Obama the Adult Versus McCain's Economic Easter Bunny

Debating on a night when global markets were tanking, Barack Obama and John McCain engaged in an edgy debate about "spreading the wealth," "class warfare" and creating an economy that benefits "Joe the Plumber" more than "Ivan the Investment Banker."

But while McCain clung to the failed fantasies of the past, Obama offered America a community rarely served up on the presidential debate stages of recent campaigns: realism.

Though they differed, at times viscerally, both men were struggling to occupy a populist high ground that suddenly appears far more attractive than the valleys of Wall Street.

The Republican kicked things off by declaring, "Americans are hurting right now, and they're angry. They're hurting, and they're angry. They're innocent victims of greed and excess on Wall Street and as well as Washington, D.C. And they're angry, and they have every reason to be angry."

The Democrat echoed the theme. "I think everybody understands at this point that we are experiencing the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. And the financial rescue plan that Sen. McCain and I supported is an important first step. And I pushed for some core principles: making sure that taxpayer can get their money back if they're putting money up. Making sure that CEOs are not enriching themselves through this process," explained Obama. "And I think that it's going to take some time to work itself out. But what we haven't yet seen is a rescue package for the middle class. Because the fundamentals of the economy were weak even before this latest crisis."

Not since 1912, when Democrat Woodrow Wilson, Progressive Teddy Roosevelt and even Republican William Howard Taft all tried to steal some of the thunder of Socialist Eugene Victor Debs have major-party presidential candidates scrambled so furiously to sound populist themes on the cusp of a definitional election.

But behind, beneath and beside the rhetorical flourishes were the evidences of a fundamental difference in approach.

McCain clung to the fading vision of Reaganomics as seen through the lens of George Bush, defaulting again and again to a lexicon of tax cuts for the richest, empty promises of trickle-down prosperity, fantasies of spending freezes and the certainty of deeper deficits and greater dysfunction in a federal government.

For McCain, ultimately, it was all about those tax cuts -- for plumber Joe Wurzelbacher in Ohio who wants to start a small business and, though he did not mention it, for corporations that earn more in a quarter than the GDPs of more than a few sovereign nations.

"The whole premise behind Sen. Obama's plans are class warfare, let's spread the wealth around. I want small businesses -- and by the way, the small businesses that we're talking about would receive an increase in their taxes right now," growled McCain. "Who -- why would you want to increase anybody's taxes right now?"

Obama chose to respond as an adult.

"I want to cut taxes for 95 percent of Americans. Now, it is true that my friend and supporter, Warren Buffett, for example, could afford to pay a little more in taxes... in order to give additional tax cuts to Joe the plumber before he was at the point where he could make $250,000," the Democrat began.

"Then," he continued, "Exxon Mobil, which made $12 billion, record profits, over the last several quarters, they can afford to pay a little more so that ordinary families who are hurting out there -- they're trying to figure out how they're going to afford food, how they're going to save for their kids' college education, they need a break.

"So, look, nobody likes taxes. I would prefer that none of us had to pay taxes, including myself. But ultimately, we've got to pay for the core investments that make this economy strong and somebody's got to do it."

McCain sputtered back: "Nobody likes taxes. Let's not raise anybody's taxes. OK?"

"Well," Obama replied. "I don't mind paying a little more."

In less serious times, that might have been a risky statement.

But Obama was no Walter Mondale apologizing for addressing fiscal realities.

The Democrat did make a class distinction, and in so doing he made the connection that more apologetic Democrats had failed to find in past campaigns.

"I think tax policy is a major difference between Sen. McCain and myself. And we both want to cut taxes, the difference is who we want to cut taxes for," explained the senator from Illinois.

"Now, Sen. McCain, the centerpiece of his economic proposal is to provide $200 billion in additional tax breaks to some of the wealthiest corporations in America. Exxon Mobil, and other oil companies, for example, would get an additional $4 billion in tax breaks," Obama continued. "What I've said is I want to provide a tax cut for 95 percent of working Americans, 95 percent. If you make... less than a quarter million dollars a year, then you will not see your income tax go up, your capital gains tax go up, your payroll tax. Not one dime. And 95 percent of working families, 95 percent of you out there, will get a tax cut. In fact, independent studies have looked at our respective plans and have concluded that I provide three times the amount of tax relief to middle-class families than Sen. McCain does."

The candidates displayed differences on issues that really do matter -- and, of course, on issues that didn't matter.

Obama and McCain were steered, briefly, into an empty "tone-of-the-campaign" debate by moderator Bob Schieffer.

McCain initially eschewed Schieffer's invitation to mouth the William Ayers-ACORN-appeasement blather that has been such a staple of his campaign in recent weeks. Instead, McCain accused Obama of spending "unprecedented amounts of money on negative ads about me." Obama reminded McCain that "100 percent of your ads are negative."

Finally, after a torturous back-and-forth about "hurt feelings," McCain dropped the bomb but missed the target. So the candidates wasted a few minutes on a sixties-radical-turned-college-professor named Ayers and a community-organization named ACORN.

But it was such a deviation that even McCain veered out of a convoluted riff on Ayers -- "it's not the fact that Sen. Obama chooses to associate with a guy who in 2001 said that he wished he had have bombed more, and he had a long association with him. It's the fact that... all of the details need to be known about Sen. Obama's relationship with them and with ACORN and the American people will make a judgment" -- to essentially acknowledge the absurdity of the discussion.

"And my campaign is about getting this economy back on track, about creating jobs, about a brighter future for America," McCain suddenly declared, pulling the brakes on the associated-with-terrorists talk. "And that's what my campaign is about and I'm not going to raise taxes the way Sen. Obama wants to raise taxes in a tough economy. And that's really what this campaign is going to be about.

The debate was back on the economic track -- and headed in a direction that allowed Obama to be the adult.

As the candidates sparred over health care, education, funding for programs for children with special needs and a host of other essential issues, the Democrat kept steering the discussion toward reality.

Both candidates talked about what they wanted to do.

While McCain imagined a world of tax cuts and free money, Obama allowed as how the economic Easter Bunny that Reagan and Bush promised was just around the corner might not be coming.

When McCain hailed his vice president running-mate's commitment to helping children with special needs and promised to help them, Obama responded, "I think it's very commendable the work she's done on behalf of special needs. I agree with that, John."

But, he added, "I do want to just point out that (children with) autism, for example, or other special needs will require some additional funding, if we're going to get serious in terms of research. That is something that every family that advocates on behalf of disabled children talk about. And if we have an across-the-board spending freeze, we're not going to be able to do it. That's an example of, I think, the kind of use of the scalpel that we want to make sure that we're funding some of those programs."

McCain offered America an old fantasy now discredited.

Obama offered America the promise of realism and a warning that, "(The) biggest risk we could take right now is to adopt the same failed policies and the same failed politics that we've seen over the last eight years and somehow expect a different result."

That was not the happy talk of the past.

But these are not happy times.

For those who want to wait around for the Easter Bunny, McCain made the proper appeal.

For those who figure it's time to get real, Obama was the only serious candidate on the stage.

Comments (141)

1. HA!!!!

   i was right!!! woot woot! nichols - the hardest working blogger at the nation!!!!!

   Posted by dexter666 at 10/15/2008 @ 11:02pm

2. I was disgusted that McCain's first statement was about how we are all victims of greed as if greed were just something that floats around in the atmosphere attacking people in their sleep.

   Go troll about the winger blogs and be prepared to listen to Joe and Jane Six-Pack defend the right of the very companies that are destroying the middle class to take an even bigger slice of the pie.

   Wake up people. Your taxes educate their workers, build the roads, the sewers and the infra-struture they depend on. You buy their products and services. Heck, before they abandoned you and sent their profits to tax havens in the Cayman's and your jobs to China you MADE those products.

   Stop feeling sorry for people who do not give a damn about you and start fighting for YOUR family's rights. You've earned them!

   Posted by Pogge at 10/15/2008 @ 11:15pm

3. I'm just happy a) to be watching this in my lifetime b) to have eaten today, and c) to have had a nice ride on my homebrew electric bicycle which gets 35 or so miles to a 15 cent or so charge. In fact, I intend that my next car will be a homebrew electric microvehicle with all the trimmin's.

   I would also venture to say that I might invest in such a vehicle if THE GOVERNMENT COULD PLEASE HELP DETROIT OR SOMEBODY THE HELL ELSE with a little direction and judicious investment (not the 250 billion in loan guarantees the nuclear industry just asked the treasury to underwrite) to make such a modest vehicle to serve the public interest and demand.

   Obama was one of the only two people who sounded rational up there. I don't think McCain is going to be able to drill or smear or talk down his way into the responsibilities of leadership. But by golly he seems to want to keep trying.

   Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 10/15/2008 @ 11:23pm

4. To whom was McC speaking??

   He consistently sounded as if he only had words for the GOP core.

   He had almost nothing to say to the audience that really mattered, the Undecided.

   Bye, John.

   Hail, President Obama.

   Posted by sloper at 10/15/2008 @ 11:35pm

5. The wrinkly old white haired dude says "I'm not George Bush" then supports all the trade and tax tactics that "W" has pushed. Then he attacks John Lewis, who is just as much an American hero as he is, because Rep. Lewis had the gale to suggest that they tone down the rhetoric.

   Posted by lachatte at 10/15/2008 @ 11:42pm

6. Don't get cocky Slope, we haven't won this thing yet-though if the election were based on talent, intelligence, temperament or any other rational measure Obama would be putting in a COA for 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

   Unfortunately it's based on whether we, the middle class, will vote in our own best interest....God help us.

   Posted by Pogge at 10/15/2008 @ 11:47pm

7. What the heck was that "class warfare" comment all about? Rich v. poor? Will supporters at McCain-Palin rallies now shout out "screw the poor?"

   One of the best moments for me, besides all the true substance and calls for substance from Obama, was when he said that the Ayers smears are the central part of the McCain campaign.

   Too true.

   Posted by timmcfarland503 at 10/16/2008 @ 12:02am

8. "Will supporters at McCain-Palin rallies now shout out "screw the poor?"

   No, only the big bucks backers will, in their clubs & private dining rooms.

   Posted by sloper at 10/16/2008 @ 12:08am

9. It just may be that we're starting to figure it out, that our best interests are not with, have never been with, the large corporations. Given the way people have gotten stiffed on fuel and food, on their retirement funds, on ever-rising health care and a decaying infrastructure, it's going to be very, very difficult to use small skirmishes in the oh-so-stale culture wars to distract from the desperate state of our society, both at home and abroad.

   No, I don't think any of that will wash this time.

   Posted by ncimon at 10/16/2008 @ 12:30am

10. I'll bet Joe the plumber wasn't going to buy a small business that would NET him over $250,000, so he would get a tax cut under Obama. I'm surprised I haven't seen this brought up. I used to own a small business that pulled in $400,000 but after payroll, inventory purchases and other expenses, I came away with less than $40,000. If Joe's small business really left him with over $250,000 net, his business revenues would be around $2 million. If that's the case, he could afford to pitch in some taxes.

    Posted by mainestream at 10/16/2008 @ 12:38am

11. I hope Joe the plumber votes for Obama and makes a big deal about it! I would love to see the media cover that! Gobama/Biden '08! PS Thanks for explaining about a small business like Joe's and how much they would have to make to take home $250,000. That's great. Very helpful and now I can explain it to people I meet when I canvass for Obama. Still 20 days to go folks. Please put your feet to the pavement, knock on doors, make phone calls, donate money, talk to your friends and family but make sure we elect Obama and Biden. We cannot rest until we are sure they are in.

    Posted by peacelovepossible at 10/16/2008 @ 01:01am

12. If John McCain is looking at Joe. W. or anyone else and he is saying that he is defending small businesses that will be aborted because of an Obama tax increase, he quite entirely 100 per cent lying. He is not looking out for anyone but the big boys who, under Obama, might be required to pay a fair share for their annual incomes of millions, as well as his other friends, the corporations, which do not want to lose their access to effective deregulators, followed by a rabble of effective torturers, bombers, treasury-sackers, neocon adventurers, country-occupying goons, assassins, informants, and hired killers.

    Anyone who doesn't know that by now is a either a fool or in some sort of denial. That is sad, really, to think that an entire nation can be occupied by fools to the tune of roughly 50 per cent.

    Posted by Madrnhell at 10/16/2008 @ 01:10am

13. Never have I seen my computer screen so devoid of reality. McCain in no prize, but Obama the politician is the polar opposite of Obama the presidential candidate. Obama IS the politician he constantly claims to be the problem in Washington. He is the poster child for the corruption and dishonesty that has caused this congress to be the least popular in history. Obama has no new ideas. His ideas are the old and failed policies implemented both here and abroad that cause unemployment, inflation and interest rates in the double digits. His political ideals were fashioned under the most corrupt political machine in the country. He has been proven wrong on virtually every other position from those on foreign policy to crime, poverty and energy. The only thing more disappointing than to see such a lothesome politician so close to being in the most powerful position in the world is to see how many people have been so fooled by this huckster.

    Posted by jrm at 10/16/2008 @ 01:13am

14. Jrm: "blah blah blah blah" Shit, weren't the conservatives the ones saying liberals were rat bastards for dissing the intelligence of the voters...and now we've been fooled by this huckster. My oh my, you are all becoming very angry suddenly.

    Posted by onthehelm at 10/16/2008 @ 01:25am

15. He [Obama] has been proven wrong on virtually every other position from those on foreign policy to crime, poverty and energy. Posted by jrm at 10/16/2008 @ 01:13am

    Do you live in Bizarro World, where everything is opposite?

    Posted by Be Good at 10/16/2008 @ 01:31am

16. Rejoice tabloid democracy!

    Embrace the feckless sheen...

    With talking points too small to see

    The valleys in between...

    Behold our stymied nation

    Astride the whims of fate

    Beckoning forth equations

    While selling short the State

    From whence is whom to guide us?

    Our shambled starry plinth

    With freedoms less desirous

    Of lobbyists' absinthe

    And as we stand in readiness

    for better days to come

    Confrontation's headiness

    Excludes the valued sum

    So, hold on fast now patriots

    Exude the future's realm

    As generations new to us

    Reorient the helm

    Embrace this newfound harmony

    And christen visions sound

    Rewrite our nation's symphony

    With peacefulness profound!

    Posted by ttr at 10/16/2008 @ 01:32am

17. Posted by jrm at 10/16/2008 @ 01:13am

    Man, I just love to see jrm andthe other righties who will be posting here with their incessant bullshit about "socialism". What is it, jrm, the big bad boogeyman "islamo-terrorist" not working for you people anymore? Let's bring back the cold war - worked well enough last time. Problem, jrm, is we're gretting to the end of 8 years of fascism. Do I need to remind you of the horrors visited on humanity during the 20th century by rampant corporatism, aka fascism? As for corruption, the Republican Party defines the term. And Obama has been proven right, not wrong, time and again, while John McCain trots out the same class warfare against the poor and the middle class that the GOP has been waging since Reagan. And, frankly, McCain came across once again as, well, an asshole. A lying, cowardly, dishonorable asshole. And he lost tonight. Yet again.

    So, 4 debates, 3 Obama wins, 1 Biden win. None of them even close.

    Posted by jmusolino at 10/16/2008 @ 01:37am

18. To onthehelm: Not angry suddenly. I'm sick of the hole lot of them. Most politicians have dissed the intelligence of the voters. And why shouldn't they? Just look at the dismal failure this hapless congress has been. Yet conventional wisdom says voters are going to give these loosers even more power. Obama is just more of the same but to an order of magnitude. You think things are bad now? The government doesn't solve problems. They either create them or make them worse. Usually both.

    To Be Good: You are right! Only in Bizarro World could Obama be taken seriously by even one person.

    Posted by jrm at 10/16/2008 @ 01:57am

19. Never have I seen my computer screen so devoid of reality.

    Posted by jrm at 10/16/2008 @ 01:13am | ignore this person | warn this person

    .

    Wow...

    I had no idea you could get a computer screen...

    ...that far up your rectum!

    Posted by Lillian at 10/16/2008 @ 02:00am

20. Really jrm, you might want to pull your head out of there and join the rest of us in 'actual' reality...

    ...the air is so much fresher out here!

    Posted by Lillian at 10/16/2008 @ 02:02am

21. Posted by jmusolino at 10/16/2008 @ 01:37am | ignore this person | warn this person

    You have the score exactly right...and the rest of the country already knows it!

    I thought the best part of the debate was the closing arguments.

    McCain = Me and all the rest of the McCains have served this country for years - I deserve it.

    Obama = The last 8 years of failed leadership have been a nightmare and we can do a heckuva lot better than 4 more years of the same - give me your vote and I'll unite this country around a vision for a better future for all of us.

    Posted by Lillian at 10/16/2008 @ 02:09am

22. Let's be clear about a few of things. First one's first. The average plumber who can afford to purchase the outfit that he works for at any point in his or her career does not exist, or is at least a fringe minority within that demographic. Secondly, I think something that is being sorely overlooked is the fact that if a labor union perpetrated the kind of fraud and cronyism that has been rampant on Wall Street McCain and his elk would see everyone locked up for it. At this point I have heard no real discussion as to what legal steps are being taken to prosecute the rampant predatory lending practices that have bankrupted this country? Bankers have been earning a living nickel and diming the working man for almost a decade.

    Home values are not in decline, they are merely reflecting their true value when removed from all of the complex schemes of financing and investment that milked middle class and upper middle class homeowners alike for more than the property was worth.

    And on to terrorism, You want to see a great example of homegrown terrorism look at the credit bureaus. The system we have is set up to convince people that they need credit to get by. In fact you can make more than you owe annually and will find it difficult to get a decent interest rate without submitting to a credit system that counts on you to screw up. I have never owned a credit card in my life!!!!

    Workers have been under assault for eight years. Let the bankers and easy money speculators who have turned our financial system into a joke sweat for a while. It's obvious that our industrial products are far superior to our financial products and therefore the only way back to a sound economy.

    Posted by unionyes399 at 10/16/2008 @ 02:13am

23. The government doesn't solve problems. They either create them or make them worse. Usually both.

    Posted by jrm at 10/16/2008 @ 01:57am | ignore this person | warn this person

    .

    Really?

    Government built roads, put people back to work during the great depression, put a man on the moon - and created all kinds of great technology in the process - like computer chips and the Internet, created the social security and medicare/medicaid safety nets, abolished slavery, created and enforce civil rights, lifted average education for all Americans, created the geosyncronous satellites that are at the heart of our communications technology, provided the seed money and continued funding that drive virtually all of the modern medical miracles we all take for granted, extended and grew the middle class of America by creating education and home ownership opportunities through the GI Bill...

    ...and on and on.

    The wingnut view that 'all government is bad' is just...

    ...nutty.

    Posted by Lillian at 10/16/2008 @ 02:21am

24. "Definitional election" is pretentious and lazy English. Write with punch. Did you mean to say "defining?"

    Posted by newandrew at 10/16/2008 @ 02:21am

25. Funny a conservative will envoke the New Deal to try to win a point but then condemn my candidate for suggesting we do those things again.

    Posted by unionyes399 at 10/16/2008 @ 02:25am

26. I think we all know America is going through tough times right now. The policies of the last eight years and -- and Washington's unwillingness to tackle the tough problems for decades has left us in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

    And that's why the biggest risk we could take right now is to adopt the same failed policies and the same failed politics that we've seen over the last eight years and somehow expect a different result.

    We need fundamental change in this country, and that's what I'd like to bring.

    You know, over the last 20 months, you've invited me into your homes. You've shared your stories with me. And you've confirmed once again the fundamental decency and generosity of the American people.

    And that's why I'm sure that our brighter days are still ahead.

    But we're going to have to invest in the American people again, in tax cuts for the middle class, in health care for all Americans, and college for every young person who wants to go. In businesses that can create the new energy economy of the future. In policies that will lift wages and will grow our middle class.

    These are the policies I have fought for my entire career. And these are the policies I want to bring to the White House.

    But it's not going to be easy. It's not going to be quick. It is going to be requiring all of us -- Democrats, Republicans, independents -- to come together and to renew a spirit of sacrifice and service and responsibility.

    I'm absolutely convinced we can do it. I would ask for your vote, and I promise you that if you give me the extraordinary honor of serving as your president, I will work every single day, tirelessly, on your behalf and on the behalf of the future of our children.

    Thank you very much.

    Posted by Lillian at 10/16/2008 @ 02:34am

27. Sorry people, I am not a conservative or a regressive. Just a realist. Thanks all for the entertainment though. I absolutely love reading the hallucinogenic rants and love getting your goats up. Funny how no one has actually provided facts to refute anything I said. Just the typical name calling, insults and grade school contradictions. (I know you are but what am I?)

    Lillian: You are correct about the location of my computer screen. Very insightful of you. The only appropriate place for my computer screen IS far up my rectum. It is the only place where one can find such sh_t as what one finds here. Either that or the commode.

    If Obama wins, be ready for far worse than the last 8 years. At least you will all be able to take comfort to know that I will be going down with you.

    Posted by jrm at 10/16/2008 @ 02:52am

28. watch out!!!!! be afraid!!!!!!! You're the only one slinging SH*T around here. The realist who obviously knows nothing of what's happening in the real world. He's off in imaginary terrorist land where the coloreds are fixing the election and a dipshit hockey mom is actually viable for high national office.

    Posted by unionyes399 at 10/16/2008 @ 03:22am

29. Alaska, where a billion dollar industry can subsidize a population with a paltry welfare payment of $3,000 annually

    Posted by unionyes399 at 10/16/2008 @ 03:25am

30. jrm:

    I understand your pain man, i wouldn't admit to being republican either.

    It is high time that someone had the balls to stand up to corporate America. The one thing that is just a little misunderstood here is that the notion of of spreading the wealth is wrong in any event. In my book It's not re distribution, it's called redemption.

    Conservatives are just pissed that there getting thumped by a black man who will give the money back to the people where it originated.

    That's one talent the repubs have down pat, they really think so highly of themselves that they feel their money is derived from hot air.

    Posted by dsavage at 10/16/2008 @ 03:52am

31. I cannot, in any way, understand how a middle class person can support the Republican line of bull. It must be the fear and insecurity that the right pushes over and over. Either that or the constant diet of hate we are fed by the gated community crowd. How mmany times will you go down the same road only to get mugged each trip, before you find another path? Do you still believe that Bush, Chaney, McCain and Palin actually care what happens to you and your loved ones? Look at the history of these theives from Ronnie up to now. They continue to aide in the rape of America by their corporate cronies and you pay the price. They have taken this country so far down the rabbit hole that there is barely a glimmer of light from above, and yet if you call them on their various crimes you are called a traitor or unpatriotic, a conspiricy nut or "LIBRUL"(heaven forbid). When will you open your eyes to how you have been conned? Grow a set of BALLS and stop being affraid of everything that is different. These tough talking cowards are just using you to protect them from paying the price for their misdeeds and lead you on with the empty promise that someday you will be wealthy enough to join their ranks, so you better get behind them now. It is an old con of using someones dreams or greed against them. Start to think for yourself, stop being so damn lazy. It is killing you and the rest of us too.

    Posted by jimeuf at 10/16/2008 @ 04:54am

32. USA Today on the coming thugocracy if Obama wins. Even George McGovern doesn't support coerced 'free choice' and stripping workers of the right to a private vote, as Obama does. Yet another reason why a vote for Obama is a vote for a thugocracy.

    Our view on labor laws: No way to form a union Workers deserve to hear both sides, vote in private.

    When citizens go to the polls on Nov. 4, they will be free to vote their conscience -- regardless of pressure from relatives, friends or co-workers -- after having had a chance to weigh the alternatives. Campaigns and secret ballots are sacrosanct elements of American democracy.

    So it's surprising and disturbing that organized labor wants to do away with both these elements when workers decide whether to form a union.

    Under the current system, once 30% of a company's workers sign union authorization cards, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) administers a confidential vote, typically 39 days after it receives the cards. The union and employer campaign for votes.

    Under a major rewrite of U.S. labor law being promoted by unions, when more than 50% of employees sign authorization cards, the NLRB would have to recognize the new union. No campaign. No secret ballot.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 08:11am

33. This misguided measure passed the House shortly after Democrats took the majority in 2007. But it needs several more votes in the Senate and a president who will sign it. Barack Obama supports it; John McCain does not. It's no surprise, then, that the AFL-CIO plans to spend an eye-popping $200 million this election cycle to support Obama and Democratic candidates for Congress. A win for Obama and big gains for Senate Democrats could remove the remaining obstacles to the euphemistically named "Employee Free Choice Act."

    Cajoled choice is more like it. The proposed change would give unions and pro-union employees more incentive to use peer pressure, or worse, to persuade reluctant workers to sign their cards. And without elections, workers who weren't contacted by union organizers would have no say in the final outcome.

    Labor leaders, such as AFL-CIO President John Sweeney in the space below, argue that the proposed law wouldn't prohibit private balloting. This is accurate but misleading. Union organizers would have no reason to seek an election if they had union cards signed by more than 50% of workers. And if they had less than a majority, they'd be unlikely to call for a vote they'd probably lose.

    The legislation has other questionable provisions as well. For example, once a union is formed, if labor and management can't agree on a contract, a federal arbitration board would be called on to go beyond the normal role of facilitating talks and actually dictate terms.

    Labor has seen its role decline since the 1950s, when about a third of all private sector employees belonged to unions, compared with about 7.5% today. So it's understandably eager to find ways to expand membership, particularly at a time when workers are feeling economically vulnerable. But undermining

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 08:12am

34. Posted by jimeuf at 10/16/2008 @ 04:54am

    You are a typical left-wing dupe, my friend, slurping at the left wing kool-aid trough. So you think the best way to get ahead is to vote for a politician who promises to give you someone else's money? Pathetic.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 08:16am

35. I suppose the cranky old sneering dinosaur figured he had nothing to lose--even if it came at the price of his dignity. It is not so much his chronological age as his dated world view, combined with a juvenile petulence that makes him irrelevant. That, and his Nixon-like creepiness.. Again the pundits tried to sing it for McCain, but the polls again demonstrated how out of touch they are. I guess McCain's ludicrous "class war" charges that Obama's policies would redistribute the wealth--while we witness the largest historical transfer of wealth from the public to corporate crooks, has special resonance to this priviliged pundit class.

    Posted by Lil at 10/16/2008 @ 08:26am

36. Posted by Lil at 10/16/2008 @ 08:26am

    Gee, Lil, did you miss Obama's little talk with that plumber in Ohio? If I heard it right, Obama told the plumber that the plumber's wealth needed to be 'spread around' to other people. Is that what you're supporting?

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 08:37am

37. The only "adult" in the room? Please.

    Senator Obama wants to "spread the wealth around" by raising the marginal federal income tax rates on those earning more than $250,000 a year.

    At the same time, he wants to use the revenue generated to send a check to workers, many of whom presently do not pay federal income taxes.

    Although called a "tax credit," in reality this is simply welfare.

    We are facing a budget "crunch" next year.

    Due to the fiscal crisis this will lead to falling tax revenues and increased unemployment rates.

    The budget deficit will likely come in at around $700 billion dollars or 5% of GDP.

    Due to increased unemployment and falling housing prices, there will be tremendous pressure to use fiscal policy (deficit spending) to "revive" the economy.

    With stimulus "packages" costing any where from $4 - 700 billion, you are left with a budget deficit of 1.1 - 1.5 trillion dollars.

    This will lead to continued downward pressure on the dollar.

    Due to decreased demand, along with a slide in the US dollar, foreign oil suppliers will reduce supply to prop up oil prices.

    A weak dollar will lead to upward pressure on prices.

    Senator Obama opposes new free trade agreements, think Columbia and wants to re-negotiate existing agreements.

    The Democrats and Senator Obama will allow open ballots to help promote unionization. Yes, no secret ballot.

    The end result? Higher taxes for one group in society and welfare for the rest. High trade tarrifs and reduced labour mobility.

    This is Obama Economics.

    America can't afford this "adult."

    With the Democratics controlling Congress, we need a true reformer in the Presidency, John McCain and a unity administration.

    Posted by John.Frank at 10/16/2008 @ 08:48am

38. The only "adult" in the room? Please.

    Senator Obama wants to "spread the wealth around" by raising the marginal federal income tax rates on those earning more than $250,000 a year.

    At the same time, he wants to use the revenue generated to send a check to workers, many of whom presently do not pay federal income taxes.

    Although called a "tax credit," in reality this is simply welfare.

    We are facing a budget "crunch" next year.

    Due to the fiscal crisis this will lead to falling tax revenues and increased unemployment rates.

    The budget deficit will likely come in at around $700 billion dollars or 5% of GDP.

    Due to increased unemployment and falling housing prices, there will be tremendous pressure to use fiscal policy (deficit spending) to "revive" the economy.

    With stimulus "packages" costing any where from $4 - 700 billion, you are left with a budget deficit of 1.1 - 1.5 trillion dollars.

    This will lead to continued downward pressure on the dollar.

    Due to decreased demand, along with a slide in the US dollar, foreign oil suppliers will reduce supply to prop up oil prices.

    A weak dollar will lead to upward pressure on prices.

    Senator Obama opposes new free trade agreements, think Columbia and wants to re-negotiate existing agreements.

    The Democrats and Senator Obama will allow open ballots to help promote unionization. Yes, no secret ballot.

    The end result? Higher taxes for one group in society and welfare for the rest. High trade tarrifs and reduced labour mobility.

    This is Obama Economics.

    America can't afford this "adult."

    With the Democratics controlling Congress, we need a true reformer in the Presidency, John McCain and a unity administration.

    Posted by John.Frank at 10/16/2008 @ 08:49am

39. Ho hum. pontificus,either you don't have a problem with--or simply choose to ignore and live in denial about how we subsidize wealth, bailing out corps that are "too big to fail" assuming their bad debt while they hunt partridge and sneer in their best Leona Helmsley parlors that only the "little people pay taxes". It is especially alarming, at this time, when the entire trickle-down, job creation scam has been exposed as an off-shoring scam, yet the Right, out of sheer desperation resorts to the same tired soundbites and talking points no matter how many times it is debunked. And they call themselves the realists in the epicenter of an economic meltdown as a consequence of getting big gubbermint offa our backs. You made your bed--the problem is we all have to sleep in it. They never call it wealth distribution when the elite class assumes our money as their privilige. How about we actually get something back for us when we all pool our resources--instead of tithing our hard-earned money to those who just might throw us a bone now and then. Jerk.

    Posted by Lil at 10/16/2008 @ 09:06am

40. "They never call it wealth distribution when the elite class assumes our money as their privilige. How about we actually get something back for us when we all pool our resources--instead of tithing our hard-earned money to those who just might throw us a bone now and then. Jerk."

    'Your' money, LIL? Are you paying attention? Most of the taxes are already paid by 'the rich'. If you aren't rich, chances are you don't even pay taxes, and if you do, it's almost a certainty that you aren't paying for the benefits you are scheduled to receive under medicare and social security.

    How typical of a leftist to talk about 'your' money when it was never yours to begin with. It's a culture of entitlement that is fostered by your cult, I suppose.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 09:11am

41. One issue relating to health insurance is how the current system absolutely stifles the creation of new business. If I want to bring in a partner to my business, the prospective partner has to decide whether they can afford to lose their current health insurance and have to pay a huge percentage of their income for health insurance. People are terrified to lose their health insurance, and I am sure that this is a major detriment to the creation of new businesses.

    Posted by waters at 10/16/2008 @ 09:13am

42. McCain's "Ayers Attack" shows his real problem....he was all over the place.

    Starting in with the attack...then switching it back to "happy talk" about his campaign...then switching that to "I'm not going to raise taxes".

    Then his "We're going to cut the budget..." (throw to the Right)...but "we're going to help people with special needs kids" (throw to the Left)....

    and a "Joe the Plumber" Hail Mary pass (and failed Reagan 1980 2nd debate impression)....and Joe, despite his criticisms of Obama...is still UNDECIDED!

    Regardless, he needed to hit three Grand Slams in a row and Obama not get a single run...and McCain barely got a base hit before the game was over.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 10/16/2008 @ 09:28am

43. Ho hum again, pontificus. Not likely. With their teams of lawyers working day and night conjuring up write-offs, loopholes, off-shored accounts and other "tools" and "instruments" to assure they don't even contribute their fair share. It is the same pattern of behavior that is all unraveling now, but because the Supreme Court determined a bribe was free speech was essentially a bribe, they pretty much consolidated gov-corp-media and pull all political strings--as a result, aside from window dressing, they get billions after they looted billions and the irony is fools like you, generally assuming the anti-gubbermint mantra, entertaining yourselves as the exemplers of reason and liberty, fail to see your free market heros have morphed into and control the gubbermint you so despise. And they, pretty much picked it clean, while the rest of us get our asses kicked--thanks to jerks like you.

    Posted by Lil at 10/16/2008 @ 09:34am

44. Posted by Lil at 10/16/2008 @ 09:34am

    LIL, if I might interrupt your incoherent, paranoid, class-warfare inspired babble for one minute, might I ask what part of 'the top 10 percent pay 85 percent of the taxes' you fail to understand? And if somehow you do manage to break through your indoctrination in one teeny tiny corner of your brain that still thinks for itself, might you ask that part how money other people pay in taxes is 'your' money?

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 09:42am

45. Taxing the rich is the easiest possible to argument to make. It's a no-brainer. When you tell "95%" of the people that their load will be carried by the top "5%", you can rest assured you'll get 95% of the vote.

    Consider this: Assemble a group of 100 people and have them vote on Obama's tax plan, saying that the top five people foot the bill for the rest. A majority vote should be a cinch.

    Regardless of the political effectiveness of this tactic, I strongly disagree with the premise that the top 5% deserve to pay higher taxes as a percentage of their income. We always hear that they can "afford it". Never are we treated to such phrases as they've "earned it", or they've "created it", while both are true. Liberals have been dangerously effective in casting the rich as our enemies. The most productive of our citizens are routinely made out to be villains, wicked thieves, and morally corrupt. It's very easy to pick on minorities and pander to majorities, but this hardly makes it just.

    Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 09:52am

46. I'd say with politicians like Obama winning, and people like LIL to support them, the following quote is more apt than ever:

    "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

    Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage.

    The above has been attributed to a number of political philosophers and thinkers, including Lord Thomas Macaulay, Alexander Tytler and Alexis DeTocqueville."

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 09:58am

47. As I was saying, typically attacking as a defense of nothing of substance and reverting to shop-worn talking points and billion dollar funded think tank sound bites to cover failed policies and a morally bankrupt philosophy clung to with religious zeal. Oh, the crisis of faith to find the Mammon humpty dumpty god is an fallen idol, and all the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't put humpty together again...

    http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0522/p15s01-cogn.html

    Not that it will penetrate, jerk.

    Posted by Lil at 10/16/2008 @ 10:01am

48. Posted by Lil at 10/16/2008 @ 10:01am

    Gee, LIL, did you write that? It's almost as incoherent as your average post.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 10:04am

49. I don't think McCain is going to be able to drill or smear or talk down his way into the responsibilities of leadership. But by golly he seems to want to keep trying. Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 10/15/2008 @ 11:23pm

    Neither will representatives of the political entities the rantificus serves be so able, imho

    Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 10/16/2008 @ 10:04am

50. At this point all McCain/Palin have are smears and hate going for them. It's what their base eats up. The Republican base thrives on hate. They have for 40 years now. All McCain has are the same old tired/useless/trickle down policies of the Bush administration that don't work. Anyone with a brain knows they don't work. All McCain is a George Bush clone. So what can they do for the next 3 weeks???? But, keep up the smear campaign and hope it convinces some voters to abandon their common sense and vote for them!

    Posted by ganddw42 at 10/16/2008 @ 10:08am

51. I did like that when McCain tried to steer the conversation toward Obama not defending him from attacks by a Congressman that Obama brought up the fact that Palin allowed folks at their rallies to shot kill him and terrorist without ever saying Hey, lets take it easy.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 10/16/2008 @ 10:08am

52. Funny how no one has actually provided facts to refute anything I said.

    Posted by jrm at 10/16/2008 @ 02:52am | ignore this person | warn this person

    .

    I went back and re-read your post, jrm (while holding my nose) and had to laugh. What you said, was basically a highly partisan rant, full of conjecture, insult, and inuendo. You didn't post a single 'fact' of any kind. So why would anyone need 'facts' to refute a rant?

    Come to think of it, the only thing even appoaching a 'fact' in your post was this...

    "You are correct about the location of my computer screen. Very insightful of you. The only appropriate place for my computer screen IS far up my rectum."

    ...because that's obvious where your head is.

    Posted by Lillian at 10/16/2008 @ 10:09am

53. Looks like an Obama victory promises to bring the fast track to union-demanded legislation stripping workers of the right to a private vote in union certification elections. The 'Free Choice' Act, aka, the 'fellow employee coercion act', is on such a fast track that Pelosi is even calling Congress back early so they can get started on the giveaways ASAP.

    Pretty soon, we can expect to see the Democrats do for industry in the country as a whole what they have done for the auto industry in Detroit and the steel industry throughout the northeast. Welcome to devastation, loss of jobs, and bondage, the big government shill's best friend.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 10:09am

54. Posted by ganddw42 at 10/16/2008 @ 10:08am

    Your post itself consists of nothing but unpremised accusations and you accuse the other side of hatred and smears? That's pretty ironic.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 10:13am

55. "Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage."

    Describes the past 28 years perfectly. Thanks.

    Hey potificus, what did the Democrats do so bad for industry during the time conservatives were in power? Are you so high that you missed out on conservative rule since 1980? The only time the country actually was helping itself was during the Clinton administration, and he was just a moderate Republican.

    As to union card check, you are confusing the idea of voter registration with voting...which is really no surprise considering how much ignorance conservatives show about ACORN (note: since Tuesday, I have gotten 16 donations for them). The former is hardly private.

    Of course, if conservatives actually gave a shit about workers this would be a non-issue. But all workers are to them are producers of others' wealth, and when this passes, yous will lose even more power.

    As to "Welcome to devastation, loss of jobs, and bondage, the big government shill's best friend" I again suggest you lay off the bottle because you have clearly been in a haze for a bit, at least the past 8 years, but 28 overall.

    Keep 'em coming--will make for a great book of quotes one day.

    Posted by onthehelm at 10/16/2008 @ 10:20am

56. darin-Economic systems do not cause deaths.It is the people who pervert them that cause deaths.Capitalism,following your logic,also causes millions of deaths,child exploitation,poor working conditions,and wars for greed,but capitalism does not do that,but it is the people who lack morals and pervert it that cause those things.We humans do these things regardless of religion,economic system,or political philosophy.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 10/16/2008 @ 10:24am

57. Posted by onthehelm at 10/16/2008 @ 10:20am

    "what did the Democrats do so bad for industry during the time conservatives were in power?"

    The unions throttled the US steel industry and the US car industry with the help of Democratic legislation making those industries uneconomic in the US. The Republicans' only fault is from failing to stop you and your ilk from doing that. When the Democrats strip the workers' right to a private vote in the country as a whole, the US industry, to the extent which you succeed in your thuggery, you will devastate the rest of our industry just as sure as night follows day.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 10:25am

58. this is rich:

    "Liberals have been dangerously effective in casting the rich as our enemies..."

    Yesiree, it was the poor welfare mother, who wouldn't put off gratification and get an education who now robs the fruit of my labor and caused the stock market to crash. Right? Such suckers you fools are and I couldn't care less except your groveling and crawling to kiss the hem of wealth and privilige, in the hopes that it gives you some kind of vicarious status as one of the enlightened self interested masters of the universe, blinds you to the fact that you are getting your ass kicked by well funded publicity campaigns for the failed trickle down rape and pillage. How many times do you have to be kicked before you figure out who is kicking? Ignorance is truly bliss, and it would be fine if it was just you who were the suckers, but we all suffer on account of your ignorance. So much for suffering fools.

    "The Republicans believe that the power of government should be used first of all to help the rich and the privileged in the country. With them, property, wealth, comes first. The Democrats believe that the power of government should be used to give the common man more protection and a chance to make a living. With us the people come first." 'A Government as Good As Its People'

    H Truman

    Posted by Lil at 10/16/2008 @ 10:32am

59. The third rail of forbidden subjects neither candidate has ever dared to mention is that given our bankruptcy status with an impending economic depression,we can no longer afford to continue the unconditional provision of Israel with billions of dollars every year.We just cannot afford to continue to finance a one sided partisan policy anymore that was the backbone of America being attacked on 9/11, something the 9/11 Commission tried to suppress as seen on You Tube.Hopefully Obama will be more balanced and fair to both sides.

    Posted by mystic at 10/16/2008 @ 10:32am

60. Posted by i'm nobody at 10/16/2008 @ 10:24am

    Economic and political systems that fail to protect private property rights inevitably fail, just as a building with insufficient structure fails from the weight of gravity. People will not continue to work hard simply for the good of other people. Morals are important, but faulty economic systems will collapse regardless of the state of public morals.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 10:35am

61. Another Truman classic:

    "Republicans approve of the American farmer, but they are willing to help him go broke. They stand four-square for the American home-- but not for housing. They are strong for labor-- but they are stronger for restricting labor's rights. They favor minimum wage--the smaller the minimum wage the better. They endorse educational opportunity for all--but they won't spend money for teachers or for schools. They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine-- for people who can afford them. They consider electrical power a great blessing--but only when the private power companies get their rake-off. They think American standard of living is a fine thing--so long as it doesn't spread to all the people. And they admire of Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it."

    Same as it ever was.

    Posted by Lil at 10/16/2008 @ 10:35am

62. Posted by Lil at 10/16/2008 @ 10:32am

    "The Democrats believe that the power of government should be used to give the common man more protection and a chance to make a living. With us the people come first."

    Yeah, that's great, LIL. But what happens when pro-union legislation supposedly designed togive 'the chance to make a living' destroys the industries that it regulates and chases them overseas? What happens when environmental regulations are so stringent that it makes it uneconomical to build refineries and drill for more oil in this country, thus helping to drive up the costs so that average people can't afford to buy gas anymore?

    Then you Democrats are scarce, or busy blaming the resulting difficulties on anyone but yourselves. No thanks to you and your fairytales, LIL!

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 10:45am

63. The unions throttled the US steel industry and the US car industry with the help of Democratic legislation making those industries uneconomic in the US.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 10:25am

    wtf?

    ever heard of inflation?

    these people were inflated out of jobs.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 10/16/2008 @ 10:54am

64. Posted by jrm at 10/16/2008 @ 01:13am | ignore this person | warn this person

    sour grapes, bub.

    Posted by emile duBois at 10/16/2008 @ 10:54am

65. ponti,

    don't you have a blender to fix or something?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 10/16/2008 @ 10:56am

66. ponti,

    the king of babble on.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 10/16/2008 @ 10:56am

67. Oh please--the Right and the capitulating triangulating Corporate "New" Democrats who have been aiding and abetting them every step of the way (congressional numbers are only lower than Bush due to the fact that they haven't held him or his NeoCons accountable for ANYTHING that done brought this country to it's knees not because Democrats hold a slim minority and are constantly hamstrung by Republicans when the do try)have done a fine job all by themselves.

    Chases them overseas? What so they can utilize slave labor and befoul another coutries environment so they can shit in a gold toilet? Oil prices were driven up by speculation, arsehole and the oil barons have acreage they don't even utilize as it now stands. Jerk.

    Posted by Lil at 10/16/2008 @ 10:56am

68. Posted by frosty zoom at 10/16/2008 @ 10:54am

    "these people were inflated out of jobs."

    Sure FROSTY, it's all a natural phenomenon, like a tornado. Nobody need take responsibility, eh? And if there's anybody to blame, surely it's those evil Republicans, because, after all, they're pretty much to blame for everything, right?

    You have the understanding of a child my friend.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 11:00am

69. Isn't it interesting that PONTI has now become what he once hated?

    Those who "only want America to fail, so they can re-gain their political power"...

    in his case in 2010 and 2012!

    Ironic, huh?

    heheh

    Posted by Maskdelta at 10/16/2008 @ 11:01am

70. Liberals have been dangerously effective in casting the rich as our enemies. The most productive of our citizens are routinely made out to be villains, wicked thieves, and morally corrupt. It's very easy to pick on minorities and pander to majorities, but this hardly makes it just. Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 09:52am | ignore this person | warn this person

    the most productive? the wall st bankers? the Auto execs? all with their hand out and a mouth full of gimme. you must be joking. another wanna be, a poor shnook defending the privileges of the super rich.

    Posted by emile duBois at 10/16/2008 @ 11:02am

71. Posted by Lil at 10/16/2008 @ 10:56am

    "Chases them overseas? What so they can utilize slave labor and befoul another coutries environment so they can shit in a gold toilet? Oil prices were driven up by speculation, arsehole and the oil barons have acreage they don't even utilize as it now stands. Jerk."

    Yep LIL, if there's anyone standing in the way of good jobs and plenty of money for everyone, promised by good thinking people like you, it's those greedy Republicans who just want to keep everything to themselves. Nice to live in a fairy tale, LIL, where reality, limits, and fundamental economics never intrudes.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 11:03am

72. I'm sorry, did you just say anything?

    Posted by Lil at 10/16/2008 @ 11:06am

73. evil workers!

    evil sky!

    sure thing, planti.

    ponti, why were wages and environmental conditions o.k. for jobs here 20 years ago?

    they haven't changed much, have they?

    nope.

    just a big plan to hide inflation on the backs of brown people.

    the wages haven't gone up, but prices would have, a whole bunch.

    unions, sheesh.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 10/16/2008 @ 11:06am

74. ponti-These is no such thing as a faulty economic system.There are just faulty humans that pervert these things.Nor does protecting property rights lead to automatic good as the native Americans and others who have been exploited,killed etc. can tell you.History is against you on this one.Prior to unions we were not turning out quality products.In fact,we have only made quality products when unions first came into existence,but then those got out of control and we started to make less quality products,but our products still superior to much made around the world that is not union.The Japanese are the only ones who make quality products without unions.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 10/16/2008 @ 11:06am

75. evil sky!

    evil workers!

    Posted by frosty zoom at 10/16/2008 @ 11:07am

76. Responding to or trying to reason with pontificus is a waste of time. His choice of a name makes that evident. He does not debate, he pontificates. His word is law and do not dare to challenge it. All things are always the way he sees them. It comes from a mind devoid of curiosity or originality, abstracts are not an option. He does not deserve contempt or direspect, he needs prayer and compassion. It is not his fault that he lacks intellectual acuity, he seems to have been born that way. So please extend to him that which he is incapable of giving to others, understanding, compassion and prayers.

    Posted by jimeuf at 10/16/2008 @ 11:08am

77. "Thugocracy"--- i like the word It aptly describes what has been happening in this country for decades now...it appears, that there is only one political party, with two different factions, but they are all "Republicrats"!!! In the past, the "only" people that were Fleeced, Ripped Off, marginalized, ABANDONED or WORSE, were POW/MIAs and their grieving Families, Widows and Orphans, Single Moms, vulnerable Seniors, Minorities and Immigrants NOW it is your turn ( on Main St)!!! How does it feel?? Wake UP AMERICA!!! Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations are really running the show, in the business of taking from ya everythig you have got, while Government Officials Local, State and Federal look the other way with a view of getting better perks for themselves and/or get appointed to even better positions of power

    Posted by powmia at 10/16/2008 @ 11:11am

78. Posted by Maskdelta at 10/16/2008 @ 11:01am

    Not hoping for it, MASK. Just predicting it. And this time, there may not be a Ronald Reagan to pull us out of the mess you lefties create.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 11:18am

79. ponti-Clinton did just fine as did FDR and there is no evidence that McCain's flip flopping economic plans will help much.You guys picked the wrong candidate and you only have yourselves to blame.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 10/16/2008 @ 11:24am

80. ponti-You probably could have easily won even with McCain had he picked a better VP choice who did not scare moderates and independents and if they had come up with one plan and a positive message because that is what people want in bad economic times.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 10/16/2008 @ 11:39am

81. Not hoping for it, MASK. Just predicting it. And this time, there may not be a Ronald Reagan to pull us out of the mess you lefties create.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 11:18am

    see mask,

    frostwin's law once again:

    the deeper a hole a rightwinger is driven into by facts,

    the greater the probability that the ghost of reagan will be thrust forth.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 10/16/2008 @ 11:49am

82. Not hoping for it, MASK. Just predicting it. And this time, there may not be a Ronald Reagan to pull us out of the mess you lefties create.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 11:18am

    the lefties create!!!!

    what a joke.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 10/16/2008 @ 11:50am

83. Not hoping for it, MASK. Just predicting it. And this time, there may not be a Ronald Reagan to pull us out of the mess you lefties create.

    Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 11:18am

    reagan???!?!?!?!

    what a joke.

    increased spending, increased bureaucracy, kept the fed rate artificially low.....

    just ask ghwbush.......

    Posted by frosty zoom at 10/16/2008 @ 11:51am

84. Well... We could start by saving money in the school lunch programs. Those kids suck down ketchup and relish by the gallon! Let's call the condiments vegetables!! We'll have no socialist nutritionists here!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketchup_as_a_vegetable

    Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 10/16/2008 @ 12:11pm

85. For McCain, ultimately, it was all about those tax cuts -- for plumber Joe Wurzelbacher in Ohio who wants to start a small business and, though he did not mention it, for corporations that earn more in a quarter than the GDPs of more than a few sovereign nations.

    It turns out that Joe the Plumber is not as poor as he pretended to be. Go to DailyKos for more details.

    Posted by boing007 at 10/16/2008 @ 12:12pm

86. What's even funnier, FROSTY is THIS line from PONTI...

    "Then you Democrats are scarce, or busy blaming the resulting difficulties on anyone but yourselves."---Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 10:45am

    Now ask PONTI why we shouldn't blame Bush for the "resulting difficulty" of the financial crises but blame "someone else"!

    LOL

    Posted by Maskdelta at 10/16/2008 @ 12:13pm

87. What the heck was that "class warfare" comment all about? Rich v. poor? Will supporters at McCain-Palin rallies now shout out "screw the poor?"

    They probably won't. Most of them are middling middle class or bordering on poor.

    Posted by boing007 at 10/16/2008 @ 12:16pm

88. "the most productive? the wall st bankers? the Auto execs? all with their hand out and a mouth full of gimme. you must be joking. another wanna be, a poor shnook defending the privileges of the super rich.

    Posted by emile duBois at 10/16/2008 @ 11:02am | ignore this person | warn this person "

    The most productive also include doctors, lawyers, engineers, scientists, inventors... I cannot bring myself to begrudge someone for earning money. CEO's and executives aren't stealing money from anyone, they're being paid by willing companies. There are some who break the law, or try to skirt it, but that occurs across the board and is certainly not the exclusive domain of top executives. Even in ugly cases like John Edwards who became a super rich lawyer by suing doctors and ruining many lives, he did so within the confines of the law. And he had the gusto and drive (and soullessness, perhaps) to do it. It might get a little more distasteful in cases like the Kennedys and Vanden Heuvels of the world who inherit their wealth rather than actually earning it, but even then it's not for me to dictate how their families handle their money. It's theirs, not mine, after all. And by the way, despite her love of socialism, I assure you the Vanden Heuvel children will be heirs to a great fortune, exercising every tax loop hole known to exist.

    Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 12:18pm

89. It's clear to me ( Independent Voter) the Obama has once again proved to be more presidential, while McCain still reminded me of a grumpy old man.

    Posted by phantastek at 10/16/2008 @ 12:19pm

90. It turns out that Joe the Plumber is not as poor as he pretended to be. Go to DailyKos for more details.

    Posted by boing007 at 10/16/2008 @ 12:21pm

91. Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 12:18pm | ignore this person | warn this person

    you are attacking a straw man, with scattered shots that fall to the ground.

    Edwards did not sue anyone. it is not the attorney that is the ligitant.

    no matter what fortune Ms Vanden Heuvel inherits, she has made her own way in the world, summa cum laude and all. you in contrast are a gnat.

    Posted by emile duBois at 10/16/2008 @ 12:38pm

92. when Edwards was representing the parents of sick kids, the other side, the doctors and medical pros also had a lawyer representing them. that lawyer got even more richer, molto more richer than even Edwards did. those guys are never mentioned. they too profit from the misery of others.

    Posted by emile duBois at 10/16/2008 @ 12:43pm

93. Obama did fine and is in good shape. the country will not turn the ship of state over to the old old soldier. McCain was the patsy from the start. the repubs knew he had slim chances to none, they could read the tea leaves for themselves. there have been landslides before in this country's elections. it's time for one now.

    McCain's bimbo Sarah Palin will not face a sunny future politically. she could get impeached. more likely an honest person will oppose her in the next elections and sweep her away.

    Posted by emile duBois at 10/16/2008 @ 12:47pm

94. er, litigant

    Posted by emile duBois at 10/16/2008 @ 12:48pm

95. You don't know much about the law business. Trial lawyers like Edwards work very hard and long hours recruiting clients. That's why they're called "ambulance chasers". It may not even occur to the guy in the ambulance to sue until a slick lawyer informs him of his rights and lures him with promises of huge payouts. Surely you see the ads on T.V. all the time from your local trial lawyers, advertising for every affliction under the sun that could bear some cash. That's just the name of the game.

    KVH is very smart and talented, and I said nothing to besmirch her personal achievements. For all I know as editor of The Nation she has doubled her fortune, though I seem to doubt it. I was only stating my suspicions and frustrations concerning the fate of her estate and how that jibes with her worldview and philosophy.

    Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 12:55pm

96. "#

    when Edwards was representing the parents of sick kids, the other side, the doctors and medical pros also had a lawyer representing them. that lawyer got even more richer, molto more richer than even Edwards did. those guys are never mentioned. they too profit from the misery of others.

    Posted by emile duBois at 10/16/2008 @ 12:43pm | ignore this person | warn this person"

    This is just stupidity on display.

    Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 12:56pm

97. Senator McCain can't escape his own party's fundamental philosophy. He may not be George Bush, but he can't move too far from his failed policies.

    Put simply, the core mission of the Republican party over the last 50 years has been to play reverse Robin Hood: "Take from the middle class and give to the rich", i.e., protect the very wealthiest individuals and corporations. Republicans including Mr. McCain must explain how making the richest richer without asking anything of them in return helps everyone else. That's the trickle-down theory. Unfortunately, recent evidence does not support that theory. So, to distract voters from their core mission, Republicans have used smokescreens of patriotism, religion, family values, racial divisiveness, fear-mongering etc., in an effort to convince middle-class people to vote against their own interests. These diversions have worked because they were orchestrated by very capable advertisers, but the core product being sold has always been Reverse Robin Hood, and that product is faulty.

    Pure and simple trickle-down may have worked in a semi-closed economy, but it does not work so easily when the "trickle" can be sent to other countries and the profits can be reinvested anywhere in the world. We had the most prosperous middle class in the world, and that middle class is being hurt by Republican policies that Mr. McCain continues to support, never mind the rhetoric about Joe the Plumber. Without the kinds of policies on economy, energy, education, health care, research and technology that Mr. Obama supports, the middle class will continue to struggle. It may be finally opening its eyes.

    Posted by lmiele at 10/16/2008 @ 1:00pm

98. You don't know much about the law business. Trial lawyers like Edwards work very hard and long hours recruiting clients. That's why they're called "ambulance chasers". It may not even occur to the guy in the ambulance to sue until a slick lawyer informs him of his rights and lures him with promises of huge payouts. Surely you see the ads on T.V. all the time from your local trial lawyers, advertising for every affliction under the sun that could bear some cash. That's just the name of the game.

    This is just stupidity on display.

    incidentally I have had many law firms as my clients, including some venerable firms.

    Posted by emile duBois at 10/16/2008 @ 1:04pm

99. your mindless repetition of repug cliches has given you an ants eye view of the world, poison

    Posted by emile duBois at 10/16/2008 @ 1:13pm

100. >>>McCain clung to the fading vision of Reaganomics as seen through the lens of George Bush, defaulting again and again to a lexicon of tax cuts for the richest, empty promises of trickle-down prosperity, fantasies of spending freezes and the certainty of deeper deficits and greater dysfunction in a federal government. <<<

     This is the KEY POINT John Nichols, and Obama should stress this over and over again in these final weeks.

     McCain "claims" he is not like George Bush, but on economics, he favors the failed trickle-down economic policies of George Bush and most Republicans.

     History has proven that trickle-down economics doesn't work, as the money never quite trickles down to the Middle Class and the poor, and the rich dude beneficiaries of this economic policy simply get richer at the expense of everyone else.

     Posted by Metteyya at 10/16/2008 @ 1:14pm

101. Obama should never have given McCain a free pass on the issue of torture: McCain has come out strongly in favor of waterboarding which is illegal because it contravenes the Geneva Conventions. Let's remember McCain has voted with Bush 90% of the time, and that means the Iraq invasion without UN support, torture, the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act. How anyone can vote for this barbaric man who dumped his wife (who was crippled while he was in Vietnam) in order to marry a richer heiress.His violent and unpredictable temper is out of control.America made a fatal mistake in electing and then re-electing George Bush who has now murdered over 1.2 million people and counting. If we make another fatal mistake, we will never recover.

     Posted by mystic at 10/16/2008 @ 1:22pm

102. Under a major rewrite of U.S. labor law being promoted by unions, when more than 50% of employees sign authorization cards, the NLRB would have to recognize the new union. No campaign. No secret ballot.

     Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 08:11am

     Yes!! Finally a fair system of voting the union in. Without months and months of employers pitting employees against each other. Without employers buying votes through veiled threats and promises of promotions and cash payoffs.

     Wow! The Employee Free Choice Act. Vote Yes to get America unionized again

     Posted by chaoszen at 10/16/2008 @ 1:26pm

103. Sorry to get off subject, but I could have sworn (rewound it 5 times) that at the McCain rally today a supporter yelled out "Kill Obama", then people cheered and McCain continued on as if nothing happened. Does McCain not know that the Networks are going to pick up on that, and that he should have done the right thing and reprimanded that supporter??

     Posted by phantastek at 10/16/2008 @ 1:46pm

104. "Looks like an Obama victory promises to bring the fast track to union-demanded legislation stripping workers of the right to a private vote in union certification elections."

     Yea Ponti, like anyone here believes that you're even remotely concerned about workers.

     Posted by brunowe at 10/16/2008 @ 2:05pm

105. Posted by phantastek at 10/16/2008 @ 1:46pm Yeah I noticed. 2 male voices say "Kill Obama" and shortly after a womans voice says clearly, "Kill Obama." McDick hesitated a bit as he heard each one but apparently decided just to forge ahead without aknowledging it.

     His base is rife with nutcases..

     Posted by chaoszen at 10/16/2008 @ 2:14pm

106. Posted by chaoszen at 10/16/2008 @ 2:14pm

     Birds of a feather...

     Posted by chaoszen at 10/16/2008 @ 2:20pm

107. Posted by brunowe at 10/16/2008 @ 2:05pm

     "Yea Ponti, like anyone here believes that you're even remotely concerned about workers."

     Nice dodge, BRUNOWE, but it isn't MY candidate who proposes to strip workers of the right to a private vote.

     Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 2:44pm

108. Posted by chaoszen at 10/16/2008 @ 1:26pm

     "Yes!! Finally a fair system of voting the union in. Without months and months of employers pitting employees against each other. Without employers buying votes through veiled threats and promises of promotions and cash payoffs."

     Yeah, that right to a private vote is just so inconvenient, especially when you keep losing, eh? Better to make everybody vote publicly, all the better to intimidate people, eh my jack-booted thug of friend?

     If parasities like you aren't enough to keep people from voting Democratic, nothing will.

     Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 2:49pm

109. lvliberty-You have no clue as to what relationship,if any,that Obama has with Ayers.Obama did not say that he wanted to murder unborn children,but expressed the view that we must find ways to cut back on abortions,unlike you,who promotes abstinence only which leads to more abortions.Nor can you show anything Marxist and only have anger and tantrum to offer.You are worse than FrankGrits and want our destruction if things don't go your way.In your hypocrisy you still won't address the lies being told by Palin.

     Posted by i'm nobody at 10/16/2008 @ 2:55pm

110. USA TODAY ON "CARD CHECK:" Workers deserve to hear both sides, vote in private. "Labor has seen its role decline since the 1950s, when about a third of all private sector employees belonged to unions, compared with about 7.5% today. So it's understandably eager to find ways to expand membership, particularly at a time when workers are feeling economically vulnerable. But undermining democratic principles is not the answer."

     For the left, including Barack Obama, undermining democratic principles apparently IS the answer.

     Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 4:02pm

111. An honest day's work for an honest day's pay, The 40 hour work week, child labor reform, overtime rules, cost of living increases. Boy we union guys are assholes sucking the life out of American Industry. Pontificus please stop talking labor issues like your name is Sam fucking Gompers, because it is obvious that you are so ignorant (or independently wealthy) that you forget what has been won in the long hard struggle that is the American Labor Movement. The rights that most workers, Union or Non-Union enjoy today were won by organized labor. For better than 20 years workers have been under direct attack. Our government's conservative policies have done nothing but tear down the Unions. Is it not at all curious to you how this assault correlates directly with the decline in American industry. We have become a nation that rewards slick manipulation of loose banking laws rather than an honest day's work for an honest day's pay. So Ponti, If you are one of the fine people lucky enough to join the ruling class in this country do something that benefits your people be an engineer, a doctor, a researcher. Banking is the equivalent of pimping and not worthy of the power and privelage you have earned or inherited. If you are not a mamber of the ruling class then wake the fuck up!!!!!!!!

     Posted by unionyes399 at 10/16/2008 @ 4:36pm

112. Oh yeah, workers' feelings of economic vulenerability ceased to be the issue about three weeks ago. For the average middle class family in this country the shit has hit the fan. It's not about retirement or accumulation of wealth for those of us just emerging in today's middle class, it is merely about survival.

     Posted by unionyes399 at 10/16/2008 @ 4:54pm

113. "incidentally I have had many law firms as my clients, including some venerable firms.

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/16/2008 @ 1:04pm | ignore this person | warn this person "

     Anyone can clean carpets, even those of the most venerable law firms.

     Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 5:00pm

114. Aside from mcCain's apparent quick temper and instability according to the testimony of others, you may recall he was one of the criminals of the Savings and Loan Scandal of the 1980s.

     Posted by quiact at 10/16/2008 @ 5:20pm

115. lvliberty-There aren't any unions in Marxism since there is no need for them.Do you know that person and know them to be lazy or are you passing judgment on an unknown person?

     Posted by i'm nobody at 10/16/2008 @ 5:52pm

116. Obama applauded mccain's running mate--unethical bimbo Sarah Palin--for her work in funding programs for special needs children?!!! look it up. _alin slashed funding 62% her first year in office and mc'hame' voted along with his cronies against a 30% increase! http://www.votesmart.org/issue_keyvote_member.php?cs_id=V2801 I am a mother of a child with down syndrome. I am tired of the lack of funding which (as Obama again suggested) goes to autism only, I can tell you what I do know after 12 years. Down Syndrome gets NO FUNDING. They are considered "functional". My niece has not gotten government assistance since she was 3. They will not pay for additional services, and rely on the public school system to give her what she needs. She gets 60 minutes a week of speech in school. That is broken down to 3 -20 minute sessions. The 20 minutes includes the time it takes for her to walk down the hall to the speech room, and walk back to her classroom. When I try to take her to outside speech, the insurance companies will not cover it- "pre-existing and the school provides", and the government says the same thing.

     On the flip side, Autism gets ALL FUNDING. If you have a child with autism, or if your child is an "undiagnosed", they are classified under the autism umbrella. Under that umbrella, you receive speech, OT and PT and, get this- the therapists COME TO YOUR HOUSE!!! I have several friends with children with autism, and it makes me cry! They cannot believe I don't get anything. The moment these children come home from school, the therapists are there. Some even pick the kids up from school so the parent can take care of their other children. Here's what I have come to understand. If your child has Down Syndrome or mental retardation, they are considered "tra

     Posted by quemdelune at 10/16/2008 @ 6:00pm

117. Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 2:49pm

     Workers having the freedom to organize without impediment is Democratic and should be the right of every patriotic American.

     Putting barricades in the way of organizing hard working Americans is Fascist and grossly un-American.

     We know who is on which side here..

     Posted by chaoszen at 10/16/2008 @ 6:30pm

118. "Put simply, the core mission of the Republican party over the last 50 years has been to play reverse Robin Hood: "Take from the middle class and give to the rich",

     Posted by lmiele at 10/16/2008 @ 1:00pm | ignore this person | warn this person"

     Wouldn't reverse Robin Hood be to take from the poor and give to the rich? But maybe they didn't have a middle class in Robin Hood's day. Upward mobility wasn't very easy in Robin Hood's day, either.

     Philosophically, was Robin Hood good or bad? Is it right to take (forcibly) from anyone, regardless of income bracket, and give to another? Steal from the rich and give to the middle class; Steal from the middle class and give to the lower class; Steal from the lower class and give to the homeless; Steal from the homeless men and give to the homeless women; Steal from the homeless women and give to the homeless children; On and on... Who appointed Robin Hood with the power to make such decisions?

     Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 6:37pm

119. Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 6:37pm

     People will generally be less apt to steal anything from one another in an economically equal society. A large strong healthy middle class will usually bring out the good side in people.

     Start backing people into a corner with a lopsided distribution of wealth and people get nasty, real nasty. Any animal including and especially the human animal will fight visciously and do all manner of crazy things when they are cornered with no place to go.

     Ever notice how social democracies in Europe like Denmark have much much lower crime rates?

     Posted by chaoszen at 10/16/2008 @ 6:54pm

120. "Put simply, the core mission of the Republican party over the last 50 years has been to play reverse Robin Hood: "Take from the middle class and give to the rich",

     Posted by lmiele at 10/16/2008 @ 1:00pm | ignore this person | warn this person"

     Robin Hood. Isn't this, in essence, what communism strives to achieve? Leveling the playing field, making everyone equal? Take from the producers and give to the non-producers? Do any of you know the communist equivalents of Warren Buffet or Bill Gates? I don't. It seems the most powerful people are members of the government. The Robin Hoods making all the calls. Surely in China there are some super wealthy industrialists. But who are they, and what power do they wield?

     Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 6:58pm

121. "Ever notice how social democracies in Europe like Denmark have much much lower crime rates?

     Posted by chaoszen at 10/16/2008 @ 6:54pm | ignore this person | warn this person"

     Being Denmark would be great. Then we wouldn't be burdened with keeping Denmark safe. We could rest easy and let someone else take care of that.

     Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 7:05pm

122. Do places like Denmark and Finland have a big problem with immigration? I mean, since they are model societies with model economies, how do they manage the untold millions of people who try to become citizens each year (legally and illegally)?

     Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 7:11pm

123. Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 6:58pm

     China is not a communist country. It is a fascist totalitarian capitalist hybrid. Communism does not work for various reasons. It is an idealistic failure.

     A social democracy on the other hand seems to have promise if you examine a number of them around the world.

     And why do you think we need to protect other countries. All of them have existed for far longer than ourselves and can take care of themselves. For the United States to attempt to be the worlds policemen is imperialist and suspect.

     All the resources we currently use to "police" the world could better be used at home.

     Posted by chaoszen at 10/16/2008 @ 7:21pm

124. "All the resources we currently use to "police" the world could better be used at home.

     Posted by chaoszen at 10/16/2008 @ 7:21pm | ignore this person | warn this person "

     Well now, this may be a point of agreement between us. However, I suspect we would be met with fierce opposition if we even hinted of withdrawing our forces from ally countries. They have lived long enough under our protection assume it as a right, and they would probably be none too happy to loose it. Especially with neighbors like Russia and places like Iran and Syria close enough at hand.

     Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 7:28pm

125. Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 7:11pm

     Countries like Denmark, Finland and Norway have very strict immigration policies. They are somewhat leary of foreigners and have been for a long time.

     Im not saying we should become like them. Im only suggesting we should look at them and see what might work for us.

     Posted by chaoszen at 10/16/2008 @ 7:31pm

126. Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 7:28pm

     That's what happens when people become dependent on others. It doesn't mean that the United States and Europeon countries should not cooperate diplomatically to further mutual interests.

     If you are right then maybe it's time to cut the cord. And share the responsibility of mutual protection.

     Posted by chaoszen at 10/16/2008 @ 7:36pm

127. Does an accurate description of Socialism constitute "incessant bullshit"?

     Speaking of twentith century horrors, Socialism's close neighbor, Communism, is responsible for the deaths of 100 million innocent people. I'm interested to know what "horrors" corporations have caused.

     (I'll spot you the 20,000 deaths caused by Union Carbide in Bhopal India. You've only got 99,980,000 deaths to go.)

     Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/16/2008 @ 08:42am

     No, Darin, the incessant bullshit is the continuing statements that Obama is a socialist. You know, like "he's a Muslim" or "he's a terrorist sympathizer". That incessant bullshit.

     Your 100 million figure is from...where? And World War II was started by corporatists - fascists, Darin - and resulted in 56 million deaths. Add to that Vietnam (2 million), Iraq (1.2 million), the destabilization of the Cambodian government that allowed Pol Pot to seize power (2 million) and any number of deaths resulting from the overthrow of legitimate governments in order to serve corporate interests, deaths domestically and globally from the desire for tobacco, chemical, military, etc. profits - it doesn't have to be warfare, after all - and you've got tens of millions of deaths caused by corporations pursuing their interests above all else.

     Posted by jmusolino at 10/17/2008 @ 02:31am

128. Anyone can clean carpets, even those of the most venerable law firms. Posted by Person at 10/16/2008 @ 5:00pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     oh is that your resume? cleaning carpets seems about right for your intelligence level.

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/17/2008 @ 09:08am

129. Countries like Denmark, Finland and Norway have very strict immigration policies. They are somewhat leary of foreigners and have been for a long time. Im not saying we should become like them. Im only suggesting we should look at them and see what might work for us. Posted by chaoszen at 10/16/2008 @ 7:31pm | ignore this person | warn this person

     I could not find the word leary in my dictionary

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/17/2008 @ 09:11am

130. I could not find the word leary in my dictionary

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/17/2008 @ 09:11am

     I could not find the word "leary" in my dictionary.

     Posted by frosty zoom at 10/17/2008 @ 09:34am

131. Posted by emile duBois at 10/17/2008 @ 09:11am

     Remember if JOHANNESROLF/EMILE corrects your spelling....

     he'll slip up himself within a few days...

     then NAIL him!

     LOL

     Posted by Maskdelta at 10/17/2008 @ 09:36am

132. leery.

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/17/2008 @ 10:19am

133. Does an accurate description of Socialism constitute "incessant bullshit"?

     Speaking of twentith century horrors, Socialism's close neighbor, Communism, is responsible for the deaths of 100 million innocent people.

     Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 10/16/2008 @ 08:42am

     .

     Whoa!!! Speaking BS Darin...you might want to back up a second because your spreading it pretty thick.

     You were talking about the evils of 'socialism'...then kind of slid over to 'communism'. The 'close neighbors' thing doesn't really work, no matter how much BS your pack around it.

     And then there's the whole "deaths of 100 million innocent people" thing. 100 million of them huh? All innocents huh? Do you have a source?

     (We'd just like to know if that was a WAG or a NOMA.)

     Posted by Lillian at 10/17/2008 @ 10:41am

134. CINCINNATI (Reuters) - After Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama made him into the most famous plumber in America, it turns out Joe Wurzelbacher isn't a licensed plumber after all. Oh, and his real name is Sham.

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/17/2008 @ 10:46am

135. "everybody vote publicly, all the better to intimidate people, eh my jack-booted thug of friend?

     If parasities like you aren't enough to keep people from voting Democratic, nothing will.

     Posted by pontificus at 10/16/2008 @ 2:49pm | ignore this person | warn this person "

     Actually the intimidation comes from the employers. Union organizers aren't allowed in the workplace and employers often don't provide the required list of eligible voters. There are periodic cases of pro-union workers being fired. Employers can distribute anti-union materials at any time while pro-union workers can only do so during lunch breaks. Employers can have mandatory staff meetings to argue against the union and call in workers for one-on-one talks with supervisors for the same reason (often to intimidate the worker), pro-union workers don't have that flexibility. Although employers are barred from making explicit threats, they can still engage in forms of harassment such as punitive changes in duties and schedules.

     The point is that, if you look at the respective power being held by the union organizers and the employer, it's rather clear who has the bigger jackboots.

     Posted by brunowe at 10/17/2008 @ 11:00am

136. "Not tax cuts -his biggest lie in the campaign

     No, they are marxist redistribution of wealth payments that go primarily to people who have no tax liability."

     Again LL with the casual abuse of the term "marxist". Not every redistribution of wealth is Marxist. Name one "means of production" that Obama has advocated seizing.

     "Unionism=laziness, the last refuge of the habitual slacker

     Unionism=marxism

     Posted by lvliberty1 at 10/16/2008 @ 5:39pm | ignore this person | warn this person"

     Really, exactly which unions have advocated Marxist policies? UAW? UMW?SEIU? Incidentally, collectively bargaining for salaries, benefits and workplace rules isn't Marxist.

     Numbers on productivity at union and non-union shops?

     The term "Marxist" has about as much substance coming from you as it did coming from Archie Bunker.

     Posted by brunowe at 10/17/2008 @ 11:21am

137. If parasities like you ...

     gosh, I love that kind of talk

     Posted by emile duBois at 10/17/2008 @ 11:37am

138. To see the right wing-nut base, just go to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRqcfqiXCX0

     caution: disturbing video

     Posted by leftofcenter at 10/17/2008 @ 2:46pm

139. Remember if JOHANNESROLF/EMILE corrects your spelling.... he'll slip up himself within a few days... then NAIL him! LOL

     Posted by Maskdelta at 10/17/2008 @ 09:36am

     actually,

     that's why i corrected his dreadful punctuation.

     Posted by frosty zoom at 10/17/2008 @ 4:35pm

140. Slope and others, unless you have a crystal ball which shows Obama winning please hold off on your premonitions.We still have a couple of weeks to go and anything can happen. We live in a racist country full of ignorant misconceptions about other cultures and race. Don't forget the Bradley Effect and don't pretend this is not going to be a fight to the end. The race is very close and we have to focus our energy on what we we can do to keep the momentum going...

     Posted by scruples at 10/20/2008 @ 12:17pm

141. Can't let jrm off. Give us some examples, actual, real examples. WHAT YOU SAY IS PURE PROJECTION OF YOURSELF--HOW YOU DO THINGS!.

     Posted by rosenhw at 10/20/2008 @ 6:25pm