Daniel Eran Dilger
Random header image... Refresh for more!

Terrorist Criminal Links to the Presidential Candidates

Daniel Eran Dilger
Unflattering associations between a presidential candidate and terrorist activities have cast a fog over an election where campaign issues have regularly taken a back seat to negative personality attacks. What’s really going on?
Republican candidate for Vice President Sarah Palin has attempted to dust off the association between Barack Obama and Bill Ayers, who back in the late 60s and early 70s was a member of a radical youth movement known as the Weather Underground.

Protesting the Vietnam War and its expansion into Laos, Ayers blew up statues and planted bombs at the Capitol and the Pentagon, where damage resulted in a water leak that delayed aerial bombing for several days. Charges against Ayers were later dropped due to police misconduct and illegal wiretaps. The Weather Underground dissolved after the end of the Vietnam War in 1973, and Ayers turned himself in in 1980.

Ayers later apologized to Richard Elrod, who was injured in the “Days of Rage” rioting that preceded the Weather Underground’s radical efforts to use bombs to violently but ineffectually attract attention to the violence in Vietnam. But Ayers told the Chicago Tribune, “we weren’t terrorists,” in 2001 interview about his Weather Underground past.

“The reason we weren’t terrorists is because we did not commit random acts of terror against people. Terrorism was what was being practiced in the countryside of Vietnam by the United States.” Ayers also wrote, “I condemn all forms of terrorism — individual, group and official” in a condemnation of the September 11 terrorist attacks. “Today we are witnessing crimes against humanity on our own shores on an unthinkable scale, and I fear that we may soon see more innocent people in other parts of the world dying in response.”

Whether Obama?

In the three decades since, Ayers went on to become a Distinguished Professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago. The McCain campaign, along with Hillary Clinton, worked hard to associate Ayers’ violent activist past with Obama, something that Obama has obviously worked equally hard to discount. Obama was 8 at the time of the Weather Underground violence, and has described Ayers’ violent activism as “detestable acts.”

The New York Times recently reported on the connections between Obama and the “rehabilitated” Ayers. The paper cited Bradford A. Berenson, “who worked on the Harvard Law Review with Mr. Obama and who served as associate White House counsel under President Bush” as noting of Obama, “I saw no evidence of a radical streak, either overt or covert, when we were together at Harvard Law School.” Berenson is a McCain supporter.

It also cited Tom Hayden, the founder of Progressives for Obama, who described the attempts to link Obama and Ayers as “typical campaign shenanigans.”

Obama and ’60s Bomber – A Look Into Crossed Paths – NYTimes.com

What About McCain?

While Ayers was setting off explosions in the turbulent early 70s in violent protest of the war, John McCain was dropping bombs on urban areas. After being shot down, McCain was subjected to horrific torture over two years, during which he compromised his military “Code of Conduct” to provide North Vietnam details including “the name of his ship, the number of raids he had flown, his squadron number, the target of his final raid,” and the fact that he was an admiral’s son, and therefore an ideal prisoner of war to protect, as his father was “now directing the war effort as commander in chief of all U.S. forces in the Pacific.”

McCain was therefore both involved in state sponsored terrorism for the US as well as collaboration with the Communist North Vietnam government; he now says he wouldn’t engage in diplomatic talks with North Korea in order to avert another war, because of its status as being part of the Bush administration’s “Axis of Evil.”

Does McCain’s role in Vietnam qualify him to lead the US? Or does his grievous psychological wounds from POW captivity and from blowing up civilians in his role as a soldier in an unpopular and discredited war just make him less qualified to defuse modern complex problems facing the nation using diplomacy?

What about McCain’s more recent associations with supporting President Reagan’s counterrevolutionary terrorism in Central America in the 1980s? What about his support for an illegitimate war built upon lies in Iraq, which has caused the unnecessary death of thousands of American soldiers, injury and disability for tens of thousands of US soldiers, and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians?

McCain continues to support this war, and has spoke of occupying Iraq for “a hundred years” if necessary while at the same time joking about bombing Iran and making rash judgements about the potential for pulling the US into a war between Georgia and Russia. Does McCain’s sloppily expressed penchant for violence compare in any way or scale to the tenuous efforts to link Obama with Ayers’ violent past?

Make-Believe Maverick : Rolling Stone
Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain

McCain’s Scandalous Friends

McCain is also closely connected to a 1970’s criminal of his own, except in McCain’s case the criminal served prison time for his involvement in the Watergate scandal and the burglary on Daniel Ellsberg, the man who leaked the Pentagon Papers revealing to the American people the truth about the Vietnam War. McCain’s criminal associate is G.Gordon Liddy, but McCain doesn’t just know of the man, he has accepted campaign contributions from him and even appeared on his radio show, where he described Liddy as an “old friend” and praised Liddy for his “adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great.”

In addition to breaking into the offices at Watergate and of Ellsberg, Media Matters notes that Liddy acknowledged he was prepared to kill people during the burglary “if necessary.” He also admits “plotting to murder journalist Jack Anderson; plotting with a ‘gangland figure’ to murder Howard Hunt to stop him from cooperating with investigators; plotting to firebomb the Brookings Institution; and plotting to kidnap ‘leftist guerillas’ at the 1972 Republican National Convention — a plan he outlined to the Nixon administration using terminology borrowed from the Nazis.”

More recently, “In 1994, after the disastrous federal raid on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, he [Liddy] gave some advice to his listeners: ‘Now if the [US] Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they’re going to be wearing bulletproof vests. … Kill the sons of bitches.’”

McCain’s campaign told the Charlotte Observer in 2000 that “Liddy’s character will appeal to many voters because he was following orders from President Nixon and kept silent afterward,” in connection with a planned speaking engagement at a McCain fundraiser. While Ayers can describe his disastrous attempts at activism through violence as a mistake made in his youth as a reaction to the violence in Vietnam, Liddy can’t. Liddy betrayed the nation as an experienced adult, and continued his terrorist threats–commonly expressed by many right leaning talk show hosts–into the present. McCain’s unabashed support for Liddy is also a stark contrast to Obama’s repudiation of Ayers’ behavior thirty years ago.

Media Matters – Why is the NY Times continuing to ignore McCain’s “own Bill Ayers”?
With friends like these … — chicagotribune.com

McCain’s Keating Five Scandal.

In addition to his friendship with Nixon’s Watergate thug, McCain is of course also tied to previous economic scandals and catastrophes, starting with cozying up to Charles Keating and accepting gifts and money to deflect regulators from looking into Keating’s S&L before it collapsed at taxpayers’ expense.

Keating, a former Navy pilot turned anti-obscenity crusader, funded about a third of McCain’s original campaign for congress. Keating expected favors in exchange for his support. Add in a housing boom associated with complex new financial instruments and low interest rates, and you have a prophetic picture of today’s financial crisis, right down to the multi-billion bailout that resulted.

Keating used the five senators to pressure regulators “to withdraw the equity risk regulations. These regulations required S&Ls involved in direct lending to set aside additional cash reserves in case there were big losses.” When that effort failed with regulators, McCain pushed for ‘voluntary’ rather than mandatory guidelines, according to a report by Mother Jones. Regulators referred the case to the Justice Department. The court recommended that the government seize Keating’s S&L to stop its fraudulent lending, but it continued for another two years; Keating’s S&L pushed thousands of elderly investors into high risk securities that failed and took their life savings down with them.

After the scandal broke, Keating told the press, “One question, among many raised in recent weeks, had to do with whether my financial support in any way influenced several political figures to take up my cause. I want to say in the most forceful way I can: I certainly hope so.” He ended up spending four years in federal prison before being freed on a technicality.

McCain defended his actions, saying “I have done this kind of thing many, many times” for other constituents. He compared what he did for Keating to ”helping the little lady who didn’t get her Social Security.” McCain eventually admitted, ”The appearance of it was wrong. It’s a wrong appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators, because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. And it was the wrong thing to do.“

A Senate ethics investigation looked into what role McCain played in the scandal along with the four democrats who were also involved. McCain emerged from the scandal with nothing more than a slap on the wrist, but later described the period as the lowest point of his life, a significant phrase for someone who had suffered tortured as a prisoner of war.

Today at noon, the Obama campaign is releasing a documentary on McCain’s involvement with Keating, noting the Keating Five Scandal is ”eerily similar to today’s credit crisis, where a lack of regulation and cozy relationships between the financial industry and Congress has allowed banks to make risky loans and profit by bending the rules.“ The Keating Economics site introduces the video saying, ”And in both cases, John McCain’s judgment and values have placed him on the wrong side of history.“

MotherJones Blog: Remember the S&L Bailout? John McCain Hopes You Don’t
Keating Economics

McCain and Osama Bin Laden.

McCain’s slack ability to decipher right and wrong and his poor judge of character go beyond Liddy and Keating. In August 1998, a week after two US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by terrorists, killing 200 people and 12 US citizens, Senator Joe Biden told the Washington Post that Osama bin Laden, who was suspected of funding the bombings, was ”one bad mother“ and that criticism of Clinton’s strikes as being a political distraction from efforts to whip up a sex scandal were ”preposterous.“

In the same article, McCain said he ”criticized the administration for ignoring problems other than bin Laden. […] I cannot say that they’ve been neglected because of Monica Lewinsky, but I can say unequivocally that they have been neglected.“

Biden asked, ”what in the hell does it do to us around the world for leading American officials to even suggest that?“

Washingtonpost.com: Clinton Accused

A month later, McCain appeared in Mother Jones, where he was asked, ”You not only have had combat experience in Vietnam, but you were also a prisoner of war. When you look at terrorism right now, with people like Osama bin Laden, do you have any reservations about watching strikes like that?“

McCain replied, ”You could say, Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that’s depicted? Most of us have never heard of him before. And where there is a parallel with Vietnam is: What’s plan B? What do we do next? We sent our troops into Vietnam to protect the bases. Lyndon Johnson said, Only to protect the bases. Next thing you know…. Well, we’ve declared to the terrorists that we’re going to strike them wherever they live. That’s fine. But what’s next? That’s where there might be some comparison.“

McCain not only failed to recognize the threat bin Laden posed as a funder of terrorism just three years before 9/11, but he actively downplayed efforts to follow the bin Laden money trail while he fretted that Clinton’s air strikes and investigations into the funding of terrorist attacks would result in another Vietnam. However, as soon as Bush entered the presidency, McCain was all for the invasion of Iraq and seizing its oil under the name of bin Laden, despite their being no connection between 9/11 and bin Laden’s terrorism financing and Iraq.

McCain still fails to see much interest in bin Laden while hoping to keep the US embroiled in Iraq in a Vietnam-style quagmire that costs America $10 billion per month. While promising to go to the ”gates of hell“ to find bin Laden, McCain reined in the hyperbole by saying that he wouldn’t target bin Laden if he crossed the Pakistan border.

John McCain – Mother Jones

What About Palin?

McCain has passed the Ayers torch to Palin. She recently referenced the New York Times article that found no connection of substance between Ayers and Obama (pointedly saying they ”do not appear to have been close“), and instead claimed that Obama ”is not a man who sees America as you and I do — as the greatest force for good in the world. This is someone who sees America as imperfect enough to pal around with terrorists who targeted their own country.“

While that was simply a lie, Palin has her own problems with an associate who fails to see America as ”the greatest force for good in the world.“ That would be her husband, who remained a member of the Alaska Independence Party between 1995 and 2002. Palin herself addressed the party earlier this year in a welcome message as governor, and attended their convention in 2000.

The Alaska Independence Party seeks to secede from the United States; its founder, Joe Vogler, makes comments such as, ”The fires of hell are frozen glaciers compared to my hatred for the American government,“ and ”I’m an Alaskan, not an American. I’ve got no use for America or her damned institutions.“

How can Palin seriously question Obama’s view of America, based on a desperate reach of casual association, when she herself sleeps with a man connected to a party with an official hatred of the US, a party she herself associated with and warmly welcomed on video earlier this year, saying ”We have a great promise: to be a self-sufficient state,“ and, ”Good luck on a successful and inspiring convention. Keep up the good work, and God bless you“?

Sarah Palin and the Alaska Independence Party

Palin’s Scandalous Friends.

Palin is also closely associated to preacher Larry Kroon, who warned her fellow members of the Wasilla Bible Church this summer that God would ”strike out His hand against“ the United States and possibly ”raise up a revived, prosperous and powerful Communist Russia with a web of alliances across the Middle East.“

In June, Palin got on stage with the preacher of Wasilla Assembly of God, Ed Kalnins, and credited him with supporting her political campaign, telling the audience, ”He was praying over me. He’s praying, ‘Lord make a way, Lord make a way…’ And I’m thinking, this guy’s really bold, he doesn’t even know what I’m gonna do, he doesn’t know what my plans are, and he’s praying not, ‘Oh Lord, if it be your will may she become governor,’ or whatever. No, he just prayed for it. He said, ‘Lord, make a way, and let her do this next step.’ And that’s exactly what happened. So, again, very very powerful coming from this church.“

Kalnins keeps his partitioners inline with reminders that voting against who they are told to vote for would send them to hell. Criticism of President Bush’s handling of Katrina had the same fate. ”I hate criticisms towards the President,“ Kalnins said, ”because it’s like criticisms towards the pastor — it’s almost like, it’s not going to get you anywhere, you know, except for hell. That’s what it’ll get you.“

How does modern day mind control terrorism and threats of eternal torment compare to violent extremism that occurred thirty years ago during war hysteria? Palin asserts that Obama is supposed to be linked in some way to Ayers’ radical youth as a war protester, but Palin herself has been steeping in radical fundamentalist mind control gibberish her entire life. It has given her a hateful, narrow perspective of the world, and causes her to see complex and delicate political negotiations as simple events orchestrated by God that can best be addressed by fear campaigns, torture threats, and the replacement of reason and diplomacy with fundamentalist rhetoric and God-based policy decisions.

Palin’s Pastor: God Will Damn America
Pastor: GOP may be downplaying Palin’s religious beliefs – CNN.com
Palin and Her Pastors – Harper’s Magazine
Palin’s Church May Have Shaped Controversial Worldview

Palin’s $22 Million Investment in Sudan.

While McCain saw no problem with bin Laden funding terrorism, Palin sees no problem in her own state funding genocide in Darfur, Sudan. Palin put on a show in the vice presidential debates where she claimed to have taken action to divest Alaska’s holdings in Sudan. The problem is that Palin was not only taking credit for the efforts others had made, but that her administration actively fought against the divestments so that they didn’t go through.

It was Alaska state representatives Les Gara, a Democrat, Bob Lynn, a Republican, who co-sponsored a resolution to force the $40 billion Alaska Permanent Fund to divest itself of millions in holdings related to Sudan.

In contrast, according to a report on official transcripts by ABC News, it was Palin’s own deputy revenue commissioner Brian Andrews who shot down the resolution, testifying that, ”the legislation is well-intended, and the desire to make a difference is noble, but mixing moral and political agendas at the expense of our citizens’ financial security is not a good combination.“

After the resolution failed to pass, Palin told a reporter in April, ”We have a moral responsibility to condemn the genocide in Darfur. I commend the actions of the Senate State Affairs Committee and I hope the entire legislature gets a chance to weigh in on this matter.“

”’At the last minute they showed up’ and supported the divestment effort, Gara said. But by then the legislative session was almost over, and there wasn’t enough time to get it passed,“ the article noted. It also pointed out that McCain ”has been a strong supporter of Sudan divestment efforts, and has urged Americans to liquidate their holdings in companies who do business there. He was criticized for that position when it was revealed in May his wife Cindy held $2 million in investment funds owning shares of Sudan-linked companies. She sold those holdings following a reporter’s inquiries.“

ABC News: Record Refutes Palin’s Sudan Claim

Hear the One About the Issues?

What credibility do McCain and Palin have in claiming an association between Ayers and Obama when both of them are saturated in anti-American radicalism, count well-known criminals and terror mongers among their close associates, take a weak and hypocritical stand on the funding of genocide, and demonstrate a world view that oscillates between arrogantly naive and wildly irrational?

A month ago, McCain’s campaign manager Rick Davis told the Washington Post, ”this election is not about issues. This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates.“ Davis also noted, ”we are in the worst Republican environment since Nixon in 1972. We take that seriously. We get the joke.“ The problem for the McCain campaign is that there’s nothing funny about that joke for the American people.

McCain Manager: ‘This Election is Not About Issues’ – The Washinton Post

Other articles on current events:
Obama-Biden, McCain-Palin: Scandals by the Numbers
Terrorist Criminal Links to the Presidential Candidates
The Big Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac Attack
Osama Bin Laden’s Dream of US Economic Collapse
You Know the Drill?
Ten Striking Parallels Between Microsoft and John McCain
Obama’s Apple, McCain’s Microsoft: the Politics of Tech

Did you like this article? Let me know. Comment here, in the Forum, or email me with your ideas.

Like reading RoughlyDrafted? Share articles with your friends, link from your blog, and subscribe to my podcast (oh wait, I have to fix that first). It’s also cool to submit my articles to Digg, Reddit, or Slashdot where more people will see them. Consider making a small donation supporting this site. Thanks!

  • http://twibe.com trainwrecka

    I feel like every political person can be linked to something bad. Is there anyone out there with a clean record?? I highly doubt it. I’m not a McCain fan, but I do like Palin.

    I do get frustrated when people call Barrack Osama instead of Obama, or emphasize his middle name. Gimmie a break.

  • oomu

    “I feel like every political person can be linked to something bad. Is there anyone out there with a clean record?? I highly doubt it. I’m not a McCain fan, but I do like Palin.

    all politicians are wrong and bad so ? don’t care if a people is a hateful bad person, because EVERYONE IS BAD too.. so why to be angry ? why to be concerned

    just forgot everything, facts, truth, morals, ethics, philosophies and your own goal in life, even your own life, because you know : everyone is BAD

  • http://www.io-rocks.com CSimmons

    We don’t need another crook, nor another plain-talking “gosh darn, dog-gone, you-betcha” politician in the White House. Been there, done that, and look where we are now as a country.

    Are we as Americans really so blind, that we can’t see the obviousness of our choices this election?!?

  • jdoc

    Dan: I know I sound like a broken record, but you need to be less biased when reporting ‘facts’ – Obama has MANY more associations and shady behaviors than you’re owning up to, especially if we use your standards for deciding what to report and not to report.

  • http://spacecynics.wordpress.com Thomas

    ”I’m an American, not British. I’ve got no use for England or her damned institutions.“
    — Sam Adams

  • harrywolf

    Good article , Dan.

    Sadly, Palin may carry the day because she looks a bit sexy.
    Thats where the US public is at, for the most part.

    You can only tell the truth, but the issues will NEVER get in the way of clever PR people.

  • harrywolf

    @jdoc – Lets see your facts if you want to make a point.

  • Rolling Ball

    I second harrywolf. jdoc, complaining about a blogger’s bias without contribution to the discussion nets you the judgment of arrogance and ignorance. I agree that this article was written in support of Obama, but did Mr. Dilger ever claim otherwise? If this article contained abhorrent lies, I would too be opposed. It doesn’t.

    It would benefit us all, if you took the torch and offered solid support to alternative biases.

  • LuisDias


    He doesn’t have to. People have this curious statistical thinking that because person X has something bad, then that somehow immediately proves that person Y has equally something bad.

    People confuse statistics (it’s probable that person Y has the same bad things that person X, specially because both are politicians and senators) with reality. Thing is, we now know a lot about McCain. Let’s hear from the other side. The best the GOP has against Obama is Ayers? That tells me a lot.

  • jdoc

    @harrywolf: I’ve done so many times before- it doesn’t do me any good to provide such info when nobody here listens. I typically won’t post if I know nothing about the subject at hand, as Daniel can probably attest to (I post-a-plenty when medical issues come up). LuisDias explained it perfectly- I’ve always been suspicious of ALL politicians- they’re all in it for personal gain. To tell me that one candidate has so many more of these affiliations than the other just doesn’t sound right from the get-go (and of course I know better). For example, if we were to consider suspicions in general, doesn’t anyone find it odd that we know nothing about Obama’s college/law school career (other than his 2 years at Occidental, where he drank himself crazy and ‘experimented heavily’ with drugs)? How did he pay for college? What kind of grades did he get? etc… He certainly doesn’t hide these details about his wife- he goes into detail in his book (yes, I’ve read both Obama and McCain’s books). He says nothing about himself, in this regard, in his book (The Audacity of Hope). He is unusually tight-lipped about such things, and this attitude continues today, both by him and his campaign.

  • jdoc

    btw- there have been many other Obama/radical persons associations made by the same pundits that try to bring down the other candidates- you can search them out on the web.

    And one dig against Daniel- I take offense that you would deem McCain a terrorist because he was forced to reveal secrets to the enemy in a time of torture. He didn’t willfully reveal such things, and considering the torture that he went through, I’m not surprised that he broke (he hung in for a very long time). He’s a hero in this country, and it’s well-deserved.

  • Silencio

    With the economy circling the drain, these attacks by association only reinforce the notion that the Republican ticket is completely out of touch with the real concerns of the American people. Instead of talking about what they would do to address the collapsing stock prices and freezing credit environment, McCain’s campaign just wants to “turn the page”. While people watch their jobs, investments, and retirement plans evaporate before their very eyes, you’re not going to change the subject so easily.

    They’re handing this election to Obama on a silver platter.

  • Silencio

    @jdoc: Obviously, being an alcoholic and a drug user does not automatically preclude one from serving as president: see the current occupant of the White House.

  • jdoc

    @Silencio: While McCain was in DC doing his job, Obama was asking folks to “call him” if they needed him. McCain played a crucial role recently in this whole bailout mess- the original proposal not only didn’t involve the House Republicans, but was an absolute mess (eg $20 billion for ACORN- please…). What would McCain do about the economy? In the last debate, he committed to a spending freeze (not reduction)- much needed at this time. Obama basically said business as usual, not committing to cutting ANY of his programs. Question: Where is Obama going to get ANY of the funds for his programs now? Will he still raise taxes? Do you think that’s good for America right now?

    Ironically, if you would review your history, it was the Republicans, including the Bush Admin, pushing for regulation and oversight in the past 7 years. The Dems fought it tooth and nail, probably because they benefited from the kick-backs that they received (mostly from FM/FM)- speculation of course, but hardly unbelievable. The list could go on…

    I never said Obama was an alcoholic. But you’re right, it doesn’t preclude one from being President. There have been many President’s with shady histories, whether it be drugs, womanizing (Clinton, JFK), etc. They’re only human, but what matters is how they handle themselves after their ordeals. Bush rehabbed, and has been clean ever since. I couldn’t tell you about Obama, because frankly his drug/alcohol history doesn’t really matter- it seemed like he was just experimenting. As long as he’s clean now, I have no problem with it.

  • mmbossman

    I’ll go ahead and re-bookmark you after the election, Dan. I hold no strong political associations, but this has gone right on past ridiculous. See you in December.

  • nelsonart

    The problem with this far-reaching article is it gives Obama a complete pass. No concerns whatever about Obama’s climb to power and who he had to rub elbows with to do it.

    When the dust clears on the mortgage crisis, there’s going to be quite a few dems standing there facing jail time or at least public condemnation. Chris Dodd, Barney Frank and former CEOs of Mac and Mae mingled politics and contributions and finance and oversight to give us the magical result of utter collapse.

    However these players can shift focus and rewrite history remains to be seen as we are in the middle of an ongoing crisis with many secret dealings and corruption yet to be revealed. What even the media is starting to understand is no one is going to accept the typical liberal response of “Bush did it” since McCain and Bush tried to focus on reigning in abusive lending practices before the crisis hit.

    Liberals also overestimate how most others view Obama’s friendships and dealings with prior criminals and anti-american zealots. Part of it is how thoughtful and intelligent Obama appears when speaking. If any of that nonsense spanning decades has seeped into his worldview, it hasn’t revealed itself. Personally, what I get from his associations is he feels comfortable dealing with those who can help his rise to power, no matter their current or prior anti-american ideology. This is for Obama to explain and most repubs first heard of these numerous associations via Hillary during the primary debates.

    Palin’s husband is like a lot of Alaskans that view themselves as rugged individuals, not really part of the shenanigans going on ‘down south.’ Alaska has a population that lives ‘off the grid’ due to its location and abundant resources that make such a choice easier. We’ll have to wait and see if people really care about Todd as much as Obama’s wife’s statement that “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country.”

    Obama’s friends, pastor, and even wife, have done bad things or said bad things that hit a nerve with the average American. How it plays out in this environment, with much more important issues to deal with, is anyone’s guess.

    Right now most view McCain as a war hero and he has the respect in the congress that he amply deserves. Trying to link McCain in any way to acts of terrorism is not just jumping the shark, but as I like to say, also eating the Fonz.

    As the market crashes and the crisis deepens and spreads, I worry less about whether Michelle Obama really likes white folk and more about how people are going to survive the severe downturn we are facing. People are looking at who Obama is tapping to help in his campaign (former CEOs of FM/FM) and for economic advice. Who will he reward in his administration? I’m deeply concerned.

    And since I always end on the Economy, what I DO NOT want is capital gains pushed to 28% (or even 20%) followed up with a massive tax hike on the rich. As Steve Forbes said recently, someone has to disabuse the dems of the notion that they can harm the wealthy in this country without it trickling down to the middle class.

    Or as some like to refer to it: blowback.

  • jdoc

    @nelsonart: Well said. While I agree with the majority of your post, I will take a more realistic approach on the accountability front: even though the likes of Frank, Dodd, etc have got themselves knee-deep in trouble, with (in all likelihood) a full Democratic Washington, little if anything at all will be done to hold them accountable. The Democratic Senate will be fully in charge of holding the hearings, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the above names didn’t come up at all, especially considering the extent to which the Dems have pushed the blame onto the current administration and the Republicans. Personally, I think this will definitely come around to bite them, because the American people won’t be duped for too much longer.

    I wholeheartedly agree about the tax issue though, and as I alluded to in my previous post, Obama doesn’t stand a chance in advancing his tax agenda, unless he’s really THAT crazy.

  • http://www.radianttechnology.net Windinthedust

    Hi Dan- thanks for taking up my dare- valiant try, you’re getting better…

    I want to be pithy, here are a few tips:

    When giving sources: don’t use a fellow blog, don’t use editorials; otherwise it’s simple anecdotal and lacks credibility. If you do, give disclosure- such as- “conservative paper admits”, or “liberal blogger acknowledges”… keep in mind, their use, is really only powerful, when it’s an admission to something in which they support, otherwise it just comes across as partisan tripe. In otherwise, never use a liberal blog, paper, editorial, etc. to back up a liberal argument, rather find a conservative admission, to back it up… much more powerful (and vice versa). This is a way to build a credible case, when credible evidence is lacking; the other way around doesn’t work.

    Report about your subject, never defend or accuse (unless they are your personal friend- then defend and accuse away with first hand commentary)

    Invite conversation on a subject; acknowledge why an opposing viewpoint may be present, etc. As an example, “while I agree with Ayres objection to the Vietnam war, I don’t agree with his methods, and I can understand why others would see this as domestic terrorism”… then don’t assume their motive, as you personally do not know- rather question- “my question is, was this an act of misguided youth? or that of a hardened terrorist?” In the same vein, you will also give credibility, by acknowledging your subjects imperfections and strengths… for this article, you could have questioned Obama’s judgment in associating with Ayers, while then giving an actual real example of a strong attribute, or even example showing strong judgement. With McCain, you could have expressed appreciation for something you like about the man, while then bringing up something you don’t.

    Give full disclosure. If you’re partisan, and in the tank for one and the other, just say so, and why. Remember, that your dialog, then (if it’s to be productive) is still to the opposing side… your purpose is to have dialogue and perhaps reach those that disagree with you; put yourself in the oppositions shoes, and talk to their viewpoint, while presenting your case.

    Doing anything else, becomes a useless cacophony pile on that betrays a lack of objective reason and common humanity.
    (In other words: are we human beings first? or we partisan lemmings?)

    So much for being pithy. :-)

  • TobiasTate

    I don’t hear much talk lately about how John McCain wanted to privatize Social Security so urgently in 2005, and apparently still supports doing so. Considering the state of the markets these days, where would we have ended up if this had been carried out? Oh yeah, I think we know the answer: human misery on an unfathomable scale! I’m amazed that people can ignore just how often John McCain has been dead wrong on the policies that really affect people’s day-to-day lives, and not just wrong as in “oops, I guess I voted the wrong way” but wrong as in “oops, I was spearheading the entire campaign to make that happen!”

  • gus2000

    “…[McCain] didn’t willfully reveal such things, and considering the torture that he went through, I’m not surprised that he broke…He’s a hero in this country, and it’s well-deserved.”

    You cannot brand someone a coward for revealing information under torture. However, you cannot tag them as a “hero”, either. That moniker is reserved for the soldiers that sustained just as much torture, but refrained from selling out their country to the enemy.

  • nelsonart


    A little man might help…

    $200 put in monthly at 2% annual rate over 40 years grows to $147K.

    The same amount, compounded at 7% grows to $525K. (7% is the accepted real return over 80+ years for large stocks – think S&P Index)

    Most advocates of privatization recognize the power of compound growth and have pushed for part investment in the market, not the whole enchilada. Some formula based on your age would likely prevail as to setting risk levels.

    Even with a drastic drop, you’d come out ahead under privatization. You’d be investing in American capitalism over spans of time, riding out the short term bumps along the way.

    Of course, we do that now with investing in 401(K)s, which give a far larger stream of payments upon retirement than SS.

    And lastly, I’ve only heard politicians tread lightly on this topic, advocating for a voluntary system. That is, if you want to participate, do, if not, don’t.

    The math is overwhelming and short of a total collapse, privatizing part of the system makes sense.

  • gus2000

    Ironically, under Social Security “privatization” the government would own the very corporations it should instead be overseeing. This brings us closer to having communal ownership of the Means of Production, which is frequently referred to as “Communism”.

    Stock trading is like gambling: some win, and some lose. Since losing the public funds is not an option, we must play to win, and the way to win every single time is to be the house and let everyone else gamble with their own money. Then we tax the winners.

  • jdoc

    @gus2000: I’d love to see your definition of ‘hero’. IMO, someone who underwent torture of the worst kind for 5 years in the name of his country is a hero in my book. Even Obama admits that.

  • enzos

    Hi Dan,
    My starting point is always to assume politicians (and lawyers) of all persuasions are self-serving, pernicious scum… that way one stands a chance of being pleasantly surprised.

    While Mr Obama is clearly the only horse still running (the RP being reduced by its leaders to a limping rabble of lame jokes), he strikes me as a bit of a flimflam man, pretending as sorts of convenient positions and identities to progress his ambitions. Hope I’m wrong but that’s the way I see it from this distance.


    Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what one does not believe. It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime.
    – Tom Paine

    The foundation of morality is to … give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibilities of knowledge.
    – T. H. Huxley

  • gus2000

    “… someone who underwent torture of the worst kind for 5 years in the name of his country is a hero in my book.”

    I’ll send your regards the boys holed-up in Gitmo.

  • http://www.roughlydrafted.com danieleran

    @Jdoc: “Even Obama admits that”

    Yes, that’s because Obama and Biden are respectful and classy. Both have taken policy issues with McCain while noting that they respect the man and include him among their friends (Biden) or as respected colleagues (Obama).

    McCain has responded to Obama with contempt, refusing to look at him in the debates and lobbing a series of outright lies (not just overstated ads, but full on lies that attack his character maliciously in was that are completely false). The association with Ayers is clearly one of these. Is McCain really trying to suggest that Obama is going to pursue some 60s era youth radical movement that has been dead since Nixon? Does he really fear Obama is going to set off fireworks at the Pentagon to stop the Iraq War? This stuff is ridiculous. Equating anti-war counterculture, even those who pursued violent uprisings, with modern terrorism designed to kill civilians such as being promoted by extremist Islamic fundamentalists is simply irresponsible.

    Now look at Palin, who is a dishonorable disgrace. She dodged every issue in the debates to hurl dishonest personal attacks at Biden and Obama. She’s a total fraud, pretending to be down-home Fargo folksy in a charade that is completely absent from her performance as AK governor.

    Everything the Right likes about Palin is an act, identical to Bush in 2000, where somebody with marginal abilities and a willingness to serve as an empty front for the neocons has suddenly put on an act of being a bumbling everyman who swaggers and says ‘nuclear’ wrong and uses folksy expressions. None of this was evident in Bush prior to the election, or in Palin prior to her VP selection. They are frauds.

    They use their fraudulent act to dishonorably attack their opponents with a string of baseless garbage, without stating any clear stance on policies, and after being elected, don’t follow what they said they would. Palin has been just as corrupt as the AK Republicans she campaigned to “take on.” Bush turned from promises to support small government and minimize international intervention like Kosovo into ballooning the national debt while taking on a huge two fronted war on false pretense and bad intel he knew was wrong.

    Obama/Binden are classy yet clearly imperfect.
    McCain/Palin are classless and put on a perfect act that is unclear.

  • jdoc

    @gus2000: and which country were those ‘boys in Gitmo’ fighting for? Right….

    Daniel: lies came from an continue to spew from each camp- facts are facts, and you can easily look them up. I could just as easily have insinuated that Obama got help from terrorists organizations, or at least shady, convicted financiers, to get into and through school, and also to buy his first ($1.65 million) home. Where exactly did he get all that money? And what a neighborhood to pick, huh?

    This election is Obama’s, there’s no question about that. I hope I’m terribly wrong and he turns out to be one of the best presidents ever- he certainly talks the talk. The American people need great leadership in these very trying times. I have serious doubts that he can be an effective leader, and I fundamentally disagree with his proposed programs (I think you know how I feel about his healthcare proposal). But again, I really hope I’m wrong about him.

  • Dorotea

    McCain looks old to me. He has been around too long. He looks like he could drop dead during the first 4 years of a presidential term. As for Palin, I want someone a a lot smarter than Joe Sixpack as Vice President. Its pretty insulting that McCain thinks that women will vote for Palin simply because she is a woman.

    I don’t know that much about Obama. His rhetoric is ok. And he hasn’t been in politics all that long.He’s looking better than McCain right now.

    I do know that I want change. McCain is not change – he is old school with old failed policies. His young wife is very rich. He seems like an old coot who is easily charmed by an attractive younger woman (Palin). Makes me think he is a real flake.

    During McCain’s tenure in congress credit card rates have gone from 12% to 20+%. Debt both personal and governmental is pervasive. Politics seems to be ruled by religion. Greed has run rampant (lenders, borrowers and everyone in between )

    We need a new face. A new agenda. A new perspective of what we should become.

  • Joe Sa

    As far as Barack Obama’s education goes:


    Now that was easy wasn’t it. I guess ignorance is bliss. People believe what they want to believe & by most of the statements that you have made. I can see you are one of those people, along with nelsonart. At least neslonart can string together a cohesive piece of bullshit. You, sadly can’t even do that. I can see why you like Sarah Palin. Sad, really.
    @ nelsonart? Rugged individualists…really. I guess Malcom X was just a rugged individualist. I guess it all depends on your perspective & the environment you grew up in…total BS.
    John McCain believes in deregulation, just like Ronald Reagan did & every Republican since. Well that ship has sailed along with the trickle down BS left to us from that era. How many times does the economy have to melt down before some of you come to that realization. I suppose the state of the economy is Clinton’s fault also. Who incidentally left the bush administration with a surplus. When is the last time a Republican president has left office & the country was in good shape economically? The Republican Party Has had a majority in congress 10 out of the last 12 years. Are you trying to tell us all they did not exercise that majority in the first six years of the Bush presidency? Sad, really. Rugged individualist? Sad.

    Large banks & investment houses pushed sub prime mortgages to other financial institutions along with what is called a swap. A swap is an insurance policy (but they don’t call it that, because than it would have been regulated) which guaranteed these companies that bought into the sub prime mortgage scheme if there investments went belly up they would be financially insured. Problem is they didn’t have the money to back this up. Greedy people without regulations gigging the game for their own personal profit. To hell with the country & to hell with anyone really. 94% of Americans make their mortgage payments. These greedy bastards bet there companies & the economy of this country on the 6%. They pushed these sub prime mortgages because they were profitable & offered the “swap” so others would buy into this scheme. Yeah, deregulation works & what has been the cornerstone of Republican economics policy is someone else’s fault.

  • nelsonart


    You don’t mean to equate Todd Palin with Malcom X, right? We had a club in grade school that hated jocks. But we never did make it to the big time political scene. Rugged Individualism is just a term to describe the thinking of those that want some camaraderie but are simultaneously too lazy to do anything meaningful with their ideology. My guess is this organization probably offered free beer and a few thirsty chaps joined in.

    On trickle down, here is a sample. When taxes are low, and the economy is favorable for taking on risk, small businesses typically thrive. Let’s say I start a business. When I do well, I branch out and hire more people. I have to buy computers, office furniture, office supplies, etc. I hire more and more people. Pretty soon I have a pretty impressive thing going, all because I looked at the risk/reward ratio and thought it favorable.

    When taxes are high, the reward part of that ratio gets hammered. This works everywhere. In Apple’s App store, if they take 30%, you’re pretty happy with that. If they take 80%, you’re not. You can’t get developers to stick their neck out if they only get to keep a small % of the gross.

    I realize that Bush has been a polarizing figure. The problem is people, in their hatred of Bush, let go of decades of economic knowledge and claim the sky is falling. Now today, it is. We have a real problem. But up until 2005, things were pretty good. Yet I never heard too many liberals say so. You couldn’t even get them to agree that our economy grew at all, no matter what the metrics indicated.

    Repubs do it too. Some are pretty stubborn and won’t admit to anything good that occurred during Clinton’s term. And there was a lot of good.

    So in my opinion, we’ll knee-jerk this and impose far too many regulations that keep businesses from thriving. The dems will hike taxes and make it absolutely painful to survive as a small business owner. We’ll spend ourselves silly, replacing Iraq with whatever new flavor of social program.

    It would be better if education and knowledge replaced dogma and repubs and dems alike learned what makes this economy tick. Then if we agreed to put partisan bickering aside and actually compromise to get some stuff done, we’d all be better off.

  • unsurelok

    Dan, love the insightful, thought provoking discourse on Apple…oh wait I seem to have wandered into some kind of political/religious blog.
    s i g h……

  • dobbie

    ” McCain was subjected to horrific torture over two years, during which he compromised his military “Code of Conduct” to provide North Vietnam details including “the name of his ship, the number of raids he had flown, his squadron number, the target of his final raid,” and the fact that he was an admiral’s son, and therefore an ideal prisoner of war to protect, as his father was “now directing the war effort as commander in chief of all U.S. forces in the Pacific.”

    McCain was therefore both involved in state sponsored terrorism for the US as well as collaboration with the Communist North Vietnam government.”

    This is excellent – the Obama campaign should pick up this line of attack immediately, preferably in the debates! Get on the phones to Obama HQ people! Hurry!

    Regards, The McCain2008 Campaign.

  • dobbie

    “The association with Ayers is clearly one of these. Is McCain really trying to suggest that Obama is going to pursue some 60s era youth radical movement that has been dead since Nixon?”

    No, the point is merely that Obama is likely to be far more radical than he lets on. His 1995 memoirs certainly seems to point that way. His ‘spiritual mentor’ Jeremiah Wright certainly seems to point that way as well.

    Indeed – Obama not only seems to have no problem with doing political stuff together with Ayers (this is not a personal relationship or friendship thing – this is Obama working on Ayer’s pet project and Ayers helping out in Obama’s political career).

    Obama also seems to be genuinely surprised by people caring about him being tied up with guys like Ayers and Wright. Which is perhaps more damning than the relationships themselves.

  • dobbie

    “John McCain believes in deregulation, just like Ronald Reagan did & every Republican since. Well that ship has sailed along with the trickle down BS left to us from that era. How many times does the economy have to melt down before some of you come to that realization.”

    The idea that the economy has two states, I.e. “deregulation” and “regulation” is funny. Indeed – what matters is that you get regulation *right*.

    President Bush has clearly failed in this regard. Indeed – Bush has actively pushed hard for exactly the kind of policy that caused the present crisis, I.e. irresponsible lending on a vast scale.

    The problem is that the Democrats, supposedly the party of “regulation” was cheering him on every step of the way. Standards for lending money were just so stodgy and old-school, you know? Hell, this is a case of the government – backed by the Democrats – actively working to subvert long-standing anti-greed norms and regulation in lending.

    Irresponsible lending in the US was then of course leveraged into a global financial crisis via clever financial voodoo, that failed rather spectacularly. (Well, not voodoo really – just bad risk calculations. Oops.)

    Still, the present crisis can hopefully teach the right lessons – I.e. that Americans have to ween themselves from their addiction to easy irresponsible credit. And that government can’t push loans as some sort of human right. And that complexity in financial instruments is sometimes not a virtue, but a problem.

  • jdoc

    @joe sa: you’ve missed the point completely, and you have no clue as to what you’re talking about when it comes to the economy. I know that Obama went to Columbia and Harvard, and he was president of the law review. Read my prior posts- how did he get there? Scholarships? These are mighty expensive schools, especially for a poor boy with humble beginnings. There are accusations that Obama had ties with radical Muslims, but he refuses to defend himself on these issues, which is odd because he so vehemently defends himself on others. He mentions nothing about this era in his life, but goes into a fair bit of detail about his wires career in his book. We know about his assiciation with corrupt, crooked Chicagoins. And it’s also interesting that he was head of the Law Review at Harvard, yet not one article from that time bears his name. Neither Columbia nor Harvard will release any info.

    About the economy- I’d be glad to explain the situation to you in detail, because clearly you’re lost. But before I do so, can you tell me, since you’re convinced that all of this is Bush’s fault, which policy or policies are responsible for the current crisis?

  • dobbie

    “There are accusations that Obama had ties with radical Muslims, but he refuses to defend himself on these issues.”

    This is pretty obviously bunk. Obama is obviously quite secular. More secular than he lets on even. But from everything I have seen, the “Obama=Muslim” (in the sense that he is a currently believing muslim) theories that float around the bunk are utter bunk.

    Stop spreading bunk.

  • jdoc

    @dobble: I’m not the one promoting it, or the myriad of other accusations. Can you prove your stance?

  • LuisDias

    @dobble: I’m not the one promoting it, or the myriad of other accusations. Can you prove your stance?


    “I’m not the one making these bullshit crackpot Swiftboat accusations to obama, no, oh my how could you possibly even accuse me of that? Oh no! But, fair is fair, could you please provide evidence that he is not a muslim? (Oh, and BTW, did you know that his middle name is Hussein?! Now come on, I am not implying anything! Are these liberals sensitive!!)”


  • LuisDias

    Where will he get the money?

    Hahhum. *Cough!* IRAQ! * Cough!*

    Impressive how liberals are always painted as irresponsible spenders, and yet, these last eight years where the deficit plunged to an all time high of 10 trillion were governed by, wait, you won’t believe it, a fiscal conservative!!

    I mean, his plan was brilliant. Let’s spend the surplus on tax cut for the 1% top wealthy americans. That way the economy surges! (no please, don’t see this as a way to get my pals rich, why would you even suggest that? Let’s forget the other 99%, I mean, let’s be honest they didn’t do a thing for the economy, they were so concerned and busy being peons.

    So this massive wealth transfer from the responsible liberal government surplus to the wealthiest americans was great, wasn’t it? I mean, just look at the deficit! Awesome! Probably, I think it’s time to even cut off more taxes for the wealthy. The hell with the middle class, they deserve nothing. I mean, since when in a time of war should the rich pay more taxes?

    Pff, the more I read certain folks from the right wing, the more I believe they are completely separated from reality.

  • dobbie

    “@dobble: I’m not the one promoting it, or the myriad of other accusations. Can you prove your stance?”

    Well, first of all Obama’s involvement with religion has mostly been restricted to a long-running stint with a guy you might know as J Wright. He is a pastor who puts emphasis on blackness and politics, not on scripture.

    From his writings, as well as all the stuff I have read about Obama, he comes across as a typical Ive League secularist, who then joins a Black Church as part of his quest to become genuinely black.

    Luis: “Swiftboating” is a much more precise term than merely spreading crap around the internet, if we want it to have any descriptive power. What made the swiftboat attacks effective was that they:

    a) Targetted what Kerry had made his primary selling point – Vietnam. “Reporting for duty”.


    b) Was launched by people who actually had served together with Kerry during *Vietnam*.

    Add in the sheer dissonance of the medal-throwing flag-stomping Kerry casting himself as John Wayne, and we have something of a perfect storm. The kind of storm you can’t buy for campaign dollars.

  • gus2000

    I continue to be amazed by the cognitive dissonance of the Right. How can you simultaneously claim that Obama is nothing but an inexperienced community organizer, yet he is powerful enough to be personally responsible for the current Trickle-Down meltdown?

    Also, it’s disingenuous to throw out a baseless accusation about someone, and then challenge everyone to provide proof that it’s NOT true. The accuser bears the burden of proof.

  • jdoc

    edit: “Clinton rose taxes on the ‘top 15 million’ people towards the end of his term. ”

    Should be, “Clinton raised taxes…”

  • jdoc

    it appears as though my second to last post was modded down- guess Daniel didn’t like facts?

    Anyway, gus, we’re not in court. If you choose to be thorough and research for yourself, then you’d be a better person for that (sounds like you could use some fact finding). I can present potential issues as I hear them. I research for myself, because I like to know the truth. You certainly may do so, instead of placing the onus on anyone, just in case you were curious.

  • nelsonart

    Class warfare is always a winning strategy because 99% of Americans are woefully ignorant of finance and economics. They haven’t the foggiest idea how the Fed works, how fiscal policy affects the economy, or even basic understanding of deficits and debt.

    Tonite, McCain has to get it across that he will cut spending while keeping taxes low. The reason is not to make people rich, but to keep treasury revenue as high as possible. Why not raise taxes during times of war? Look at Clinton’s record of raising capital gains taxes. Revenue plummets. You’ll read statements like “X President’s tax increases only resulted in 60% of predicted revenue…”

    People change their behavior in response to taxation. This works both ways, which is why you can often increase revenue by lowering taxes.

    This is basic stuff, but I hope McCain can drive a few points home so the American people won’t fall for the Dem class warfare strategy where we are all pushed to think of low taxes as only for the rich.

    McC also needs to hammer the point home that Obama’s tax cut for ‘95% of us’ will be no relief at all if the economy is forced to struggle against yet more head winds.

    McCain will maximize TR while cutting spending, including a recently announced spending freeze while Obama will raise taxes and increase spending.

    If McCain can’t get this point across, this election will go to Obama. I would forget about the strategy of painting him as irresponsible for chumming with terrorists and those responsible for a huge chunk of this crisis. The media has given him a pass and there’s no point in talking about the past.

  • LuisDias


    Add in the sheer dissonance of the medal-throwing flag-stomping Kerry casting himself as John Wayne, and we have something of a perfect storm

    Smells like McCain’s POW. Fortunately, we ain’t gonna see the same snide attacks from the dems, like getting some “fighting comrades” talking about McCain’s lowest points in the army. Instead we see Obama appreciating his dedication. But then again, perhaps “class” isn’t for everyone.

    Also, it’s disingenuous to throw out a baseless accusation about someone, and then challenge everyone to provide proof that it’s NOT true. The accuser bears the burden of proof.

    As Known As The Shift Of The Burden of Proof.

  • LuisDias


    People change their behavior in response to taxation. This works both ways, which is why you can often increase revenue by lowering taxes.


    McC also needs to hammer the point home that Obama’s tax cut for ‘95% of us’ will be no relief at all if the economy is forced to struggle against yet more head winds.


    Mental Collapse.

  • LuisDias

    Of course, the good reading of it should be:

    Tax cuts only work if they are for the rich

    Or alternatively,

    Tax cuts only work if the party of the government is the GOP

    Like JDoc would like to say:

    Prove me wrong

  • nelsonart


    Sorry about that 2nd paragraph. It sucked. I referred to Obama’s tax plan the way he does. But as you surely understand, the total package is a massive tax hike as there are a lot of individuals and small businesses that make over 250K.

    That’s the massive head wind.

    I’m crossing my fingers that current events will make him realize that he cannot implement his plan without inflicting even more damage to the economy.

  • jdoc

    luisdias: you’ve proven that you can attack people pretty well, but still fail to add anything constructive to the argument.

  • LuisDias

    nelsonart, there’s a piece in Chigaco Sun Times about their plans:

    The precise cost depends on whether you assume the current tax breaks would be renewed or would expire.

    Assuming they would have been renewed anyway, Obama’s plan would bring in an additional $700 billion in taxes over the next 10 years, while McCain’s would cost the Treasury $600 billion. Assuming legislators would have let the tax breaks expire, Obama’s plan would cost the U.S. Treasury $2.7 trillion and McCain’s $3.7 trillion.

    Here’s what McCain camp says about it:

    “Obama raises taxes in a way that’s detrimental to the economy,” said McCain adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin. “The John McCain plan is a jobs-first plan that keeps small businesses in the game.”

    Here’s what Obama camp has to say:

    “Obama’s Brian Deese said the $600 million deficit the study pro- jects McCain’s plan would create “doesn’t count impact of current Iraq war spending. If McCain’s plan drives the deficit up and puts upward pressure on interest rates, that increases costs for families and could force really Draconian, across-the-board spending cuts.”

    Hmm. But wait. Obama won’t raise taxes overall, at least according to CNN:

    The reason: neither plan would raise the amount of revenue expected under current tax policy – which assumes all the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire by 2011. And neither plan would raise enough to cover expected government costs during those 10 years.

    Many people talk how Obama’s going to pay this or that, but in terms of US deficit, look it up:

    Under both plans, all American taxpayers could pay a price for their tax cuts: a bigger deficit. The Tax Policy Center estimates that over 10 years, McCain’s tax proposals could increase the national debt by as much as $4.5 trillion with interest, while Obama’s could add as much as $3.3 trillion.

    It seems that McCain’s plan is to tax cut the wealthy while plunging a deeper hole in the treasury debt. Obama’s not that much better, but at least he has the decency to tax cut the middle class and the poor, who are going to be the hardest hit now.

    I know it’s a difference of ideology, nelsonart, but even you ought to agree that consumer spending is crucial to every economy. If the middle class and the poor are just abandoned, you should expect a worse economy.