primaries that day!!! By June 3rd of this year every state will have already voted.

Time has nothing to do with this debate; it’s all about numbers. We want Hillary to drop out because it is mathematically impossible for her to win, not because it’s almost June!

Not only was this an extremely insensitive thing to say, but also it is like comparing apples to oranges.

Mrs. Clinton is getting increasingly desperate and she is starting to hurt her public image. Obama is 56 delegates away from clinching the nomination. Clinton’s arguments over the votes in Michigan and Florida not counting are ridiculous and her logic about the subject hurts my brain.

Hillary…..I think it’s time.

Why won’t she just drop out?

There are a number of reasons why Hillary won’t just drop out of the race. Let’s explore a few of them.

First of all, and this is one nobody is talking about, Al Gore has not endorsed anyone yet. We all know that a Gore endorsement would go a long way for either of these candidates. If Al stepped out today and endorsed Hillary publicly what would be the outcome? Would it be enough to get her out of the deepening hole that she is now in?

Probably not

Al Gore is not likely to endorse a candidate who is all but sure to lose the nomination. He wants to put the weight of his name behind his party’s candidate to further boost the candidate’s visibility come general election time. Or does he? Is being friends with the Clinton’s enough to make him endorse Hillary’s sinking candidacy? (NO)

Another reason she could be waiting is to go out on top after a big win in West Virginia next Tuesday, where she has a huge lead in the polls. Clinton is actively campaigning in West Virginia, at the same time I haven’t heard of Obama making any campaign stops out there.

She will use the state of West Virginia to plead her case for the Vice Presidency. She will try to say that Obama cannot win ‘working class voters.’ Which is ludicrous…. (More about this in a future post.)

I have also heard of her campaign coming up with a deal with the Obama campaign to pay off her campaign debt of $20+ million.

The gas tax holiday proposed by opponents Senators Clinton and McCain is nothing more than a campaign gimmick.

Both candidates know that it doesn’t make fiscal sense; they also know that by proposing something like this that the American people will not look into whether or not it makes fiscal sense.

Again, this is an assault on our intelligence as voters. They think that we don’t understand that the suspension of a federal tax would cause long terms economical problems in an economy that is now in recession. The experts that have weighed in on the ‘gas tax holiday’ are even saying that it might not even lower the price of gas for consumers.

I’ll be honest when I first heard John McCain propose to cut gas prices I was happy, but then I realized that it would be a mere band-aid on a bullet wound. Suspending the gas tax for three months will only create more problems. Even if the overall price of gas was lowered by 18 cents per gallon, on a typical 13 gallon fill up that’s a whopping savings of over $2.

Big deal

McCain and Clinton also know that there is no way that the House and Senate could pass the bill in time for the ‘holiday.’ Congress just doesn’t work that fast.

Instead of taking money away from our country’s infrastructure how about we tax the oil companies (over a certain threshold of profit) who despite a ’supply problem’ still manage to make billions of dollars a month in profit ?

After last night’s ‘big’ Clinton victory in Pennsylvania it is now impossible for either her or Senator Obama to claim the 2,025 delegates needed to secure the nomination. What does this mean? It means that your vote no longer counts.

As of today Obama has 1,719 delegates, while Clinton has managed 1,586.

The now infamous ‘Super delegates’ will now decide who the Democratic nominee will be. Isn’t that just great? These candidates raise and spend tens of millions of dollars per month, campaign up and down the country to get their message across to us voters, and it doesn’t even matter if we vote because these ‘Super delegates,’ not you, will now decide who the nominee will be.

What the heck is a Super delegate? “Super-delegates are designed to act as a check on ideologically extreme or inexperienced candidates. It also gives power to people who have a vested interested in party policies: elected leaders. ” (source: About.com). Super delegates were a reaction to Democratic nominee George McGovern in 1972. In the general election McGovern won only one state and a mere 37.5% of the popular vote.

This is another example of how voters are not trusted to pick their leaders. It ensures that the same brand of entrenched politics will always be around.

CHANGE we can believe in? Let’s hope so, because old school Democratic fat cats are not likely to vote for someone who wants to change anything.

“Why doesn’t Congress do anything?”
“Tradition mostly” – Congressman Charlie Wilson

When I say the word ‘politician’ what do you think of? Most people would respond with ‘sleazy,’ ‘scandalous,’ or some other word that would require me to hide the children.

Much has been talked about as to how to keep our politicians from become corrupt, and to get the corrupt ones out. The problem is that the ones who need to be governed by laws are the ones who make the laws. It’s a catch-22.

One idea that gets tossed around (to make it look like they are trying to fix the problem) is term limits. In the California State Legislature members are allowed to serve a total of 14 years between the two houses. 8 years as a State Senator and 6 as a member of the Assembly. Recently the leadership (who all just so happened to stand to be termed out at the end of their current terms) introduced Proposition 93.

Like most of politics there has been nothing but confusion surrounding Prop 93, which California voters defeated on Super Tuesday. This 53% opposed proposition was marketed using a successful tactic of confusion. Voters were unsure if it eliminated term limits, shortened term limits, increased speed limits, or who even supported it.

All that Prop 93 would have done was shortened the total amount of years to 12 years of service, but it would allow a person to serve all twelve years in the same house.

Prop 93’s support was also confusing. At one point the Governor didn’t support it, but then suddenly endorsed it. Some say he realized that 3 or the 4 leaders in the State Legislature would become ‘lame ducks’ if the proposition didn’t pass and would make it impossible for the Governor to advance his agenda.

Prop 93 was a good idea, but term limits are only a mere band-aid on the malignant issue. The issue should not be how long politicians should serve; it should be about us finally holding them accountable to their service. Let’s say that Speaker Nunez was using special interest money to go on Luis Vuitton shopping sprees in Paris as the anti-Prop 93 commercials touted, then why do his term limits matter? If he is using money other than his own to live his ‘opulent lifestyle’ he shouldn’t be re-elected even if he was eligible.

Every voter is afraid of politicians who are in bed with special interest groups, the ones who don’t pay attention to us anymore. We all see that some of our U.S. Congressmen and women are corrupt; we see Jack Abramoff in FBI custody, our Representatives homes being raided, and Senators asking for “favors” in airport bathrooms.

Congress’ overall approval rating is historically below 30% every year, and was as low as 11% in 2007. An ABC News/Washington Post Poll last September asked, “Overall, how much do you think Congress has accomplished this year: a great deal, a good amount, not too much, or nothing at all?” 2% answered “A great deal,” 14%, “A good amount,” and 65% said “Not too much.”

We don’t trust out members of Congress, but we consistently re-elect them at rates over 95%.

The fact that these people spend millions of dollars running for a job that pays around $160,000 a year should be cause to throw a penalty flag. They do it because they get away with anything, they always have. If you give a mouse a cookie…

Look at Congressman John Doolittle, he has been under investigation by the FBI for years now, and he has been re-elected 8 times! While his colleagues were being thrown in jail he was out being re-elected. Are we nuts!? People he works with are being thrown in jail and we just say ‘ok, but you aren’t doing that stuff right? Ok we’ll re-elect you.’ Doolittle finally had to announce that he wouldn’t run for re-election in 2008. (District 4 rejoice, you don’t have to re-elect him again!). I suppose the FBI raids on his homes made him wonder if he stood a chance in November, nah he would have been re-elected.

Unfortunately voters have become mindless lemmings when it comes to elections. Just because someone was elected does not mean that they have to be re-elected! If we paid attention to what our politicians were doing and held them accountable for their actions term limits would be unnecessary. The fact that we have term limits in California shows that we don’t trust ourselves to hold our elected officials accountable.

With the way we don’t pay attention to what our politicians do they would get away with murder, and no I won’t make a Ted Kennedy reference here.

Today Senator McCain attacked Senator Obama on public election financing. McCain’s camp said that last spring Obama’s campaign said Obama would “aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly-financed general election.”

Campaigns that are publicly financed means that each campaign would receive around $85 million from a taxpayer financed fund. But if they accept it they are not allowed to raise money elsewhere.

McCain said that Obama should “keep his word to the American people.”

First of all, Obama isn’t the nominee yet, and neither is McCain. So let’s not count the chickens before they hatch (even though on the Republican egg I can see the beak). Secondly an attack on Obama is good news for Barack’s campaign because that shows that the Republicans are already counting on him winning the nomination.

The thing that I don’t like about this type of attack is that Obama has said nothing about using public financing during the general election. By McCain challenging something Obama has said nothing about it makes it look like Obama has already said he won’t use public financing. Ahhh classic politics.

Let’s be honest here, the only reason McCain has brought this up is because he knows he doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance in hell at raising even half the money Obama would. In January Obama raised over $32 million dollars, mostly from small donations. When looking at cash each campaign has on hand, it is not surprise. Obama has over $18 million while McCain has just about $3 million.

If the candidates agreed to both use public financing it would take away a huge advantage from Obama. When his campaign made that comment last spring I’m sure they didn’t realize that they would become a money machine in 2008.

If Obama does receive the nomination he has a huge decision to make. Should he reject his proposal of using public financing and dominate McCain with his millions. Or should he stick to his word and have a level playing field with McCain?

The smart thing for him to do would be to reject the public financing and take the wrath that comes with a flip-flop. McCain won’t have much money to get the message out that Obama flip-flopped in the first place.

As most people know Stephen Colbert has announced that he will run for president…in South Carolina. He is attempting to get on the ballot in South Carolina as a Democrat and a Republican.

“Man of the Year” for real? No, he is only running in one state.

While the tone of his ‘candidacy’ is humorous at best, other candidates have actually responded to it. Colbert says he is the favorite son of South Carolina, and Doritos will sponsor his candidacy.

This is a joke, but it didn’t stop the John Edwards campaign from ‘firing back.’ “What is more troubling than his quest for a status his own mother won’t grant him (favorite son) are his ties to the salty food industry,” Wells said. “As the candidate of Doritos, his hands are stained by corporate corruption and nacho cheese. John Edwards has never taken a dime from taco chip lobbyists and America deserves a President who isn’t in the pocket of the snack food special interests.”

Are they joking? It is hard to tell.

Colbert has an enormous fan base and is wildly popular with the college crowd, I watch “The Report.”

Something like this has never been done before. It will be interesting to see if his one state candidacy actually makes real candidates keep responding to things that he does.

Source: AP

Bill, sorry, Hillary Clinton has joined the ranks of candidates who are actually trying (appearing) to want to do something! She has announced her plan for “universal” healthcare. On her website you can download her plan in a pdf file.

She must have read how much I love pdf files!!

I’m pretty sure that this is the first time that I have said something positive about Hillary. I’m not agreeing with the plan, I’m just happy that she has come up with one (in a pdf). The other candidates who have no plans are a waste of time.

Fred Thompson was quick to criticize “HillaryCare” on a video on his website Fred08.com. Thompson, ever the advocate for the small government, showed his frustration in the video which was filmed in the back of a moving car. Thompson said that he does not agree with Hillary’s principles, especially the part of her plan in which employers being required to check if new applicants have healthcare.

Ehh, ok that does make sense. Employers do provide employees with healthcare, so why are they required to have it when applying for a job?

Chicken or the egg?

Universal healthcare has been the Bain of politician’s existence for years now. They mostly agree that our healthcare system needs reform, but don’t seem able to get past the dreaded drug companies and their lobbyists.

Will the BILLary plan work? I don’t know, but at least s/he has proposed one. It is mostly smoke and mirrors but how many Republicans have released a healthcare plan?

Fred Thompson (seen above with his wife Jeri) has officially declared his candidacy for president, about time. He joins the race “late” with tons of support from the right.

Thompson says he will promote, “limited government, an aggressive foreign policy and lower taxes — and promised a commitment to securing the borders and appointing conservative judges.”

Excuse me for not giving Thompson a ’standing O.’

Not to say that some (2) of the Democratic candidates are actually promoting change more so than any Republican, but give me a break. In a campaign promise he says he will ‘appoint conservative judges?’ Oh boy, that will change everything!

Not to sound like one of those lefties, but issues such as our soldiers dying in Iraq without clear objectives and millions of uninsured Americans unable to get life saving surgeries are a bit more important to me than appointing conservative judges!!!

I understand that he is aiming at getting the Republican nomination, and to do so you have to say things that make you look like you are teetering on the edge of the right, because only hard core Republicans will be voting in the primary. But he will have to bring his promises back to the middle if he wants to win over swing voters in the general election. However, in his speech he criticized other candidates who have flip-flopped their positions.

He is setting himself up to fail.

I don’t want a president who only caters to one ideology, and neither should you. We have seen what can happen. A president has to make tough choices for the greater good, not the greater right edge (or left edge). There are far more Americans who are in the middle than who are on either side.

The only ones who are on the two extremes are the people we elect to ‘represent’ us.

Sources: WashingtonPost.com