Reading over yesterday’s post and subsequent comment exchange (and resulting RL convos), I was inspired by a comment made by Ken, saying that being a PLP member and Republican ideological supporter means I am “delusional and hilarious”. Yeah, that irritated me on many levels, not the least of which is that many people seem to think that Republicans are some “big bad”… some evil group of people that are sitting around just thinking of ways to destroy the world. So I thought perhaps a bit of discussion related to the ideology and history of the GOP is in order.
The GOP, or Republican Party, was founded in 1854 by anti-slavery activists. They were created to oppose the expansion of slavery into Kansas, breaking off from the Democratic party and becoming the Republican Party. The vision of the US emphasized higher education, banking, railroads, industry and cities. Their first president was Abraham Lincoln, elected 1860. They have more than 55m registered members and are the second largest political party in the US. They are best known as the conservative party. But what does that mean?
- They believe that law-making is the province of the legislature and that judges should refrain from “legislating from the bench”.
- They believe in greater limitations being placed upon federal power and giving more power to the States (as compared to the Democrats).
- They believe that corporate and personal decision making is most important in fostering economic prosperity, favouring a free market.
- They believe that reduced income taxes increase GDP growth – thusly creating a bigger pool to pull taxes from and thereby increasing revenue to the gov’t.
- They believe the private-sector are more efficent than the gov’t in helping the poor (by definition gov’ts are unwieldy) and thus believe the answer is providing higher amounts of grants available to failth-based and other private charitable organizations.
- They introduced and strongly supported the Welfare Reform of 1996, which Clinton signed into law, which has been proven to have lead many former welfare recipients to find jobs.
- They do not support “socialized” universal health care, being more in favour of personal or employer-based healthcare supplemented by the gov’t.
- They oppose raising minimum wage as it has been proven to cause companies to cut jobs and thusly harm those who would actually get the benefits of the increase.
- They started the EPA, the US Park Service and believe that gov’t need to create incentives for companies to invest in environmental technologies.
- They believe that marriage is a man and a woman, but do not oppose civil unions for same-sex couples.
- They favour pro-life and pro-choice, depending on which state you are looking at.
- They support class-based affirmative action as opposed to race or sex based.
- They favour school choices through voucher systems for private schools, charter schools and favour greater accountability being held by the schools whose students under-perform.
- They disapprove of interventionalist foreign policy.
Not everything they believe I agree with but the fundamentals, yeah. Republicans are not evil people, they are simply people.
Bermuda Fables 
Alsys,
I didnt say that you were delusional and hilarious for being a PLP supporter and Republican, or at least I didnt mean that.
It was for other reasons. I just didnt understand how you could support the PLP for many of the reasons I presume you do, and then support the Republican party.
Little Johnny…
A teacher in Elmira , New York , who is a McCain supporter, asked her 4th
grade class, “How many of you are McCain fans?”
Not really knowing what a McCain fan is, but wanting to be liked by the
teacher, all the kids raised their hands, except for Little Johnny.
The teacher asked Little Johnny why he has decided to be different.
Little Johnny said, “Because I’m not a McCain fan.”
The teacher asked, “Why aren’t you a McCain fan?”
Johnny said, “Because I’m a Democrat.”
The teacher asked him why he’s a Democrat. Little Johnny answered, “Well,
my Mom’s a Democrat and my Dad’s a Democrat, so I’m a Democrat.”
Annoyed by this answer, the teacher asked, “If your mom was a moron and
your dad was an idiot, what would that make you?”
With a big smile, Little Johnny replied, “That would make me a McCain fan.”
Oh gee thanks.. that made me feel so much better. I’m assuming you know me personally then :). That’s different.
Ken, I don’t expect anyone to agree with me and my values (some of which in my opinion, are shared by the PLP and Republicans and alternatively between the PLP and the Democrats) but I just want to make the point that neither side is wrong, per se. They are good and bad things in each party, as there are in each person. Just because I look at things differently than you does not make either you OR I wrong, it simply makes us two different people.
woman in a hot air balloon realized she was lost. She lowered altitude and spotted a man in a boat below. She shouted to him, “Excuse me, can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago, but I don’t know where I am.”
The man consulted his portable GPS and replied, “You’re in a hot air balloon approximately 30 feet above a ground elevation of 2,346 feet above sea level. You are 31 degrees, 14.97 minutes north latitude and 100 degrees, 49.09 minutes west longitude.”
She rolled her eyes and said, “You must be a Republican.”
“I am,” replied the man. “How did you know?”
“Well,” answered the balloonist, “everything you told me is technically correct, but I have no idea what to make of your information, and I’m still lost. Frankly, you’ve not been much help to me.”
The man smiled and responded, “You must be a Democrat.”
“I am,” replied the balloonist. “But how did you know?”
“Well,” said the man, “You don’t know where you are or where you’re going. You’ve risen to where you are due to a large quantity of hot air. You’ve made a promise that you have no idea how to keep, and now you expect ME to solve your problem. You’re in EXACTLY the same position you were in before we met, but somehow, now, it’s MY fault.
And 1854 was the turning point. Counld’nt make any more monies off of Slavery. Prior too that it was ok. Now they want to tax the middle guy and give the big fish tax breaks, and it will continue under McCain.
I’m a Truman fan and always will be. The backbone of the US is the working class and pay more taxes than the wealthy…fact.
I need a rum………no back and forth from me.
Have a great day. As for the jokes, a Portagee was on a airplane and the engines died at 30,000 feet……………
Actually Rummy, it is more than they don’t believe in penalizing someone for working their butts off and becoming successful. Graduated taxation means that you are saying that if you work hard and do a good job and thusly make lots of money, you should pay twice as much (percentage-wise) as the next person?
It does not mean tax breaks for the rich, it means having the same criteria for all, regardless.
I’m not gonna argue with you dear. But 35% of my earnings of $80,000 a year and the same for someone making $3.7 million just don’t add up…….so I better leave it there for now.
Then again…your an Onion so it really does not affect you except for the fact you may work for an American controlled company. Hell…tourism is out the window and Wall Street is falling apart ( not really..it’s still there and people work) it’s the economy and thats global.
I think I’ll have a double whilst I can still afford one and whilst supplies of cane sugar are still available from our friends down south.
Alsys,
I have to disagree with your points regarding the GOP. Your first paragraph is technically correct, then goes way off in your bullet points. I’ll cite just a few.
[li][i]They believe that law-making is the province of the legislature and that judges should refrain from “legislating from the bench”.[/i] Actually, the GOP has skewed the original intent of the Constitution, which was for the States to make their own directives. Notice now how all federal judge positions and state positions are POLITICAL appointments. The judiciary was supposed to be separate.[/li]
[li][i] They believe in greater limitations being placed upon federal power and giving more power to the States (as compared to the Democrats).[/i] Well, they SAY that, but every Republican administration has actually INCREASED the size of the govt, and also their influence.[/li]
[li][i]They believe that reduced income taxes increase GDP growth – thusly creating a bigger pool to pull taxes from and thereby increasing revenue to the gov’t.[/i] Again, this is not the case, the economy has grown under Democratic administrations, and shrank under the GOP.[/li]
Honestly, I can’t understand how anyone who believes in basic human rights could vote for the Republicans in general. I like Ron Paul, but he’s quite left of centre. The rest I don’t care for. The GOP has minimised people’s rights every chance they have got, but they have hoodwinked the general American into thinking that they represent their interests. That is the biggest lie ever. You could take every NASTY thing ever said about the UBP, and say it TRUTHFULLY about the GOP over the last hundred years. With the exception of being good for the economy, that is.
The facts just don’t support their claims. I like Lincoln. I like Teddy Roosevelt (the Parks and EPA man). The rest have been a complete waste of time. Just watch the hypocrisy of every GOP mouthpiece out there (Rove, Hannity, Morris, Coulter, O’Reilly, etc) and ask yourself if that’s really the kind of people you want to associate yourself with. Don’t buy their hype. It will just end in tears for you and the rest of us who have to put up with their decisions.
Damn, I thought you could do HTML tags in the comments box. Can you clean it up?
I respect that you believe in the fundamentals but the Republicans have increased government spending and the role that government plays in a person’s life such spying. You said that McCain didn’t support the Bush tax cuts but he does now. You stated that you think Obama is lying. I would agree I don’t think he has a chance of doing some of the things he says. Do you think McCain isn’t lying? After all they are politicians. A politicians wins by convincing the most people he/she will serve their constituents’ causes. What makes you support McCain because he is called a Maverick because he goes against the Republican party line. I appreciate the open debate.
Sorry Renaissance Man, I don’t actually know how to as yet.
I will admit there are things about the Republican playbook that I disagree with but there are way more about the Democratic playbook that I disagree with. No one gov’t is ever going to be perfect. The Democrats have made some seriously bad missteps too. But as far as what ideology I more relate to, yeah, its the Republicans.
The bermudian media says the same stuff about the PLP. Bias is where you find it.
@Wildchild – Yeah, McCain has changed his stances quite a bit in recent months but i hope that is more “election fever” than anything else. And you’re right, politicians all lie, by definition 🙂 My main issue is that Obama is supposedly “not the same old” yet when pushed, he is said to be “a politician after all”. He can’t be different and the same, can he? And if he is, then hold everyone to the same standards.
And yeah, you are right in a sense. He isn’t called a maverick so much because he goes against the party line, it’s because he goes against the “Bush” line. To me, paralleling in Bermuda, Bush does not equal republican.
Alsys,
You’ll need to cite some examples for me. History has shown that the Democrats have consistently been better for the US every time they were in power. This goes back many decades. Hell, you only have to remember things from a week ago to highlight the GOP’s hypocrisy.
BTW, you’re a bit off base with the local media reference. It’s a perception, nothing more. Certainly in recent times, you would be extremely hard pressed to show any credible examples of outright bias. Outside of editorial commentary, but that’s commentary, not news. The great thing about newspapers is that they HAVE to print the truth. If they don’t, call them on it, and if there’s no retraction and apology, then sue them for libel. The law’s on your side there. This doesn’t always apply to broadcast media though, particularly radio.
Agreed with no party is perfect, but some are a damn sight better than others. Please remember that the ideology of the GOP listed earlier is nothing but a populist myth. They really just look after the richest 1% of the population, not middle class people at all. They’re just better at getting their message out, and polishing off all of the rough bits that the electorate is too lazy to look for. Complacency is your enemy when it comes to politics.
@Renaissance – The Dems have been in charge of the Congress for two years and they have managed to do nothing. In fact the budget has risen several times and the deficit is huger. Pelosi promised all these things and what has she and the rest of the Dems accomplished?
Dems had Carter – who started the ball rolling on middle east v american aggression and Reps had Reagan. Everytime the Democrats have been in power they have purposely weakened the American military by both numbers and money. I’m actually hard-pressed (I like that phrase – kudos) to find examples of things that the Dems actually DO.
Sorry, Ren, I disagree. I go by actual policies and the Republicans do more, in my opinion. Some good and some bad (depending on how you look at it) but they do.
I just found this when I was researching my reply:
http://hangrightpolitics.com/2006/10/01/democrats-on-the-wrong-side-of-history-for-forty-years/
By the way, I’d like to thank everyone for posting. I like learning new things and this is one way to do such. Please don’t get offended at my opinions, as they are simply that, mine own opinions. I’m not trying to be right and I’m not trying to make anyone else out as wrong. And I don’t represent anyone besides myself (which I’m sure more PLP-ers breathe a sigh of relief for 🙂 ).
I would agree Alsys that Bush doesn’t equal the Republican line but McCain has changed his stance to kind of mirror Bush’s. So he really isn’t a Maverick so much anymore.
I guess because of your reasoning I don’t understand why you pick McCain over Obama. McCain is using the change line also quite effectively. I think everything you dislike about Obama can be equally said for McCain.
One last question, I got the impression that you felt if was justified with going into Iraq. What about Afghanistan? How do you feel about the possibility of going in to Iran? Equally Obama is willing to go into Pakistan. I think the possibility of this is important to consider for all voters. The last tenet of the Republican party you listed was to not have an interventionalist foreign policy.
Alsys I appreciate this space to voice my opinions and to hear others.
Honestly, I like McCain’s stance in the pro-life area. I don’t agree that Roe v Wade should be overturned but I think that anything that discourages abortion as a method of contraception is good. I am pro-choice in a sense but I think that a child’s right begins at conception and that one shouldn’t just have abortions willy-nilly. For the right reasons, not becuase you can’t be bothered to use a contraceptive. I do believe that it is a person’s choice but I just think that if you can help people to truly consider their actions and consider that child’s life.. well, all good.
Bush’s main tag line in 2000 was “change” also. And he ran quite effectively on it, in fact being called a bit of a maverick himself. I seriously think it’s not only the politicians that are the problem, it’s the system. I don’t think Obama fully understands that. He will make an amazing president some day, I just don’t think he understands enough of the process to be that person right now. Not so much experience as understanding.
I don’t agree with the war,no. I personally thought and think it was a stupid thing to do. But we can’t change the past. What we can do is deal with the go-forward. They shouldn’t have gone in the way they did (which Biden disagrees with me on – being one of the main components of going to Iraq in the first place) nbut now that they are there, I simply don’t think that just withdrawing is the answer. Nothing is so simple. From reading the speeches and watching a few of Obama’s, I think he thinks it is that simple. That’s scary to me.
As to Afganistan, Obama firmly backs focusing more troops and money into Afganistan. Actually one of his main election platforms. Are you asking if I agree with him on that?
Yeah, I disagree on the no interventionalist foreign policy. I believe that those who can help should. But do it right.
Russia spent years in Afganistan and left defeated. There’s nothing there for anyone except the Afganistanians. It is ruled by war lords and opium heads. We stop using it there won’t be a market. Butu back on subject, the next President won’t have to worry too much about the above as his hands will be full dealing with Bolivia et al and Russia’s sucking up (oil and all) with/too Iran.
Mark my words….
I feel a song comming on………I see a pale moon rising…………..
Be good…..make the right choice and vote Clinton/Nader…..
OK, two years of having all of your stuff blocked by presidential veto is hardly a fair comparison. Remember that this is a presidential budget, not a congressional one.
FYI, Carter just had the misfortune to be in office after the overthrow of the Shah. What is CONVENIENTLY omitted by the media is that twenty years prior, when Iran was the ONLY democracy in the Middle East, the CIA overthrew the sitting government because they wouldn’t sell oil to the US at less than they sold it to other countries. The Shah was a trumped-up position that had no historical reference. Don’t blame Carter for previous administration foreign policy backlash. The memories are long there, they still don’t trust the US, and why should they?
Iran is actually a convenient microcosm of US interventionist policies, which, ironically, are mostly GOP events. Here’s the foreign policy in a nutshell: Here’s the world. Here’s a place that has something we want (oil, sugar, location, money). How can we make money off this country Are they friendly to us? If so, great. If not, coerce them to get what we want.
What happens is that after about twenty years (a generation) the populace tends to have a backlash against the people that the US put in charge, because they’re a bad bunch to begin with. Examples like Saddam, previously in prison in Iraq, before Reagan helped him become President of Iraq to look after US interests once the Shah wasn’t in the region anymore. Or the Taliban, Reagan’s freedom fighters against the Soviets in Afghanistan, now the enemy. Or Mohamed Farah Aideed in Sudan? Or Milosevic in the Balkans? Think about most foreign incursions that the US has done, and draw the parallels. These are the results of the seeds that US foreign policy has sown.
Umm, that rightist blog you referenced is meaningless drivel, and inaccurate. ACTUAL history is much more complimentary towards the Dems. Carter was a military man himself, originally designated to be Hyman Rickover’s successor, to develop the nuclear Navy. It is inaccurate to portray him as being weak on military matters.
I am actually not a partisan. I rely on facts and not opinions. The facts just don’t support the GOP assertions.
“The surest way to stop the Republicans from telling lies about the Democrats is to tell the truth about the Republicans.” Adlai Stevenson
Enjoying the discourse.
See, that’s the thing. The sources I have read/looked up over the years veer towards the opposite being “fact”. And face it, history is written by the winners so that’s understandable. The problem for me is I can point at things the Reps have done, whether good or bad, but no so much on the Dems. Clinton is known as the “good” president but seems to have gotten that title through his lack of movement more than anything he actually did. And then when pressed, most people say well, all politicians are alike. If they are they why the divide? Is it because people like to have a side to argue from? I mean, I always thought of myself as a liberal until someone pointed out that my ideals sync up more with the republicans. After I stopped being immensely offended, I figured, hey let’s have a look at this and now I agree. Does that mean I think Dems are wrong? No. I just don’t agree with more of their stuff than I disagree with the Reps stuff (sorry if that is a confusing sentence).
The hardest thing about any political campaign is how to win without proving that you are unworthy of winning. ~Adlai E. Stevenson
Any American who is prepared to run for president should automatically, by definition, be disqualified from ever doing so. ~Gore Vidal
Do you have any sites or books that you can recommend? Not just for me but for the people lurking. I find most of the information from wikipedia and its links – mostly the links. Too easily abused even with the safeguards.
Are you asking for sources on the Iran government coup or something else? If so that was actually initially started by the British and what is now British Petroleum after Iran nationalized the oil business. According to National Geographic, the US stepped in because they were concerned that Iran might fall to Communism due to Russia’s influence in the region. Not saying that it is right but it is a nice article on Iran and the Persian culture.
Wildchild, anything that you find interesting really. I’m an information junkie really. National Geographic, you say? Thanks! Gonna look that up. Hey, maybe I won’t post on Palin and Biden tomorrow after all… 🙂
It was either August or July’s edition. Can check and get back to you.
Do they have it online do you think?
Wildchild is mostly right about the Brit initial involvement in Iran. The elected government was somewhat socialist, and quite frankly, that’s not a bad idea if you are a small country with a valuable resource. However, nationalising oil ruffled a few feathers (cut into the profits for the multi-nationals).
The US just has taken the mantle of empire building from the Brits for the past 100 years. I believe the article is online at NatGeo. They have a pretty good search engine which you can use to see the link. It is a bit pro-American, but then it’s a US publication. Mostly fair, though.
Sadly, Iran is just one of several cases of big business influencing governments to make concessions for them.
I will see what I can send your way re historical references regarding both parties.
I like your Stevenson quote too! Gore Vidal is also cool. I have many quotes which I reference.
Some humourous links for you.
The funny/sad thing is, it’s all true.
Renaissance Man I would be interested in any information you can find about Iran and US dealings of the past.
Alsys it is the August issue.
The best reason to not support McCain?
Sarah Palin
Here’s some good basic links to start at…
http://www.socialist.nu/middle-east/
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=1019
(several good links at Cato, this is just one)
One could go on for hours. I know some conservatives will say that this is liberal bias, but that’s not the case.
As for Sarah Palin, well, anyone who made rape victims pay for their own tests at hospitals is definitely NOT someone who should have any form of public office.
Renaissance Man, lol. Yeah, she seems to have a bit of an issue with telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Have a gander at http://www.politifact.com and http://www.ontheissues.org
Oh and wildchild, I never thought to go onto NatGeo. Thanks so much for that heads up!
I agree with Wiaruz.
Even if you like MCcain for whatever reason, the selection of palin and the lies or untruths and information that is coming out from her camp seem very shady. For her to be one heartbeat away from the presidency is a scary thing.
I agree, Ken. I intend to go more into detail about the VP choices but she is near Bush on my non-likeability scale. ‘Cept, I’m not sure she is as intelligent *cough… lol* as Bush (and yeah, that is sarcasm).
check this link. Mccain advisers are saying neither he not Palin are qualified to be CEOs, but are qualified to be President. WTF? I mean seriously. A country is a company plus a whole lot more. With a much bigger budget.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/16/fiorina.mccain/index.html
Alsys,
Thanks for those links. Finally some more balance.
Apologies for the double post, it didn’t show the first time.
Sarah Palin is very pretty, but unfortunately, that’s where her appeal stops.
As for McCain, do we REALLY need another doddering old dude in charge? REALLY? If he was truly progressive, maybe. There are so many better choices, though.
As for so many choices..show me. One or two Independents and the GOP and the Dems. Too late for another convention and that would be against ‘dee roolz’…
Damed if you do and still screwed if you don’t. Pullytiks….funny eh?
A great day too all the believers in Capitalism….. :+)
This is deep.
Why wont she cooperate?
I’m not sure, Ken, but it does not bode well for her credibility, what there is of it…
Alsys,
I hear ya on why you favour the Republicans from an ideology perspective but this election is not being made about ideology or issues, it is being made about personalities, as one McCain croonie stated.
That being the case and the fact the Sarah Palin simply cannot tell the truth and is as you yourself say, not credible, how on earth can you support the McCain/Palin ticket? I know neither you, me nor most posters on this site can vote in the U.S. but I have to question the basis for your support of McCain/Palin from a purely political perspective. I can understand why many in Bermuda and other offshore jurisdictions may have issue with Obama and his views on tax havens, but from a purely political perspective I see no credbility in either McCain, who doesn’t even know what economic fundamentals are, or Palin who utters complete lies in every sentence she speaks.
Here we have a woman who wants claims to have sold the jet on Ebay when in fact there were no takers and it was sold, at a loss through a broker. Here we have a woman who truly believes that because Russia is her next door neighbour means she is qualified on foreign policy, forget the fact that she has never even been to Russia.
Yep. She’s Bush with lipstick. A pro-life, gun toting creationist nut job, running as VP to a 72 year-old who has suffered 4 bouts of cancer and has a dodgy ticker.
The Republican party has lost its way in the last 8 years. I don’t agree with some of Obama’s leftish policies but i would prefer to have an intelligent, charismatic democrat with good advisors tha a Bush replicate and his hockey mom side kick.
For those who enjoy this type of thing….here’s the link to Wikileaks and the private email account of Sarah Palin which was recently hacked.
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin_Yahoo_account_2008
That’s horrible. That’s sure to garner quite a few sympathy votes for her, I’m sure. Good going…
Frankly, it frightens the life out of me. Is nothing sacred in this world.
Welcome to the new world, Martin… *sigh*
(And the answer is nope, not anymore).
Apparently a big issue is that Gov Palin has been using her personal email account for job related stuff. The problem with that is that it isn’t auditable. All business related emails should be on the business address so if they need it for investigations or reference either during or after her time, it is referenceable.
Alsys,
Do you think Mccain wanting to postpone the debate is really about the financial crisis? or is it becuase this week has been a bad one in the polls for him, and he needs a time-out?
personally i feel it was to make americans think he is putting counntry before campaign, but I loved Obama’s response that as President you have to deal with more than one thing at a time. You can’t take a time out to catch your breath.
ALso, did you catch Palin being interviewed by katie couric? How ridiculous was that?
I have to agree with Ken re: McCain this week.
I think his decision has backfired on him and he looks weak as a result.
Over and above what his campaign team said to him, I too can’t believe that someone didn’t whisper…”Erm…you will have to multi task as the President you know”.
Of equal importance is the remark that Obama made when he said the Presidential debate should not only continue as planned, but should be opened up to enable the American people to hear views on the financial crisis.
Maybe the reality is that McCain is struggling to distance himself from 8 years of George’s mess ups?
See, that’s the thing about politics. You see what you want to see. When I first heard about his decision I thought, yeah, exactly. I think it’s a good idea to suspend spending money on travelling and speechwriting when loads of Americans, the ones who come to hear you speak, are two seconds away from losing their proverbial shirts.
You see weak, I see someone who is deciding to focus his attention on the “once-in-a-century” crisis. Yeah, you have to be able to multitask but the important stuff, right? Have the debates in Washington where these guys can do what they are actuall getting paid to do… be american politicians, help make laws, help protect the american public.
Alsys,
Gimme a break. Are you serious???
You cannot see that this was a timeout for mccain? He wanted to stop Obama’s momentum. The election is in less that 6 weeks. The debate has been scheduled for weeks. He singularly does not play that important a role in the negotiations in DC.
How can Mccain want to be sensitive to the millions that are in financial trouble, but on the other hand, only wants to give tax breaks to the top 2% of the wealthy. it is not consistent.
Mccain is playing politics with this situation. And it is backfiring.
Maybe he should send his well-versed VP nominee in to debate Obama.
Why did Bush ask them to come to DC for negotiations if they don’t play that big a role?
A phot op..thats all. 100 Senators, – two = well deal with it.
Rums…:+}
Alsys,
Who would have thunk it but I agree with Rummy, that the invite to the whitehouse was nothing more than a photo op.
When you look at the deal that has been presented neither Obama nor McCain were directly involved, they were asked if they would support it and they both agreed they would but they had no direct involvement in the debate.
What I have a hard time understanding is how many in the media believe McCain won the debate. I tend to side with the results of the pre-debate polls of the public who believed Obama won te debate. McCain many have had a few sound bites but Obama clearly linked McCain to George W, especially with the war. What I found amusing was issue of the bracelets, McCain’s attempted to use his bracelet as a sign he was in touch on the war and that Americans wanted to the war, Obama quickly stated he had a bracelet as well and it was from a mother not wanting other mothers to lose kids in the war.
I think Obama showed his leadership abilities and how he would make decisions on foreign policy and this coupled with the fact that Obama seems to have a greater grasp of economics than McCain gave him the edge in this debate, a debate that McCain should have won hands down due to his “experience”. McCain needs to put aside his POW story because as Chris Rock said, “I am not going to support the guy that got caught, I am going to support the guy that got away.”
I fully understand the concerns that are being expressed in Bermuda about Obama’s view of tax havens and I also think the ad was unnecessary and lacked knowledge of what the Bermuda market is but Obama is trying to win an election. Will he follow through on his promise to shut down the tax loopholes that allow places like Bermuda to flourish? Who knows. I would only hope that before making any such decision he would educate himself on the exact role that Bermuda plays in the global insurance market what would happen to capacity and as such premium levels if Bermuda is “shut down”. The advantages of having Bermuda are greater than any taxes that are not being earned by the U.S. Government.
Sorry, that should read “post-debate” polls.
Guilden,
Obama has made tax havens and tax avoidance a centerpiece of his campaign. His tax program doesn’t add up if he doesn’t shut everything down [actually it still doesn’t add up because he’s about $60 billion light but that’s after an $80 billion offset for shutting down loopholes and tax havens.]
He can’t back down, even if he wanted to.
And the US simply doesn’t care what happens to Bermuda or the Bermuda insurance and reinsurance industry. From their point of view, if it’s not here it will be someplace else. And since Bermuda is the poster child for tax havens we’re directly in his sights.
By the way, on the bracelet issue, Obama’s use of his was like a little kid saying “I’ve got one of those too”. The soldier’s father had specifically requested that Obama not use it.
And he didn’t even know the soldier’s name, he had to read the bracelet – absolute lack of class.
By the way, you can hear the interview with the father and the very specific statement that Obama was not to use the bracelet.
[audio src="http://clipcast.wpr.org:8080/ramgen/wpr/wau/rt51080329_iraqwar5years.mp3" /]
Absolutely, McCain’s dash to DC to “save” the bailout talks last week was definiately because he needed a time out. Mr. Big Guy who didn’t do much. And Bush asked for them to come after that, not because he thought they could help, it was to side with McCain (don’t forget they’re on the same team).
And what good did it do? Look at today. No Go!
As far as the debate goes, I thought Obama was better. And, of course, you noticed, I’m sure, that McCain didn’t even have the decency to even look at Obama. Couldn’t even look him in the eye. I thought that was disgusting.
Looking forward to Thursday’s VP debate. You know I’m not a fan of Palin and I wish her no harm but sheesh she hasn’t performed very well has she. And I do mean “perform”. Wonder why she’s been out of sight for several days now.
Blankman,
I heard on Fox News, yes, Fox that there are some issues with the radio caller.
The mother of the soldier has defended Obama on his use of the bracelet see the following links:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-wi-obama-bracelet,0,6413408.story
http://www.startribune.com/29863889.html?elr=KArksDyycyUtyycyUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUU
I think the newspaper artciles can be accepted as more accurate and credible than the voice of a caller to a radio show. What do you think?
PS. I tried posting this before and it did not appears to accept so I am posting again. Thought I would explain myself if it posts twice.
Maggie,
As far as looking at each other, Obama’s continual peeks at McCain to see what he was doing next or whether he’d scored a hit of some sort only made him look insecure.
As far as content goes, Obama says nothing better than anyone. And I mean anyone. And nobody ever calls him on it.
When Jim Lehrer asked Obama “No matter which rescue plan prevails, what are you going to have to give up (in spending)” By the time Obama finished, he’d spent another 20 billion dollars!
And this is what “won” the debate??
I try to, blankman. Obama is intriguing and inspiring and eloquent. He’s also a politician who made his way up through chicago politics, perhaps the dirtiest politics in the States. I’d just like an honest answer from him for once, not one he has to consider. Speak from the heart. Some people might not agree with you but I’d respect you more for it.
Alsys,
This is politics and both Obama and McCain are playing the political game. Both are tryign to out do each other because he who out does his opponent wins.
One thing I have found in following these elections is that Obama is very consistent in his message where John McCain is all over the place. First he is a deregulator and now he wants more regulation. First he says the economic fundamentals are sound them he says he meant the U.S. workers. He said he was putting his campaign on hold to go to Washington to get the Bail Out measures sorted out, yet in the meeting with Bush, according to reports, he said absolutely nothing. Yesterday morning he took credit for negotiating a deal to ensure that the Bail Out Bill passed and then the bill failed yet he takes no credit for its failure. He and his surrogates claimed he had to go to Washington to handle this in person he could not do it by way of the telephone, yet reports have it he spent less than 2 hours in chambers and spent the rest of the time at his condo on the phone making calls. He later flew out of Washington and made more phone calls.
If he was more consistent in his appraoch I do believe he woudl be closer in the polls, well that and choosing a running mate that could give the electorate confidence that she could fulfill the role of president.
She gathered her foreign policy experience from living next door to Russia? When Putin raises his head he flies over Alaska? So I guess that means that any Alaskan could have been selected by McCain because that would all have this very same foreign policy experience.
Even fellow Republicans are requesting that Palin remove herself from this ticket because she is not in the least qualified for the role.
Consistency? You mean as compared to Obama saying stuff like how McCain opposed Obama’s paln that he put forward in congress about the economy last year, when he actually never tabled his plan AND McCain never said anything about it, either for or against… you know, mainly because it was never tabled? Or how Obama/Biden keep talking all about Palin and this Bridge to Nowhere, yet they both voted for it TWICE? Or Obama saying he never voted against the act that allowws partial abortion babies to be entitled to care under the government yet he actually did vote against it? Or how he said that he would use public funding for his campaign but then changed his mind becazuse of the cap? Or how he said he would not use the Oil Reserves a couple of months ago but now he’s all gung ho for it?
Face it, as is said often, politicians say what they think will get them elected. If you judge by voting records over the years, McCain has the most consistent message.
I concede that there are times over Obama’s career where he may have voted for or against something that he may now agree or disagree with but show me a politician that hasn’t. That is the nature of the beast your views tend to shift a little in the direction of the most support.
With regard to oil and energy, below is a CNN comparison of both candidates’ energuy polcies, which have probably shifted:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/09/news/economy/candidates_energy/index.htm
I still contend that during this campaign Obama has shown the most consistency of the two. The electorate seems to be focusing on how the candidates are conducting themselves now and Obama definitely seems to be the more presidential of the two. I believe the current polls show where the voting public stands on the two.
Alsys, I think you need to deal with more local politics. My friend you sound like a person from another country making points on how to get a visa. Your an onion and live there in Onion Land. Focus more on Bermuda and not the US elections.
I know, to some degree that it effects us all but lets clean up our own back yard and make plans fore the future as best we can. I for one will not rely on someone else to do it for me but I have the means and fortitude to try and plan something.
Your views may inspire you too your Republican attitude. Thas fine and only reflects the PLP party’s links with such.
Anyway..nothing personal…..just an opinion like yours and many others that will not effect any change on the outcome of the US elections. It'[s hereditary and culture based when it comes to voting. Obama is making a change and I am proud to say that I will vote for him in a few weeks.
A great day too all.
Honestly rummy, I am not sure whether to be offended or not. My opinion matters.. to me. Does it matter to anyone else? I can’t say. I have talked about local politics, just like I’ve talked about completely non-political things. If you aren’t interested in mine and others postings on here, you simply don’t have to read it. Easy.
Your absolutely correct. “Offended” ? Why would you say that? My opinion offends you? Thats a crisis in itself. I better shut up for now because I am very likely to make a comparison.
I have read your words from day one on local blogs and I get this ‘itchy feeling’.
Just a question. Is L.Furbert a single mother………
I don’t know what you are getting at, Rummy. What does Ms. Furbert have to do with the topic at hand?
Yes, I could focus more on Bermudian politics but as the US election is 6 weeks away and with how much Bermuda is directly affected by said election, I think this is important to us. You’re right in that ultimately the majority of the posters are not going to be voting in the election. And so what? It will and does affect us so it people want to have a say, why can’t they.
And no, your opinion doesn’t offend me, but your implication that i should focus on other subjects, for whatever reason, does.
It was not an implication, it was a statement of fact. Deal with your own backyard. The chips will fall but at least you would have done your part.
You have no say in any matter outside Bermuda , period. We have enough problems and should be focussing on them, and I know that some are interactive.
I’m just an old fart with an opinion but I will tell you this, my eggs are not in one basket but I know how to hold em, fold em, and scramble them.
Thanks for giving me a voice.
Blankman,
I don’t think Obama looked insecure because he looked at McCain. To me that was engaging his opponent. At least recongizing that he was on the stage. McCain couldn’t bear to look the guy in the eye not even just to greet each other.
Obama speaks of hope and I believe real change…McCain speaks the same ole same ole and you can’t really believe we need more of that. And the prospect of Palin taking over the oval office..may God help us all.
Maggie,
While I believe an Obama win would change American for the better, I think it needs to be understood why Bermuda has concerns with Obama.
The the mere fact that he has threatened to go after the tax havens and specifically mentioning Bermuda is enough to cause real concern. The Bermuda market is NOT what many in the U.S., including in my view Obama, view it to be.
I think if you take a look at the level of claims payment the Bermuda market has made for catastrophies in the U.S. you would get some idea of the important of the Bermuda market from a global perspective. Much of the capital that has been invested in the Bermuda insurance market probably would not be used as insurance capital in the U.S. and I think the Obama camp needs to understand that if the Bermuda market is “shut down” insurance capacity would shrink and the U.S. market would see significantly higher costs of premium.
And I think your just talking scare tactics. If not Bermuda,….somewhere else. whats your point?
I’m sorry Rummy, If not Bermuda what? I’m not sure which part of blankman’s post you are referring to.
alsys,
At the risk of putting words in Rummy’s mouth, I think he’s referring to a comment I made earlier. Obama (and the US) doesn’t care about Bermuda.
While I agree that Bermuda has to keep pounding on the fact that the Bermuda insurance and reinsurance industry is important to the US, I don’t think that argument will ultimately win. If the reinsurance business isn’t here it will be someplace else [probably not in the US but there are lots of other places].
Obama has made such a big deal about tax havens in general and Bermuda in particular that there is no way he can back down. Besides his tax plan calls for about $130 billion in tax cuts which he has to get back from somewhere – his ads are more than a little disingenuous in that he claims that closing loopholes and shutting down tax havens will make up the shortfall – it’s not enough but he’s going to have to collect those funds.
Your both wrong. I was refering to what Guilden said. You see, as usual, yah both jump to the wrong conclusion. As for Blankman, well yah no…yeah right…they know. Amazing..ones words are always interpreted to suit what channel/blog/forum they are on…….
And you wonder why there is no ‘conversation’? Don’t hate the Rummy nor his words, reflect on what you say, and how it affects everyday life. Guess I am a scapegoat but thats cool. Just prooves mighy points once more.
Good thing I am not a Lemming…..then again…I would mislead you right?…….
Plunk…………………………..
Guilden,
My post had nothing to do with that. I was addressing the debate and McCains obvious disdain for his opponent by not even looking at him.
I completely understand why Bermuda is concerned about Obama. This has been discussed on BermudaSucks as well. I lived in Bermuda for many years and raised my children there. I don’t want any harm to come to Bermuda either…..but….I do care deeply about my country too and we need Obama. I also really don’t think that he would completely destroy the economy of Bermuda. Changes need to be made but I don’t think he would be willing to completely cut off his nose to spite his face.
Here’s a fact check report from the VP debate last night, thought some might find it interesting:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_biden-palin_debate.html