
Image credit - The John McCain Website

NOTE: I had to split this sheet in half. You have to look at the next picture down to make sense of this one. The next one down lists the income divisions. My apologies...
Barack Obama's tax plan for Americans. Image - Mike Free via Creative Commons/Flickr
John McCain and Barack Obama met at Old Miss for their first debate only 53 hours after McCain announced he was suspending his campaign and had requested a stay. After Jim Lehrer introduced the candidates, the gloves came off and it was soon obvious that McCain and Obama were far apart in the way they would lead America.
Jim Lehrer prefaced the debate by saying 'tonight's debate is centered around foreign policy - which includes the global financial crisis...' This was probably done due to pressure from current events.
'What is your stand on the financial recovery plan?'
McCain wanted accountability, and made some mention of his recent trip to Washington. When pressed, he said he would vote yes on the plan. He did engage in some rhetoric about the trip and explained that he was working with other Republicans, but to his credit, he did not elaborate much on this.
Obama said he would vote yes, but wants no golden parachutes or big bonuses for CEO's. He wants to see help for homeowners in distress now. He made a comparison to the Great Depression, pointing out that the Federal government did eventually get their money back on a bailout that was done in the 1930's. He wants the bailout paid back, even if it takes years. Obama blamed Republican policies and deregulation for the crisis.
'Are there fundamental differences in how either of you would specifically deal with the crisis?'
Both candidates went off the subject here, going back and forth about earmarks and tax plans, and how they would either cut spending and make the budget more efficient. McCain claimed that Obama requested $935 million dollars in earmark spending during Obama's time in the Senate. McCain also said that total Federal earmark spending added up to $18 billion in 2007. He said he would cut earmarks from the budget and advertise the names of those lawmakers who sent such spending requests past his desk.
Obama responded by reminding everyone that although $18 billion was a lot of money, that George Bush's tax cuts alone added up to more than $300 billion, mostly to rich people and corporations.
At this point, both candidates argued their tax plans for several minutes. There were no major changes in their official platforms on taxes. Obama wants to cut taxes to the middle class and small business, while McCain wants to continue the 2001 Bush tax cuts while at the same time lowering the corporate tax rate, which he said would stimulate the economy. Both candidates want to go through the Federal budget and cut waste.
On the war in Iraq, the two candidates were as far apart as day and night. Obama wants the troops to come home from Iraq now, while expanding the U.S. role in Afghanistan. He reinterated his previous stand about the war, saying he was against it, and that it was based on bad intelligence. McCain wants 'victory with honor' in Iraq, but agreed more troops need to be in Afghanistan.
How would you address the possible threat of Iran?
Again, the two candidates had sharp differences on this issue. Obama said he wants more direct diplomacy with possibly hostile world leaders, rather than the Bush policy of refusing to meet with them. Obama called for more cooperation from other countries on sanctions against renegade governments, saying that when the U.S. goes it alone on sanctions, they don't work. He said these renegade countries just go elsewhere for trade to get what they need. He wants to work with Russia and China to help the U.S. enforce any sanctions. Obama said that the present policies with the governments of Iran and North Korea aren't working, because they both still have nuclear programs.
McCain was positively against any idea of meeting these leaders without pre-conditions. The debate moved over to the subject of Russia and Georgia. McCain spoke of his time meeting with the Georgian president, and that threats to the entire region were real.
In general, McCain followed the basic Republican policy line throughout the debate, and was absolutely firm about staying in Iraq until the U.S. can claim victory. He said the U.S. was safer since 9-11, but thinks that if we leave Iraq early, that Al-Queda will establish a base there when we leave.
Obama wants to concentrate on Afghanistan and Pakistan to root out Al-Queda.
The two men are extremely far apart on all the issues, which could explain why this election has been so polarized with voters. Both men looked fairly good in this first debate, although it was obvious Obama was looking at a somewhat larger vision for the United States than McCain. Both men gave intelligent answers to the debate questions, and good closings.
Was there a 'winner' in this first debate? Well, let's call it a split decision. Both men presented well, but Obama showed America he knows a lot more about foreign policy than some may have thought and McCain got in a few shots of his own. We'll have to wait for the next debate to declare a clear winner.
Thought it was pretty good. I was surprised with Obama's knowledge on foreign affairs. I thought it was a mistake on McCain's part not to look at Obama during the entire debate, but McCain held his own. Learned a little more about each on their policies/issues. Both did alright. We'll see.....
It was good. McCain smiled, provided wisdom and insight, Obama was the usuall canned speach BS.
Obama also apeared nervous and at a loss numerous times.
The vote is for the debate people, not the election. McCain won this one by a landslide to anyone with more than two brain cells.
The Obamanation is beginning to sweat.
McCain behaved like an angry old man living in the past. If you think McCain was on target tonight you did not watch the debate.McCain is angry and would not help restore our respect in the international community.Plus he admitted to the world that we torture people and tried to tell Obama what not to say .
This debate was the only one in which John McCain had a "decided advantage" coming in, which meant that he should have dominated the debate. He didn't by my measure - it was a draw.
I used to play competitive chess. When I was matched against an opponent with a significantly higher rating and managed to play to a draw, I considered it a win. In the final analysis, I think that Obama "won" the debate only because he held his own very well in McCain's strength area.
I couldn't help but think of the first Godfather movie while watching the debate. I remember Tom being removed as Consigliere because they needed a "wartime consigliere" and Tom was too balanced to serve in that role. McCain stating that he would essentially "place domestic policy on auto-pilot" while whipping the rest of the world into shape said to me that he was telling us that his presidency would be a one-trick pony (sorry about the mixed movie metaphors). I'm hopeful that the Undecided Voters saw the same thing and became very worried about what will happen during the next four years.
Young people, those less than 45, can be so naive.
The clear choice was shown tonight.
As I type this, there is that American Express commercial showing how blatant the stupid American is to the rest of the world.
Strong business is what moves this country forward. Obama has shown he will take us backward. Rob Peter to pay Paul. They keep trying, but continue to fail. Just like their Public Health Plan.
Remember when Bill Clinton assigned Hillary to this? Another miserable failure, yet they are trying to sucker your again.
As I have stated before, perhaps we need a president like Obama to show folks how bad things can get. If Obama is elected, taxes will grow to the point that many will walk away from their homes, unemployment will grow, businesses will fail, and everything will turn to crap. Then Democrats will whine even more, and find more things or people to blame for their woes.
The government will go back to Republican, just as it always has since the GOP was founded.
Young people, those less than 45, can be so naive.
And old fogeys, like McCain, can be so clueless yet condescending.
The government will go back to Republican, just as it always has since the GOP was founded.
Gee, that's a tough call given that our country is fairly evenly split between democrats and republicans. Of course it will continuously gyrate back and forth between them. What a profoundly clueless comment.
I am getting a bit soft in the head in my "over 45" years, but I seem to recall that Billy Bob Clinton left the country with a large surplus that didn't last 4 years of GW, that GW's reign has included the largest expansion of the federal government in history (for a party that preaches smaller government), as well as a huge increase in federal spending and the largest deficit in history (again from a party that always--as McCain did tonight--preaches fiscal restraint and cuts in social welfare programs). As a member of the underclass for many years, trickle down NEVER benefited me one red cent. How can anyone still preach such nonsense today? It is pretty obvious--the preachers are those McCain calls wealthy, earning $250,000 per year or more. I just don't understand why they believe they can keep pulling the wool over the eyes of the working man, either that or they are depending on massive cuts n education funding to be sure to dumb down the electorate.
Yikes! I think I must have bumped my head pretty hard before coming back and reading your comments, Deucalion! Who commenting on this thread do you think is "less than 45", Oh Condescending One????
"If Obama is elected, taxes will grow to the point that many will walk away from their homes, unemployment will grow, businesses will fail, and everything will turn to crap." LOL - As opposed to now and the past several years, for instance? What flavor of kool aid is it that you're drinking? I know, it's GOP Red!
"As I have stated before, perhaps we need a president like Obama to show folks how bad things can get."
LOL - If they get much worse than they currently are, we'll all be speaking another language. Face it, the current meltdown happened on Dubya's watch, and the GOP Cowboys in the House are playing "flinch" with Dubya. You're not putting alcohol in that kool aid, are you?
I don't think there was a clear winner in this one but I think the next one will be different. Obama must and will come back with the killer blow: McCain is MiniBush.
Great article Robert. I think Obama was certainly more presidential in temperament tonight. McCain did make a number of gaffes the fact checkers are already talking about, plus took credit for things he had nothing to do with.
What I can't believe, on a number of levels is why the line--when McCain said something like "and I think the American people would like to know Obama's definition of rich is..." is not getting more heat. That is the moment I knew what to expect from McCain during the debate. As if McCain has any room to even talk about that subject.
Blevins-Please don't whine or complain like a little girl if I hit a nerve. May I please be allowed to express my opinion without being banned? IF you think, and that's a big IF, Obama won the debate tonite, think again. It was his absolute army of advisors, lawyers, campaign staff that won-Not Obama. Obama has no real record or no real experience. WE are voting for a President, not someone who is a rock star, or gives great speeches(from his cadre of advisors, lawyers, campaign staff). And Obama is no President.
Isn't that why Reagan got elected? with little experience other than being movie star and being governor, he managed to win on great speeches promising a golden future by cutting taxes for the rich. Has it worked yet? Isn't that what McCain proposed tonight--tax cuts for the wealthy, and a reduction in the capital gains tax? Who does he think he is? Ronnie Reagan?
Further, don't you think that McCain has his own cadre of well-paid advisers? Given how far he has drifted away from his former "Maverick" self towards the right side of his party, I really don't think there can be any doubt about it. Many have surmised the invisible strings pulled by the hand of Carl Rove, Machiavelli to Prince George.
Great speeches? Yeah, Obama gives a great speech. But after twenty years running for office, don't you think that McCain should have learned the technique by now? Don't all great leaders give great speeches? What is McCain's excuse?
mdnorcuss-In case you haven't noticed, McCain is a real person with a real record, not a phony, empty suit like Obama, who has to rely on a veritable army of advisors, lawyers, and campaign staff. If Obama wants to apply for a job on a soap opera that's fine-but NOT for President. And lets not forget his friendship and association with a known terrorist, William Ayers. I thought we were supposed to be fighting terrorism since 9/11 not be friends with terrorists like Obama is. If the FBI, and or the CIA, etc, etc, had bothered to do background checks on him, there is no way he would even be allowed to run for President. Anyone who is friends with a known terrorist should automatically be ineligable and disqualified for running for President.
In case you haven't noticed, McCain is a real person with a real record
What does that mean exactly? A "real" person? Please. What a silly thing to say. So which is the "real" McCain? The moderate maverick of 2000? Or the reborn Christian Conservative of 2008?
And I have to say that I have looked extensively into McCain's record and for 27 years in the Senate, I have to say his overall accomplishments are less than stellar. Sure he has a few, but nothing exemplary for that amount of time in the job.
not a phony, empty suit like Obama
Obama has proven time and again that he is no empty suit, and he did it again last night with a strong performance in a debate focusing on an area of McCain's supposed strength. All the repubs were gloating over how poorly Obama would do without a teleprompter and he sent them all home crying with his performance.
who has to rely on a veritable army of advisors, lawyers, and campaign staff.
All candidates rely on quality advisors and aides. If they didn't they would be both foolish and unsuccessful. You really think McCain does everything on his own? You are blinded by your own partisanship.
And lets not forget his friendship and association with a known terrorist, William Ayers.
If you have to keep coming back to this tired, ridiculous argument, then you obviously have nothing of substance to argue against Obama. This one has been long since put to bed and your reliance on it to scare people just shows how desperate you really are.
People don't seem to realize that Halliburton, the company with deep Republican ties, sold the nuclear technologies to Iran..... I think I see a pattern in Republican foreign policy (think about all of the following: Bin Laden, the Taliban, Saddam Hussein and next Iran): Let's arm a country with dangerous weapons and then go to war with them because they are a threat to our security.
Continued war and violent conflicts only adds to the profits of weapons companies and other defence contractors that receive military contracts. Blackwater Worldwide, whose founder and owner Erick Prince was an intern in the Dubya White House and is a major financial backer of Republican candidates and causes, has received MORE THAN 1 BILLION dollars in such contracts! Halliburton has received contracts in Iraq surmounting 18 BILLION dollars! This just to name two such companies!
If John McCain is elected you can be assured that the Rovian policies of the past 8 years will continue to fatten the pockets of these war profiteering corporations that have financial ties to the Republican party. For the Republicans the longer the war lasts the better. The more the taxpayers pay for wars at the expense of funding for domestic programs, the more profits for the friends of John McCain and the Bushes.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |