८ ऑक्टोबर, २००८
"Once again -- Senator McCain didn't mention the middle class a single time during the debate."
Email from Obama. Somehow, after all the turmoil of the past week, the most important thing is still McCain's failure to use the expression "middle class."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
४३ टिप्पण्या:
He didn't?
No, wait... he said "working Americans" didn't he.
I noticed that.
I thought he said "middle income earners" or something like that. Or was that Obama?
Does it matter?
So what? Why must the middle class be invoked in order to promote how you are going to tax many of them through indirect means. $250,000 a year bracket won't bode well for many East Coasters who are plagued with innumerable taxes. Place like NYC will suffer the greatest from this type of tax debacle. Mr. Barely talks about how he will prioritize his tax and spend plans, but I assure you when he gets into office, the checkbook will be out. He will simply abandon his current 'economic' plans in a calculated measure to implement his real goal which will be the near total socialization of our economy.
He's already told you that he is going to do it starting with health care. When Brokaw asked if health care is a right or a personal responsibility, Mr. Barely said it was a right. You do understand what that means in leftist-speak don't you? Rights in regards to government services equals entitlements. He will create another line item of the entitlement rolls on the federal budget for Health Care. It will only go downhill from there. Then let's see how the middle-class deals with that. This man is a fraud, he's a malignant and dangerous fool who doesn't know the first thing about leadership or running anything. Remember the saying about getting what you vote for.
I think that truth would require stating that not only did McCain *mention* the middle class... he talked about them quite a bit and referred to them in a number of clearly representative ways.
So "didn't mention the middle class" is a bald faced lie.
The only way to state that as truth... assuming that McCain never used the term "middle class"... is to say, "Once again -- Senator McCain didn't use the phrase "middle class" a single time during the debate."
LOL... as a second thought...
Maybe McCain remembered the last time he was accused of never mentioning the middle class and, on purpose, used other terms such as working Americans or middle income earners, so as to provoke this obviously bogus charge from the Obama campaign.
(No, I don't think so, but it would be fun if true.)
It would be like claiming someone yet again never mentioned "Scandinavians" a single time during a debate when they'd talked about Norwegians, Danes, Swedes, and the "dirty Scandis" (call out to Ace) and discussed the conditions on the ground in Reykjavik in detail.
Searching the transcript:
middle class: Obama 3, McCain 0
middle-income Obama 0, McCain 3
poor: not found
poverty: not found
forgot the link in the first post
You forgot to tag this post with "lameness."
" This man is a fraud, he's a malignant and dangerous fool who doesn't know the first thing about leadership or running anything."
methadras, you loser, you hater, you bozo the clown, you fraud, you malignant, and dangerous fool, who doesn't know the first thing about leadership only about running your your foul mouth off. Goddamn you!
Entertaining video
Er, Trumpit, I hate to break it to you, dude, but yer the one with the...um..."foul mouth."
Methadras launched, like it or not, based on stuff he wrote earlier. It was straight and stuck it to no one save Obama. Didn't notice any language in there that would make Aunt Esther cringe, unless she was a Democrat. But then she's entitled to say McCain's an old fool, a fraud who's been bought and paid for by them evil plutocrats, a bitter warmonger, and so's his horse.
But you just blatted some bad notes and took the Lord's Name in vain in the bargain.
Get a grip, dude. Here's what to do: First, take the valves out, remove all the slides, unscrew the spit keys, and wash yerself out. You really need to clean up that bore.
After seeing there were 107 comments about Obama's 'ear-piece'/not, it was easier to comment here.
If you look at his entire ear; his face, you see that this man is 'squeaky clean'.
Dark skin shows up more shiny than lighter skin; when I'm tanned, I get this same effect after I've showered and used hair conditioner.
As to McCain not mentioning the middle class, it's because he doesn't realize it exists - rich people don't see ANYONE who isn't as rich (or richer) as they are.
HAPPY IN NEVADA said...After seeing there were 107 comments about Obama's 'ear-piece'/not, it was easier to comment here.
If you look at his entire ear; his face, you see that this man is 'squeaky clean'.
OK, but Who is he talking to?
As to McCain not mentioning the middle class, it's because he doesn't realize it exists - rich people don't see ANYONE who isn't as rich (or richer) as they are.
What's the difference between middle class and middle income?
And why did a black liberal Democrat completely avoid the issue of poverty in America?
"That one" won. '-D
American Liberal Elite said..."That one" won. '-D
So did John Kerry.
And Kevin Parker, a New York state senator from Brooklyn, said,"If you have to remind people that Barack Obama is African-American, you have reached the bottom."
Greatest quote of all time! LOL.
And here's more and more and more.
A seventy-two year old Republican who grew up in an upper class family (as McCain did) would not use the term "middle class" the same way the (upper) middle class son of a liberal college professor (Obama) does. McCain would consider the term mildly demeaning and rather make references in terms of income. On the other hand, when Obama uses the term, he really means "working class", but knows that in today's America that term has overtones that are politically untenable.
I like John McCain. He was far from my first choice as a candidate, though.
I think he's done his best, but I don't think he anywhere near won last night, and I doubt he'll win in November. I'll still be honored to cast my futile Michigan vote for him.
Oh, Lordy. The Dems in charge of Congress and the WH.
One bright spot is that Republicans might benefit from being in the wilderness for a while. They need to hone their message by miles and miles...
Hey Victoria, Camile Paglia has noticed something I refered to here.
When I watch Sarah Palin, I don't think sex -- I think Amazon warrior! I admire her competitive spirit and her exuberant vitality, which borders on the supernormal. The question that keeps popping up for me is whether Palin, who was born in Idaho, could possibly be part Native American (as we know her husband is), which sometimes seems suggested by her strong facial contours. I have felt that same extraordinary energy and hyper-alertness billowing out from other women with Native American ancestry -- including two overpowering celebrity icons with whom I have worked.
Teacher! Uncle John won't play 'class warfare' with me!
Really, what the hell is wrong with some people, that they insist on seeing people in terms of classes rather than on the basis of what they do? McCain talks about 'working Americans' - that's engaging with people who work for a living, lower-class, middle-class, and harried, over-worked rich alike. Obama is insisting on talking about the boxes he wants to put us all in.
The thing is, I'm not sure if I qualify as 'middle-class'. I don't own a home, I don't make all that much, although I'm doing better than I was under Clinton. I get the distinct impression Obama sees me as someone to be conscripted into 'service', for my own good. I apparently don't feel enough common-feeling and am not 'sacrificing' enough for my own good.
On the other hand, maybe the lower classes don't exist for Obama. He keeps insisting on claiming that he'll lower taxes on '95% of Americans', as if the 45% of us who don't pay any federal income taxes at all don't exist to him.
I suppose it doesn't matter. His tax-cut promises are all arrant lies. He'll suffer a sudden post-election conversion experience like Bill Clinton's and discover that the fisc and his aggressive spending agenda won't allow any sort of tax cut. Except something token he and the Democratic Congress can talk up as a so-called 'middle class tax cut' - a newly-defined middle class described to the purposes of their revenue goals, of course.
As Jim said, Obama didn't mention "the poor" either (other than in an oblique manner, as Jake suggests). Is that a minus for either candidate? Is it a plus that McCain gave a shout-out to Chief Petty Officers? Have we really reached the point where debates are evaluated based on whether a candidate namecheked a particular demographic?
Didn't Obama say that its wrong to ask a teacher who is only making $30k a year to cut back when we have other people high on the hog. WTF kind of statement is that. Is Obama for communism? Who defines when someone is high on the hog. It's one thing to sympathize with people who have to tighten their belts, but its quite another to compare and threaten their relative position to someone else. We live in a free country, not some totalitarian communist society where Obama gets to chose who wins and loses.
Yup, class warfare.
He is reading from the FDR playbook. Fact is, envy is a successful political plan. Many people want to take from Peter to pay Paul, especially popular with all the Pauls.
It's socialism pure and simple. Confiscate, redistribute. Blame the rich. Take their money because it isn't theirs but ours. This leads to a contracted economy and slow or no growth.
Yippee. Everything for the Party, nothing outside of the Party. It's 1932 again and it'll take 15 years instead of 5 to climb out, thanks to the bounty that is socialism.
I'm afraid you're right, Pogo. Silver lining: somewhere in all that baby-surfing is the next Ronald Reagan.
OMG. What a bastard that McCain is.
There will be two financial disasters under Obama.
The first of course will be healthcare. Obama wants to cover all but even he will soon understand it is busting his budget.
The second will be when Obama caves in to the demand for federal dough from all the spendthrift Dem governors. Obama will cover their deficit asses with federal funds and that will make the deficit grow too.
So we will have even bigger federal deficits, states continue on path of runaway spending, health care system in chaos due to growing shortage of providers, and finally inflation comes back due to Fed printing money 247's.
Your right Ann. The most important thing is "did Obama wear an ear piece during last night's debate?
Pogo said...Yup, class warfare.
He is reading from the FDR playbook.
FDR's Policies Prolonged Depression by 7 Years
How many houses does John McCain own? More than you!! Vote Obama.
Middle income is an evaluation of economic status, middle class is like what? Not high class? Not low class. Top of the bottom, bottm of the top, cream of the crap? I've known some high class people of very modest means and some rich people who were very low class.
I guess you'd have to be around people who think about "class" in a political sense to use that term and think it represents something worth sending an email about. Na na na nah!
I'm pretty sure I am one of what Obama calls the middle class and if he was for me, he's leave me and my familt the f*** alone, which of course he is not planning to do.
It baffles me that someone would listen closely enough to tell.
I agree with the comment from last night that McCain should've been the nominee in 2000; this 2008 nomination is like giving the Oscar for a mediocre film when the really good performance was a couple years ago. It's Paul Newman in 1986 when it really should've been Newman in the early 60s.
Pogo said...
"He is reading from the FDR playbook."
I would suggest that for many liberals, this election is the moment where they get to correct the country's mistake of 1968; they intend to pick up exactly where they left off at midday on January 20th 1969. Hope? Change? Back to the Future, more like.
MadisonMan - who would you have had us nominate - a lamb for the slaughter? Given the political realities of the season, the landscape of the election year, I have no regrets about our choices. McCain was the best option we had, even though few of us liked it. And Palin -- imperfect though she may be* -- was absolutley the only rational choice for veep. No one else could have unified the party and put us within striking distance. We blundered backwards into the best possible ticket for the season, and even if we lose, it must be remembered that this was a year when we weren't expected to even be in contention.
________
* I still think she's terrific. Even when I was cheerleading for her selection before the event, I acknowledged that it was really too soon for her, but noted that we had no other choice. It would have been better if the election had been in two years, but the fact is that you play with the team you have on the day of the game, not with the players you'd like at a time of your choosing with conditions at their best.
Simon, I agree that the Republican slate was full of unworthy candidates, much like the Democratic slate.
I think McCain can still win, but I'm doubtful that it will happen. It'll be an interesting 4 weeks 'til election day.
I left out this budget buster.
Obama supports govt paid day care and pre-k (I guess Bill Ayers told him to start indoctrinating kids when they are young).
Take a guess what it would cost taxpayers to pay for that.
Didn't Obama say that its wrong to ask a teacher who is only making $30k a year to cut back when we have other people high on the hog. WTF kind of statement is that.
Noticed that and thought it was a nice little insight into what's in his head. It's all about what's FAIR. O, life isn't fair. My boss makes more than me, but I don't go around whining about it all the time. Geez.
This Middle Class gotcha nonsense by the Obama camp is the definition of Obama's "silly season" he used to talk about.
MadisonMan said...
"Simon, I agree that the Republican slate was full of unworthy candidates, much like the Democratic slate."
I wouldn't say "unworthy"; ordinary comes closer to it. And they were all flawed. Every candidate had something appealing, yet remained a "but..." candidate, posessing an asterisk next to their name. Mitt Romney, for example: effective governor, conservative, good turnaround record *but too easy to be sold to the working class as the consultant who fired you by the Democrats. There would have been a whole campaign painting Romney as Bob Slidell. Or Rudy: effective mayor in a role that is more closely analogous to a governor than a mayor, national security hawk, *but a social liberal. Or Brownback: a good man and strong conservative who has shown an admirable McCain-like willingness to follow his faith across the aisle when necessary, *but just too conservative, too religious for me, let alone for America at large.
"I think McCain can still win, but I'm doubtful that it will happen."
Unless the polls are wrong, I'm hard-pushed to see how McCain can make up so much ground - or Obama lose it - in the time left. It would take something extraordinarily serendipitous - the rudder of the Titanic magically growing to an adequate size. The O-ring miraculously resealing itself. The second plane missing. I find myself feeling terribly pessimistic for the future.
Why didn't anyone mention poverty or the poor? Because middle-class IS the new poor.
As someone in the nefarious above $250,000 income households, I don't feel very rich, and I'm very worried about retirement, and I've been saving for it since I was 22.
I know that Obama will make me pay a lot more taxes. But what I can't figure out is what has happened to John McCain. I always found him fairly witty and engaging. He's very intelligent, obviously. So where did this hostile curmudgeon come from? I know he's always had a temper, but he knew how to charm the press.
This grumpy old guy is going to lose.
Simon said...Unless the polls are wrong, I'm hard-pushed to see how McCain can make up so much ground - or Obama lose it - in the time left.
Maybe the polls are wrong for this reason. Pro Obama voters want to tell the world about it and will participate in these polls.
Anti-Obama or pro-McCain voters are more likely to keep it to themselves and don't want to particpate in the polls.
So the question for Zogby/Rassmussen et al is what percentage of people contacted for the poll REJECT participation.
This number is key.
This number will include people who don't vote. But I believe this number also contains a disproportionate number of McCain voters.
I will grudgingly vote for McCain but I wouldn't participate in a poll or put a McCain sign on my yard or bumper sticker on my car.
Eva said...But what I can't figure out is what has happened to John McCain. ...So where did this hostile curmudgeon come from? I know he's always had a temper, but he knew how to charm the press.
John McCain could charm the press when he believed they liked him, that they really liked him.
Now he feels rejected and hurt because he knows they hate him. His girlfriend left him for a younger guy.
Trumpit said...
methadras, you loser, you hater, you bozo the clown, you fraud, you malignant, and dangerous fool, who doesn't know the first thing about leadership only about running your your foul mouth off. Goddamn you!
I laugh at you. You know that right? It's like a big surprise party whenever you show up and have internet epilepsy for everyone to see. Foaming mouth and all from a creature of demeaned pity.
The other issue with polls is the Bradly Effect or whatever that's called...
Not only is there the question of who chooses to participate in the polls, but of those who do, how many will lie and why?
The idea that people will say one thing and do another, particularly when it comes to race (apparently... or so I'm told...) leaves the question of how many people are lying?
(I think that the people who don't want to admit they aren't voting for *this* black man are as likely to be basing their actual vote on his politics rather than race but the reason they won't admit it is still to avoid being labeled racist. A person doesn't have to be a racist to care about being called one. In that respect I think that many/most people miss the point of the Bradley Effect... it works out the same if someone doesn't want to admit that they won't vote for a black man as if they would gladly vote for a black man... just not this one.)
Synova said...
"The other issue with polls is the Bradly Effect...."
If this is going to have bite anywhere, though, wouldn't it have bite in the old south, where McCain doesn't need it anyway? McCain's problem right now is that he is losing in the key battleground states - Ohio, PA, Fla., MO, &c. - not that he's losing his base states.
Obama didn't mention the poor because he announced that the 95% of working Americans that will get a tax cut are the middle class.
He's expanded middle class to include 95% of working Americans. I guess we can only call those who don't work poor. Except for that top 5% or 1% who are the rich.
I don't know where the Bradley Effect is going to have the most bite.
Where are people the most concerned with not appearing racist?
And generally, where are they going to be most reluctant to admit they're voting Republican?
I'd think in McCain's "base" states people would be more likely to feel comfortable stating their support.
Mostly though... I think there's a reason I'm not one of the people designing polls.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा