OT: Elections/Politics thread, part 4

[Teal]

This is just pathetic-looks like, incredibly, MSNBC has managed to lower the bar of journalistic integrity to a new low:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032619/#26960409

So the f*cking prison guard doesn't remember any torturing? Big f*cking surprise there-but you'd think MSNBC had stumbled on a 'smoking gun'.

Just pathetic.

[Jared]

Do you know what's the leading cause of death for African-American women age 25-34? AIDS. Out of women with AIDS, 64% are black. The rate of AIDS is 23 times greater in black vs. white women.

Okay. Those are some statistics. They aren't good ones. But what in the hell does she think Dick Cheney and John Edwards are going to do about it? They were running for VP...not the head of the CDC.

But different candidates and parties have different strategies for addressing public health issues, and the President appoints people that lead that charge (Health & Human Services). Do you dedicate public funds to addressing this? Is this strictly a morals issue that government shouldn't be involved in? If you use public funds, what's the best way to use them?

[Teal]

Do you know what's the leading cause of death for African-American women age 25-34? AIDS. Out of women with AIDS, 64% are black. The rate of AIDS is 23 times greater in black vs. white women.

Okay. Those are some statistics. They aren't good ones. But what in the hell does she think Dick Cheney and John Edwards are going to do about it? They were running for VP...not the head of the CDC.

But different candidates and parties have different strategies for addressing public health issues, and the President appoints people that lead that charge (Health & Human Services). Do you dedicate public funds to addressing this? Is this strictly a morals issue that government shouldn't be involved in? If you use public funds, what's the best way to use them?

Personally? An ad campaign designed to tell people to keep their privates in their pants. I know it's not a cure-all, but hey...gotta start with the basics...

[Jared]

Personally? An ad campaign designed to tell people to keep their privates in their pants. I know it's not a cure-all, but hey...gotta start with the basics...

So that's what VP Teal would say, whereas VP someone else would say something different; the answers would show their policy positions on public health. Hence why it's a valid debate question.

[pk500]

Moderator isn't going to have as much effect on the debate as the format.

From Slate:

Negotiations between the McCain and Obama campaigns resulted in a 90-minute format that calls for the two candidates to stand at podiums and field questions in turn from moderator Ifill. Answers may not exceed 90 seconds, and two minutes of open discussion will follow each question. Each candidate will give a 90-second closing statement.

According to the New York Times, the McCain campaign pushed for this arrangement, which is more restrictive than the two-minute-response, five-minutes-of-open-discussion format of the first McCain-Obama debate, because the looser "format could leave Ms. Palin, a relatively inexperienced debater, at a disadvantage and largely on the defensive."

Probably will help both candidates be concise. Both have shown a tendency to ramble on.

It also could backfire for the McCain camp because it will allow more questions to be asked, which will force Palin to expand upon a wider variety of issues or go more in-depth on particular issues. That's risky, given her recent display of a loose grasp of basic issues.

But hey, I'm all ears about listening to the missile defense system in the Aleutians to stop Putin when he decides to invade Alaskan airspace.

Take care,
PK

[Teal]

Moderator isn't going to have as much effect on the debate as the format.

From Slate:

Negotiations between the McCain and Obama campaigns resulted in a 90-minute format that calls for the two candidates to stand at podiums and field questions in turn from moderator Ifill. Answers may not exceed 90 seconds, and two minutes of open discussion will follow each question. Each candidate will give a 90-second closing statement.

According to the New York Times, the McCain campaign pushed for this arrangement, which is more restrictive than the two-minute-response, five-minutes-of-open-discussion format of the first McCain-Obama debate, because the looser "format could leave Ms. Palin, a relatively inexperienced debater, at a disadvantage and largely on the defensive."

Probably will help both candidates be concise. Both have shown a tendency to ramble on.

It also could backfire for the McCain camp because it will allow more questions to be asked, which will force Palin to expand upon a wider variety of issues or go more in-depth on particular issues. That's risky, given her recent display of a loose grasp of basic issues.

Take care,
PK

I'm looking very much forward to the debates.

[matthewk]

Unless you are are earning more than $250K per year, why would you favor McCain on taxes? Just wondering....

Because if you tax the crap out of businesses, they will outsource even more jobs and look to expand or relocate where it's cheaper to do so. My home state of Wisconsin is a perfect example of what happens when you continually tax businesses. They leave. Then I don't have ANY job. Try and get income taxes from me then.

[Teal]

Personally? An ad campaign designed to tell people to keep their privates in their pants. I know it's not a cure-all, but hey...gotta start with the basics...

So that's what VP Teal would say, whereas VP someone else would say something different; the answers would show their policy positions on public health. Hence why it's a valid debate question.

No that's NOT what VP Teal would say. It's just what regular ol' Teal would say. This is a question that belies a 'nanny state' mentality, something I'm categorically opposed to.

"What will you do, as president, to stop the AIDS crisis in America?"

"Nothing. Personal responsibility is the order of the day, not a directive from the White House. Next question."

[wco81]

Unless you are are earning more than $250K per year, why would you favor McCain on taxes? Just wondering....

Because if you tax the crap out of businesses, they will outsource even more jobs and look to expand or relocate where it's cheaper to do so. My home state of Wisconsin is a perfect example of what happens when you continually tax businesses. They leave. Then I don't have ANY job. Try and get income taxes from me then.

You really think a few percent higher tax rates for corporations are causing the outsourcing?

Lower tax rates won't do it. If American workers are willing to take 1/10 of what they used to make, maybe they won't outsource.

Hey, but the jobs will stay in the state/country.

EDIT:

McCain's contention is that other countries have lower corporate tax rates. But those countries are offshoring too.

Before jobs were offshored, they moved from one state to another. Often to states with lower labor costs. But also, states would offer tax breaks or subsidies, at least for a certain amount of time, to entice businesses to relocate.

That's fine but not a sustainable strategy. If a business isn't contributing to the locality, why have them there?

[Teal]

This bill is no better than the first one. It just has more pork and 'sweeteners' in it.

The more sweeteners that are in it, the more I think that they are trying to get us to eat s***.

[Teal]

Here's the Essence article. Ifill has no business being there tomorrow night-get Lehrer. Outside of seemingly goading the two candidates into a fight, he was good enough.
http://www.essence.com/news_entertainme ... icanfamily

[matthewk]

Because if you tax the crap out of businesses, they will outsource even more jobs and look to expand or relocate where it's cheaper to do so. My home state of Wisconsin is a perfect example of what happens when you continually tax businesses. They leave. Then I don't have ANY job. Try and get income taxes from me then.

You really think a few percent higher tax rates for corporations are causing the outsourcing?

Lower tax rates won't do it. If American workers are willing to take 1/10 of what they used to make, maybe they won't outsource.

Hey, but the jobs will stay in the state/country.

EDIT:

McCain's contention is that other countries have lower corporate tax rates. But those countries are offshoring too.

Before jobs were offshored, they moved from one state to another. Often to states with lower labor costs. But also, states would offer tax breaks or subsidies, at least for a certain amount of time, to entice businesses to relocate.

That's fine but not a sustainable strategy. If a business isn't contributing to the locality, why have them there?

A few percent won't cause outsourceing by iteself, but it definitely won't help. Do you really think that taxing American businesses will help our economy? Sure, we'll get more $$$ in the short term, at least until those companies find ways to make up that cost. One way would be to move their prescene (jobs, buildings, etc..) to another country. Another would be to raise their prices on goods to make up for the loss in profits. Either one sounds like a bad result to me.

Wherever a buisiness is, it is contributing to the locality in the form of jobs and taxes. If it isn't contributing to the locality, then how is it even in business?

[FatPitcher]

Do you know what's the leading cause of death for African-American women age 25-34? AIDS. Out of women with AIDS, 64% are black. The rate of AIDS is 23 times greater in black vs. white women.

Okay. Those are some statistics. They aren't good ones. But what in the hell does she think Dick Cheney and John Edwards are going to do about it? They were running for VP...not the head of the CDC.

But different candidates and parties have different strategies for addressing public health issues, and the President appoints people that lead that charge (Health & Human Services). Do you dedicate public funds to addressing this? Is this strictly a morals issue that government shouldn't be involved in? If you use public funds, what's the best way to use them?

I think you just don't understand the difference between an issue that's very important to some people and a useful debate question. What exactly are the two candidates going to say on such a wonkish, specialized issue, and what percentage of the viewers will find the information they provide useful in making a decision?

That is one reason why Ifill was a poor moderator. The question may have been important to her, but there was no reason to expect that either candidate would be able to provide useful information to the public. It was just her sad attempt to "raise awareness" and inject her own concerns into the presidential campaign.

[wco81]

Difference in any tax savings from lower corporate rates are dwarfed by lower labor costs.

A business which doesn't pay taxes will just use more infrastructure. Lot of towns prefer big box stores over say a small manufacturer. While the latter provides better jobs, the former generates more sales taxes which go directly to the local govt. coffers.

[wco81]

If Ifil is a problem to the McCain supporters, why wait until the day before?

Did her publisher reveal her book is coming just in the last few days?

Or is this some attempt to delay the debate or at least preemptively discredit the debate results because of a supposedly biased moderator, even though the rules limit the role of the moderator?

[XXXIV]

By definition....If the moderator is biased the moderator is biased.

[Teal]

If Ifil is a problem to the McCain supporters, why wait until the day before?

Did her publisher reveal her book is coming just in the last few days?

Or is this some attempt to delay the debate or at least preemptively discredit the debate results because of a supposedly biased moderator, even though the rules limit the role of the moderator?

A 'biased moderator' is an oxymoron. And about the conspiracy theories...c'mon. Really. Fox Mulder would even be embarrassed.

[Jared]

I think you just don't understand the difference between an issue that's very important to some people and a useful debate question. What exactly are the two candidates going to say on such a wonkish, specialized issue, and what percentage of the viewers will find the information they provide useful in making a decision?

I think I do understand the difference. Wonkish, specialized issue? This is AIDS in African-American women. That's a small subset of the population, but in answering that question you can reveal a wealth of information re: your positions on the role of gov't in public health, the role of gov't in legislating morality, causes of problems that disproportionately affect African-Americans; how public issues like this affect all Americans (health insurance, etc.) all which are bigger issues that are of major interest to the public.

[Teal]

Those are all great questions...for a pastor to answer. For a sociologist to answer. In the current climate, questions like those are a clusterf*cking waste of time.

And I'd love to believe these guys were doing this just to encourage people to vote because it's their patriotic duty, and for no other reason, but...there's an extremely partisan bent to all of these 'Jay-Z, PDiddy, vote-or-die, get out the vote' registrations...and it ain't a conservative one...
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1

[Jared]

I've seen some pretty bad Palin videos...but this may take the cake. Isn't this <b>really</b> concerning?

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0rXmuhWrlj4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed>

[GTHobbes]

I mentioned this Supreme Court interview q's a couple pages back and I agree...scary stuff.

[matthewk]

Difference in any tax savings from lower corporate rates are dwarfed by lower labor costs.

A business which doesn't pay taxes will just use more infrastructure. Lot of towns prefer big box stores over say a small manufacturer. While the latter provides better jobs, the former generates more sales taxes which go directly to the local govt. coffers.

What's your point? None of what you said justifies raising taxes on businesses.

Who cares how much money the businesses generate in taxes in no one in the community can afford to shop there? If no one shops, then the retail-type stores dry up. Communities (and our country) can't thrive on retail stores alone.

[Brando70]

I mentioned this Supreme Court interview q's a couple pages back and I agree...scary stuff.

I had seen some of this interview but not this section. I think Governor William J. Lepetomane could have given more coherent answers.

All she had to do was say something like the SC had made some terrible rulings, like Dredd Scott, that later realized were wrong. Instead, she just kept talking. It was like watching a press release that had sprung a leak, with talking points just spilling all over the place.

[Teal]

I've seen some pretty bad Palin videos...but this may take the cake. Isn't this <b>really</b> concerning?

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0rXmuhWrlj4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed>

It's no worse than this...and this is the presidential nominee.
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fRllrrrw_Y0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed>

Or how about this?
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/v7r1lpn4gQs&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed>


In a word, no, I'm not concerned, if this is who the democrats feel comfortable with voting for as president, the only thing I'm concerned about is if enough people are fleeced into voting for this guy. THAT'S what concerns me.

[XXXIV]

This weeks episode ...You Tube Wars 2008...or

I Post You Decide....or

Anything you can do I can do better. ...or

Why bother?