Teddy Roosevelt for Obama October 31, 2008March 12, 2017 REDISTRIBUTION Why does it take a guest on Comedy Central to point out that our PROGRESSIVE INCOME TAX was the brainchild of Teddy Roosevelt – the Republican president John McCain most admires? A progressive income tax is the foundation of redistribution – was Teddy Roosevelt a socialist? Why does it take that same guest (David Simon, creator of ‘The Wire,’ on The Colbert Report) to point out that the EARNED INCOME TAX CREDIT was established on the watch of Ronald Reagan – the Republican president McCain’s supporters most admire? The EITC is redistribution pure and simple – was Ronald Reagan a socialist? Consider this from Teddy Roosevelt in 1910: No man should receive a dollar unless that dollar has been fairly earned. Every dollar received should represent a dollar’s worth of service rendered – not gambling in stocks, but service rendered. The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size, acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means. Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and in another tax which is far more easily collected and far more effective – a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion, and increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate. ☞ Certainly times have changed a lot since 1910, and the income tax has come to be levied not just on ‘big fortunes’ but even on the middle class. But it’s because the need for government spending has increased since 1910, and with it, the need for tax revenue. There is our huge military, of course. But with respect to redistribution, the biggest culprit may be the increase in American life expectancy. In 1910, white women lived 52* years on average, black women, 38 – and grandparents tended to live with their children – so the need for an old-age safety net (Social Security and Medicare) was less. Also, what we now consider minimally acceptable living standards have risen to include luxuries like indoor plumbing. * Higher infant and childhood mortality account for much of the difference. But even looking at life expectancy for those who reached 20, say, it was around 63 in 1910, versus around 78 today . . . making programs that kick in at age 65, say, at lot more expensive. The excerpt above is from a stirring speech by an inspiring, transformational young Harvard man – Roosevelt graduated magna cum laude! – just 43 when he assumed the Presidency in 1901. There’s common-man appeal to a candidate who got ‘gentleman C’s’ (Bush) or who graduated 894th out of 899 (McCain) or who got a D in macroeconomics (Palin). But when you face multiple complex critical challenges, there’s also something to be said for a youthful, brilliant, well educated mind (Teddy Roosevelt, John Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama). Teddy’s speech begins: We come here today to commemorate one of the epoch-making events of the long struggle for the rights of man – the long struggle for the uplift of humanity. Our country – this great Republic – means nothing unless it means the triumph of a real democracy, the triumph of popular government, and, in the long run, of an economic system under which each man shall be guaranteed the opportunity to show the best that there is in him. That is why the history of America is now the central feature of the history of the world; for the world has set its face hopefully toward our democracy; and, O my fellow citizens, each one of you carries on your shoulders not only the burden of doing well for the sake of your country, but the burden of doing well and of seeing that this nation does well for the sake of mankind. ☞ President Bush appealed to us to shop. Senator McCain and Governor Palin have been mostly appealing to our fears of socialists and pals of terrorists. Barack Obama seems to have a way of engaging people, especially young people, in something bigger. TAXES: OBAMA V McCAIN Almost everybody comes out ahead under Obama’s plan, yet according to the Tax Policy Center, Senator McCain’s plan would increase the deficit by $5 trillion over the next ten years versus ‘just’ $3.5 million for Obama’s plan. How can that be? How can McCain’s plan be more costly if almost everybody does better under Obama’s? Shouldn’t Obama’s plan cost more? Where is that extra trillion-and-a-half going? The answer, of course, is that, where McCain is less generous with most folks, he is more generous with the best off – and an absolute Godsend to truly rich and super-rich. Same as Bush. YOU JUST HAVE TO LOVE REPUBLICAN INTEGRITY Tuesday, I gave the example of the attacks on Darcy Burner and others. Two more: Kay Hagan is running for the Senate from North Carolina. She is a Sunday school teacher. She is an elder in the Presbyterian Church. Her opponent, Elizabeth Dole, trailing in the polls, has approved this ad suggesting she is an atheist. (Incidentally, there’s nothing whatsoever wrong with being an atheist – but she’s not one.) Jack Rivers: ‘This ad, put up by Marilyn Musgrave, may be the worst I have ever seen. It purports to show her opponent, Betsy Markey, taking a lie detector test and failing. Of course, the woman in the ad is NOT Betsy Markey. The accusations in the ad are either down right lies, or just silly. (Of course she was told not to engage in any transactions that would lead to an appearance of impropriety. ALL federal employees are told that).’ HALLOWEEN Makes me nervous. I don’t like it. Leave me alone.
To Your Health October 30, 2008March 12, 2017 DON’T VOTE I can’t imagine you won’t, but this is fun. REDISTRIBUTION Bob Neinast: ‘I’m a Republican, but, as I like to put it, a Republican with a Brain. Clearly Obama is the only sane choice this year. However, his ‘redistribution’ comment is killing him here in Ohio. There really is talk here about ‘socialism’ and ‘communism.’ He needs an ad that asks . . . Were we socialist under Eisenhower in the 1950s? The top marginal rates then were 90%. Under Nixon and Ford in the 1970s when the top bracket was 70%? All Obama is talking about is putting the top rates back to where they were under Clinton/Gore. Were we living under the communist yoke back then?’ HEALTH CARE Douglas Holtz-Eakin ‘speaks with unmatched authority on the economy, globalization and healthcare.’ He ran the Congressional Budget Office. He serves as John McCain’s Senior Policy Advisor – and, according to ABC News, he says workers won’t want to leave their company-sponsored plans because, ‘What they are getting from their employer is way better than what they could get with the credit we’re gonna give ’em.’ Health care reform just screams to be done. Our economic competitiveness depends on it. Earlier this year, I linked to a story about hospital check lists. It described how the B17 – though wildly superior to anything else then flying – crashed on its first test flight because it was just too complicated to fly. So – instead of scrapping the plane – they added the first-ever pilot ‘checklist’ . . . and from then on it performed beautifully and became the workhorse of World War II. A similar thing has happened in hospital Intensive Care Units. Astonishing drops in error rates, costs, and lost lives through the addition of simple check lists. It’s a story that needs to become ‘urgent common knowledge’ so that every hospital quickly adopts this practice. And it’s the kind of smart modernization through which Senator Obama hopes to shave $2,500 off the cost of an average family’s annual health care cost. And we need to find less expensive ways to care for the currently uninsured than the current system of Emergency Room care. CBS ran two terrific pieces this past Sunday Morning. The first is a fascinating 7 minutes (preceded by a 15-second promo) on the French system – ‘Why the French Can Afford to Get Sick.’ The second is on our system – ‘Perils of American Health Care.’ Because health care is so important to each of us . . . and represents more than 15% of our economy (versus 11% in France) . . . it really makes sense to find the time to watch these two pieces. We need to be better informed to participate in the debate. Let’s face it: ours is not the most conscientious electorate. So many people are, well, such idiots – and so quick to attack. To wit (to witless?): This kind of story represents the worst in journalistic distortion of the facts. If you divide the number of people living in France by the 12-14 BILLION dollar deficit for this system, it comes to a mere $201,000 per person!!!! A family of four could insure themselves for two lifetimes with that $800,000. Why is it that you totally evade that part of the equation? Probably because most of the dumb—es in the USA couldn’t begin to fathom the impact on the individual. Ultimately, the French taxpayers will have to pay the piper, just like we in the U.S. will if we wind up with a government system of medical care! Posted by gafilardi at 03:58 PM : Oct 27, 2008 ☞ Note the self-assuredness of the poster. You’ve got to admire such confidence and certainty. This is a guy or gal unafraid to expose the biased, liberal media. Except that $14 billion divided by the population of France (65 million) is actually $215, not $201,000. See the difference? Oy.
A Schoolmate Remembers Senator McCain October 29, 2008March 12, 2017 NICE RALLY! But, no, the bear market is not over. REDISTRIBUTION Alaska gets way more from Washington per capita than any other state, something like $5 for every $1 it sends to Washington. Indeed, by and large it’s the traditionally ‘red’ states that get more than they pay, at the expense of the blue states – that’s redistribution. You pay sales tax and that money is used to pay public school teachers – that’s redistribution. Most Americans believe in a progressive income tax, where the rate is higher for those doing best – that’s redistribution. The question is, as with so many things, one of balance. Too much redistribution is a bad thing. Too little is also a bad thing – both morally, perhaps, but also for the health and prosperity of a nation. The balance under Clinton/Gore, I thought, was pretty good. President Bush pushed it way more in favor of billionaires . . . and Senator McCain, same as President Bush, wants to make that permanent. How will you do under his plan? VOTE YOUR BOTTOM LINE See how you’d fare under Obama vs. McCain: Taxcutfacts.org. THE WORD FROM McCAIN SURROGATES On the differences between him and President Bush. RECOLLECTIONS OF A SCHOOLMATE Herewith an email from a schoolmate of John McCain, who grew up to be a successful business executive (and church leader). It’s not dispositive in any way, just one more data point as we strive to know the candidates. Charley Ellis sent me a note asking if I knew John McCain at Episcopal High (EHS), and if I did, did I have any insights. Actually I knew John from when I was in the seventh grade at St. Stephen’s in Alexandria, and he was in eighth grade there. He and a number of classmates moved on to EHS the next year, and a number of my classmates and I did the same the subsequent year. He graduated from EHS in 1954, and I in 1955. John was good friends throughout this period with a classmate of mine named Rives Richey. John was the shortest person in his class and Rives was the shortest person in my class. All three of us were skinny in those days. Both John and Rives reacted to their relative smallness by putting on bravado, and being distinctly feisty. Knowing them was what first led me to recognize that some short males try to compensate for being short by being feisty, extra-masculine in their demeanor, and/or being risk-takers. Both John and Rives were accomplished members of the EHS wrestling team. I don’t believe they were in the same weight category. One day when I was in seventh or eighth grade, a friend of mine and I rode our bikes over to the North Fairlington area of Arlington to visit our respective girl friends. John also lived in that neighborhood. We were greeted by the girlfriends’ excited news that Johnny McCain (as he was then known) had gone across the overpass where North 28th Street went over South Buchanan St. by walking on the handrail of the overpass bridge. My friend and I rode our bikes over to the overpass, which was a wooden bridge, with a walkway along one side. The walkway had a wooden fence on the outer side, a little above waist high in height. The top of the fence was the handrail, a board about four or five inches wide, tilted outward at about a 30-degree down angle. I presume that the tilt was meant to discourage people from trying to walk the handrail. I mentally calculated that the tilt wasn’t enough to be especially dangerous to a handrail walker (the surface was dry that day) so that there wasn’t a lot of danger caused by the tilt or by the four-or-five-inch width of the handrail. On the other hand, there was no bridge structure within reach of someone standing on the handrail, so that if you lost your balance, you would either fall onto the walkway, or fall 14 or 15 feet onto the sidewalk or street below. I decided that (1) there wasn’t a lot of danger of falling, (2) that if one did fall, one could be very badly hurt, (3) there wasn’t a lot of glory to be had by being the second person to do this (who remembers the name of the second man to run a four-minute mile?), and (4) I didn’t need to do it. So I didn’t. If you plug the address 4821 South 28th Street, Arlington, VA, into the map section of Mapquest.com and zoom in a couple of clicks, you can see very clearly the gap where South 28th used to go over South Buchanan. The wooden bridge is no longer there. Carrier pilots are the real risk-takers in the Navy (along with the SEALS). John was a carrier-based pilot. Choosing Sarah Palin was a risky move. It shored up the conservative base, but cost him among those in the middle. Was there a better plan that could have achieved both goals? You have probably heard the story of the man who got a shiny brand new hammer for his birthday. For a long time afterward, every problem looked to him like a nail. I think that US Presidents can get a dose of a similar response when they become Commander-in-Chief of the nation’s military. LBJ was probably the worst. I think that J. McCain has a big dose of military nail-ism also, but he got his from two other sources: Being the son and the grandson of two senior Navy Admirals, while not making admiral himself. Being a long-time POW in a war the US finally gave up on – without achieving “Victory.” I think that psychologically, John is in some internal-to-himself way still trying to “win” the Vietnam War. His concluding words in the last debate should have been formulated to appeal to Independent voters. Instead, they seemed addressed to himself and to his faithful followers. (“Keep fighting!”) Also, I think John overestimates his own gifts for strategy. The best approach is to win without fighting (or with only minimal fighting). The first Pres. Bush understood this; the second does not. Obama gets it, McCain does not. Petraeus has a very creative approach: “If you can beat ‘em, pay ‘em to join our side!” John’s proposed changes to medical insurance are flawed not only in the way pointed out by Obama (insurance companies would rush to the states with the weakest regulations). John doesn’t seem to understand that the cost to an individual when buying medical insurance is much greater than when one is a member of a group plan. There’s no reason why John should understand this; he’s been on Government-provided health coverage since birth, due to his father’s coverage, then on his own coverage as active military, and finally under the life-time coverage for those who retired with 20 or more years of military service, not to mention his coverage as a Senator. I admire John’s record of service. I just think that what he wants now is out of his league. Best to all, Ted Mollegen ABSENTEE BALLOTS Juan Ahonen-Jover: “You write, ‘If you have secured an absentee ballot but find your plans have changed and you actually can vote in person, rip up the absentee ballot and get thee to your polling place.’ Do not rip up your absentee ballot – bring it with you if you decide to vote in person. Many states require it as a proof that you are not voting twice. If you do vote absentee, call the supervisor of elections to verify that they got your ballot and that it will be counted. Finally, if you vote on Election Day, account for the possibility that you may need to stay in line for several hours. Federal legislation requires that if you are in line at the poll closing time, they have to allow you to vote even if it takes many hours.” PROBLEMS VOTING? CNN would like to hear about it. Call CNN’s voter hotline at 877-GOCNN-08 (800-462-6608) to report it.
The NeoCon and the Norwegian Newlywed (How Then Should We Invest) October 28, 2008March 12, 2017 THE WORD FROM ALASKA From the Anchorage Daily News: Many Alaskans are proud to see their governor, and their state, so prominent on the national stage. Gov. Palin’s nomination clearly alters the landscape for Alaskans as we survey this race for the presidency — but it does not overwhelm all other judgment. The election, after all is said and done, is not about Sarah Palin, and our sober view is that her running mate, Sen. John McCain, is the wrong choice for president at this critical time for our nation. Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee, brings far more promise to the office. In a time of grave economic crisis, he displays thoughtful analysis, enlists wise counsel and operates with a cool, steady hand. The same cannot be said of Sen. McCain. DIRTY DANCING Seattle Democrat Darcy Burner is running for Congress. The Republican incumbent is casting doubt on her education credentials. The irony is that she absolutely, positively graduated from Harvard with a degree in computer science and economics – his attack is completely baseless – while he claims a B.A. from Concordia University when in fact he did not receive one. It is by this same thuggish Republican tactic that the party of George W. Bush – who went AWOL from the Alabama National Guard – mocked John Kerry’s three purple hearts. Or by which Republican Saxby Chambliss – who sidestepped military service with ‘a bad knee’ – attacked former Georgia Senator Max Cleland, a decorated veteran and triple amputee, ‘for breaking his oath to protect and defend the Constitution.’ Or by which John McCain says Barack Obama wants to raise taxes on Joe the Plumber (he wants to lower them) . . . or Sarah Palin says Barack Obama ‘pals around with terrorists’ (what nonsense) . . . or Cindy McCain says ‘The day that Sen. Obama cast a vote to not to fund my son when he was serving sent a cold chill through my body’ (when her husband had cast the same vote a month before). What happened to the Party of Nelson Rockefeller? Or of Barry Goldwater, for that matter? GOLDWATER FOR OBAMA ‘We believe strongly in what our grandfather stood for: honesty, integrity, and personal freedom, free from political maneuvering and fear tactics,’ writes his granddaughter, an Arizonan who will be voting for Obama. ‘Nothing about the Republican ticket offers the hope America needs to regain its standing in the world, that’s why [my siblings and I] are going to support Barack Obama.’ REAGAN FOR OBAMA Click here (and then click NEXT). FED CHAIRMAN BERNANKE FOR OBAMA Or so says the Wall Street Journal. ‘A STRIKING NUMBER OF CONSERVATIVES’ FOR OBAMA Or so reports the The Economist. FORMER REPUBLICAN SENATOR LARRY PRESSLER FOR OBAMA A South Dakotan who’s never before voted Democrat ‘got the feeling that Obama will be able to handle this financial crisis better.‘ FORMER REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR WILLIAM WELD FOR OBAMA Governor of Massachusetts from 1991 to1997, he calls Obama ‘a once-in-a-lifetime candidate.’ FORMER REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR ARNE CARLSON FOR OBAMA Governor of Minnesota from 1991 to 1999, he says, ‘[Obama] has laid out for this nation a vision for a national purpose.’ And writes that he ‘truly believe[s] our very survival as a successful and independent nation is at stake.’ And describes Obama as having ‘the potential to become a truly great president.’ PROMINENT NEOCON KEN ADELMAN FOR OBAMA This Iraq War architect writes that for the first time in his life he is voting for the less conservative of two candidates: . . . McCain’s views are closer to mine than Obama’s. But I’ve learned over this Bush era to value competence along with ideology. Otherwise, our ideology gets discredited, as it has so disastrously over the past eight years. McCain’s temperament – leading him to bizarre behavior during the week the economic crisis broke – and his judgment – leading him to Wasilla – depressed me into thinking that “our guy” would be a(nother) lousy conservative president. Been there, done that. I’d rather a competent moderate president. . . . . . . McCain would not — could not — be a good president. Obama just might be. SIGN AT AN INTERSECTION IN DOWNTOWN NORTH VERNON, INDIANA: Even WE’VE had Enough! REDNECKS 4 OBAMA GO VOTE HEARTWARMING NORWEGIAN STORY Here it is in Norwegian. And here it is in English (with a photo): Mary was a newlywed and ready to move to Norway, but was stopped at the airport because she didn’t have enough money for the trip. Then a stranger turned up and paid for her. Mary Menth Andersen was 31 years old at the time and had just married Norwegian Dag Andersen. She was looking forward to starting a new life in Åsgårdstrand in Vestfold with him. But first she had to get all of her belongings across to Norway. The date was November 2nd, 1988. At the airport in Miami things were hectic as usual, with long lines at the check-in counters. When it was finally Mary’s turn and she had placed her luggage on the baggage line, she got the message that would crush her bubbling feeling of happiness. “You’ll have to pay a 103 dollar surcharge if you want to bring both those suitcases to Norway,” the man behind the counter said. Mary had no money. Her new husband had travelled ahead of her to Norway, and she had no one else to call. “I was completely desperate and tried to think which of my things I could manage without. But I had already made such a careful selection of my most prized possessions,” says Mary. Although she explained the situation to the man behind the counter, he showed no signs of mercy. “I started to cry, tears were pouring down my face and I had no idea what to do. Then I heard a gentle and friendly voice behind me saying, ‘That’s OK, I’ll pay for her.’ ” Mary turned around to see a tall man whom she had never seen before. “He had a gentle and kind voice that was still firm and decisive. The first thing I thought was, Who is this man?” Although this happened 20 years ago, Mary still remembers the authority that radiated from the man. “He was nicely dressed, fashionably dressed with brown leather shoes, a cotton shirt open at the throat and khaki pants,” says Mary. She was thrilled to be able to bring both her suitcases to Norway and assured the stranger that he would get his money back. The man wrote his name and address on a piece of paper that he gave to Mary. She thanked him repeatedly. When she finally walked off towards the security checkpoint, he waved goodbye to her. The piece of paper said ‘Barack Obama’ and his address in Kansas, which is the state where his mother comes from. Mary carried the slip of paper around in her wallet for years, before it was thrown out. “He was my knight in shining armor,” says Mary, smiling. She paid the 103 dollars back to Obama the day after she arrived in Norway. At that time he had just finished his job as a poorly paid community worker in Chicago, and had started his law studies at prestigious Harvard university. In the spring of 2006 Mary’s parents had heard that Obama was considering a run for president, but that he had still not decided. They chose to write a letter in which they told him that he would receive their votes. At the same time, they thanked Obama for helping their daughter 18 years earlier. In a letter to Mary’s parents dated May 4th, 2006 and stamped “United States Senate, Washington DC,” Barack Obama writes: “I want to thank you for the lovely things you wrote about me and for reminding me of what happened at Miami airport. I’m happy I could help back then, and I’m delighted to hear that your daughter is happy in Norway. Please send her my best wishes. Sincerely, Barack Obama, United States senator.” The parents sent the letter on to Mary. Mary says that when her friends and associates talk about the election, especially when race relations is the heated subject, she relates the story of the kind man who helped out a stranger-in-need over twenty years ago, years before he had even thought about running for high office. HOW THEN SHOULD WE INVEST For those of you more interesting in money than votes, John Mauldin tells all.
One-Party Rule October 27, 2008January 3, 2017 THE BIGGER PICTURE ‘By 1424,’ Wikipedia tells us, ‘Cambridge University library owned only 122 books – each of which had a value equal to a farm or vineyard.[1]‘ To a ten-year-old, 600 years is an eternity. To me, who merely acts like a ten-year-old, it is just ten of my lives-so-far laid end to end. We are hurtling through history at an ever more rapid rate (remember, Kurzweil: technological progress will be 32 times more dazzling these next 50 years than the last) . . . desperately in need of steady hands to keep from spinning out of control. Speaking of which . . . ANOTHER REPUBLICAN FOR OBAMA Now we learn that former Bush White House Press Secretary and Texas Republican Scott McClellan will be voting for Obama. Scott McClellan . . . Susan Eisenhower . . . Julie Nixon Eisenhower . . . Colin Powell . . . Christopher Buckley . . . Michael Smerconish . . . former National Review publisher Wick Allison . . . former Senator Lincoln Chaffee . . . former Iowa Congressman Jim Leach . . . Fairbanks Alaska Mayor Jim Whitaker . . . Lilibet Hagel . . . Lennar CEO Stuart Miller . . . the Chicago Tribune for the first time in 161 years . . . This is not politics as usual. There is no corresponding list of lifelong Democrats jumping ship for Senator McCain and Governor Palin. Many life-long Republicans, conservatives and libertarians are seeing in Barack Obama the kind of honest, steady, open-minded, inspirational – perhaps transformational – problem-solver we need to get us through this mess. Let your Republican, conservative, and libertarian friends know they are equally welcome – and that we need them. And one more thing in that regard: FEAR OF ‘ONE-PARTY RULE’ Now is not the time to favor government gridlock. Now is not the time to protect the status quo. For those who do fear ‘one-party rule,’ there are two reasons, I think, not to: The first is that without 60 Democratic Senators, the Republican Party retains a veto. Even with 60 – a long-shot – that number includes centrist Democrats . . . and Joe Lieberman who caucuses with the Democrats but is constantly by Senator McCain’s side. These centrists, too, would have an effective veto. The second and more important reason is that Senator Obama would not propose, or sign, anything crazy in the first place. He clearly sees the need to govern “from the center” and bring people together. On economics, you will have the kind of policy borne of advisors like Warren Buffett, Paul Volcker, Bob Rubin, Larry Summers, Hank Paulson – and Bill Clinton. These are not socialists. On military matters, you will have the kind of policy borne of advisors like former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell and former Supreme Allied Commander General Wesley Clark. These are not pacifists. On the Supreme Court, six of the last eight Justices were appointed by Reagan, Bush, and Bush. (Senator McCain promises more of the same: “clones” – his word – of George W. Bush’s appointments, if elected.) So I don’t think anyone need be concerned they will be outnumbered. TWO MINUTES WITH OBAMA With Obama we would get a man determined to reach the best possible solutions to difficult problems. I like that his campaign’s mantra has been, “Obama, no drama.” Rather than drama, his campaign has been about working toward difficult goals (like winning the nomination, and now, perhaps, the Presidency) – with a clear vision, a steady hand, and a lot of smart teammates – and, touch wood, achieving them. We could use the same thing in the White House. If you’re still on the fence, take two minutes to hear it from the candidate himself.
Ron Howard Is Bald! October 24, 2008January 3, 2017 PRIORITIES You will recall that, through their family foundation, the McCains gave $78,000 to charity last year. According to Vanity Fair, Cindy McCain wore $280,000 earrings to the Republican Convention. Meanwhile, the RNC picked up a $150,000 tab for Sarah Palin’s eight-week wardrobe. Per Bill Press‘s column this week, Michelle Obama wore a $148 dress on ‘The View.’ THE NUB OF THEIR ARGUMENT The McCain campaign has two major themes: First, that Senator Obama will raise taxes on small businesses, like the one Joe the Plumber hopes one day to buy. But this is simply untrue: Obama would raise taxes on only about 2% of small businesses, and lower them on most of the remaining 98% – and on Joe the Plumber. Second, that Senator Obama “pals around with terrorists like Bill Ayers.” But by this standard, Reagan confidante and ambassador, the late Walter Annenberg – who appointed Ayers to the board Obama served on – would also have been suspect. Could Reagan himself have been a terrorist sympathizer if Annenberg was? And as if all that weren’t a grand enough vision to win your vote, Senator McCain says he “knows how to get Bin Laden” – and he’ll do it if elected President. Leading one to recall President Bush’s similar vow to get him, dead or alive . . . and to wonder why, if McCain does know how to get Bin Laden, he hasn’t told someone. TELEMARKETING Gail Collins recounts the story of a McCain telemarketer who just couldn’t take it anymore. BETTER TO VOTE IN PERSON From Rolling Stone.com: Suppressing the vote has long been a cornerstone of the GOP’s electoral strategy. Shortly before the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980, Paul Weyrich — a principal architect of today’s Republican Party — scolded evangelicals who believed in democracy. “Many of our Christians have what I call the ‘goo goo’ syndrome — good government,” said Weyrich, who co-founded Moral Majority with Jerry Falwell. “They want everybody to vote. I don’t want everybody to vote. . . . As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.” Today, Weyrich’s vision has become a national reality. Since 2003, according to the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, at least 2.7 million new voters have had their applications to register rejected. In addition, at least 1.6 million votes were never counted in the 2004 election — and the commission’s own data suggests that the real number could be twice as high. To purge registration rolls and discard ballots, partisan election officials used a wide range of pretexts, from “unreadability” to changes in a voter’s signature. And this year, thanks to new provisions of the Help America Vote Act, the number of discounted votes could surge even higher. . . . To justify this battery of new voting impediments, Republicans cite an alleged upsurge in voting fraud. Indeed, the U.S.-attorney scandal that resulted in the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales began when the White House fired federal prosecutors who resisted political pressure to drum up nonexistent cases of voting fraud against Democrats. “They wanted some splashy pre-election indictments that would scare these alleged hordes of illegal voters away,” says David Iglesias, a U.S. attorney for New Mexico who was fired in December 2006. “We took over 100 complaints and investigated for almost two years — but I didn’t find one prosecutable case of voter fraud in the entire state of New Mexico.” . . . ☞ Vote early, if your state allows it, to avoid problems on Election Day. If challenged, do NOT accept a “provisional ballot” – just keep politely but resolutely going up the chain until you get to cast your real ballot like everyone else. The chances are good there will be a lawyer on hand or nearby to help protect your rights. Finally, though it’s a bit late to be telling you this, if you have secured an absentee ballot but find your plans have changed and you actually can vote in person, rip up the absentee ballot and get thee to your polling place. The authors of this piece say you run less risk of being disenfranchised if you do so. A great many absentee ballots are thrown out on technicalities, they say – and the voter never even gets to know it. RON HOWARD IS BALD! An unusual video. (Thanks, Roger.)
Yesterday October 23, 2008March 12, 2017 WHO GOT THE WEALTH WE SPREAD AROUND This pie chart shows how the $863 billion of household income growth from 2002 to 2006 was spread around. Three-quarters of it went to the top 1%. And Bush/McCain/Palin think that wasn’t enough – that those good folks needed tax cuts on their additional income, even if it meant going further into National Debt to provide them. It’s just loony tunes to hear McCain/Palin trying to frighten small business owners. For the approximately 98% who net less than $250,000 a year, taxes would go down or stay the same. And for the top 2% (a group very much NOT including Joe the Plumber or the owner of the business Joe hopes to buy), it’s not as though taxes would be confiscatory. They would simply be much as they were under Clinton/Gore, a time when almost everyone – very much including the rich – was doing well. The real spread-the-wealth-income-redistribution-welfare state is Alaska. It takes wealth from the oil companies and sends big checks to every citizen in the state – even to people who pay no taxes! Even to people who don’t work! On top of that, unlike Ohio, say, which gets back less than half a buck in federal assistance for every dollar paid in federal taxes, Alaska gets back more like five times what it pays. Alaska is seriously on the dole – from states like New York. I VOTED YESTERDAY Go ye, if your state has early voting, and do likewise. Larry from Ft. Lauderdale: ‘Day after day, I read your column and just wish you’d stick to MONEY and other fun stuff. But you don’t. You’ve been shaking my resolve. I generally side with Republicans on economic matters, and despite disagreeing with them on so many other positions, I usually vote Republican. This is a great source of conflict for me, but that’s how I vote. Finally the other day I thought to myself, ‘Hey, I don’t think I’m a Republican who agrees with the Democrats on a few things any more. I’m a Democrat who just disagrees with a few of my new party’s positions.’ I’m voting for Obama!‘ ☞ Yay! (Larry acknowledges it was Senator McCain’s choice of Governor Palin that finally pushed him over the edge. Here is Monty Python’s John Cleese on this choice.) I BOUGHT STUFF YESTERDAY Not huge amounts – I’d be surprised if we’ve seen the bottom. But I do think most people are now relatively confident that the world’s central bankers simply will not allow a general collapse of the financial system, no matter what it takes to prevent it. Good news. And because so many investors expect a tough, perhaps prolonged recession, that expectation may be largely built into stock prices. (Then again, it’s been so long since we had a prolonged, tough recession, investors may have forgotten, or never been alive to know, just how discouraged markets can get. Or how many stocks really can go to zero, as their underlying company gets reorganized through bankruptcy.) Tax-selling drives battered shares even lower as people sell to realize losses they can use to offset gains they may have taken earlier in the year and up to $3,000 in ordinary income. So 10,000 Boise Paper warrants could be had for $200 yesterday morning (and $350 yesterday afternoon), down 99% from their high less than a year or so ago. I bought a zillion of them not because I expect the underlying company, Boise Paper, to thrive. But what if it did muddle through? Its stock is down from $10 to 53 cents. What if by June 18, 2011, when those warrants expire, the stock had returned to $10? Highly unlikely, to be sure, but not impossible – and, exercisable at $7.50, each one would be worth about $2.50. So the 10,000 you bought for $200 – plus a deep discount broker’s $8 commission – would have become a $25,000 long-term capital gain. A less reckless speculation, though still very much a speculation, would be to buy BZ stock itself. The leverage is not as great – and the possibility of total loss certainly still there – but with the stock, there is no deadline by which better times must return. If the stock hit $5 five years from now, you’d have made nearly 10 times the yesterday’s 53-cent closing price . . . whereas the warrants would long since have expired worthless. Speculations like this abound (and my track record at picking them is, as many of you have learned from sorry experience, mixed). But I bought some Altus Pharmaceuticals yesterday at 50 cents, down from its $14 high a year ago. It has no debt to speak of and plenty of cash, at least for now. It’s a bet that the FDA will approve a drug someone smarter than me thinks it will approve.
Religion October 22, 2008March 12, 2017 FOR YOUR EVANGELICAL FRIENDS This from a man who voted for McCain in 2000: Frank Schaeffer . . . is the son of the late evangelist Francis Schaeffer and considered himself a lifelong Republican. He voted for John McCain in 2000, and McCain even endorsed one of Schaeffer’s earlier books on military service. But on Friday, Schaeffer published an open letter to McCain excoriating the Arizona senator. RABBIS FOR OBAMA More than three hundred of them. Oy! IF ANY OF YOUR BEST FRIENDS ARE JEWISH Quite a few Jewish voters this year are torn. They know they should be for Obama on so many issues. But they are unsure of his commitment to Israel. My own thought is that either McCain or Obama will be very strong on Israel, but that when it comes to helping to keep Israel secure, Obama will have a huge advantage: much of the world will like and be inspired by him, and want to cooperate with him. This, from an American who lives and works in Jerusalem: From: Lionel Wolberger Date: October 6, 2008 10:25:00 AM EDT To: Howard Brown Subject: Security and Obama Dear fellow American and fellow Jewish voters, I am an American living in Israel for 12 years. I have been watching the U.S. election with apprehension. My wife and I are raising three children here, so we have a big stake in the future of both countries. I think that the main issue in this American election is security. Not just National (military) Security, but security in a bigger sense: the ability to feel safe, confident, protected – free from fear and anxiety about the future. I work at a security company in Jerusalem, and we know that security is a means, not an end. To actually “be” secure and to “feel” secure are two completely different things. You can FEEL secure even though you’re not, and you can BE secure even when you don’t feel it. And I am concerned that many Jewish Americans may be planning to vote for security in a way that will not make either America or Israel safer. It might FEEL more secure to vote for McCain: the candidate who is a former soldier with a Bible-thumping young woman by his side. It may feel less secure to vote for a young man named “Barack Hussein,” with a Muslim father. I understand this but none of these FEELINGS translate into BEING secure. I know, as a citizen of Israel, that Iran, Syria, Hamas and Al Qaeda are plotting to harm me and other Israelis, and these are not short term threats. To be really secure, Israel needs a reliable partner in the U.S. to face these long-term challenges. Now, when America’s military has its hands full with the protracted war in Iraq and the Wall Street crisis, its ability to come to Israel’s assistance is greatly diminished. At a time like this, Jewish Americans should not be moved by sound bites, fear mongering and rumors that obscure the real issues affecting both America’s security and Israel’s. Talking points cannot convey the complex reality of the issues that really affect us. On the one hand, we have Senator McCain, a 72 1/2 year old cancer survivor and former smoker, 2 1/2 years older than any president that has ever [been sworn in as President]. He may need to leave his presidential duties to Sarah Palin who has no track record, especially relating to Israel and Jewish issues, and refuses to reveal her thinking on the subject outside of her well memorized talking points. This should be a red flag for Jewish voters. Jewish voters should remember that people who use scare tactics — like saying that Obama is Muslim and associates with terrorists — are also, in the end, anti-Jewish. Jewish minorities are always vulnerable to such pandering, bigotry and lies. I hope that Jewish voters won’t let these scare tactics work. Go, like I did, to FactCheck.org and read the facts. Go to the Library of Congress website and read each Senator’s legislative record. Go to Wikipedia and look over the candidates’ pages (and religions). I am terribly concerned that many of my fellow Jews believe the bigotry propagated by the same people who lied about John Kerry’s exemplary patriotism and heroism. True, Obama is young: although Theodore Roosevelt, Ulysses S. Grant, Bill Clinton and John F. Kennedy were younger than he is when they became presidents. I know that many Jews were scared by the words of his previous minister, Jeremiah Wright, but Obama repudiated Wright’s ideas numerous times; Palin, on the other hand, has not repudiated the ideas of either her Pentecostal minister Muthee nor Brickner, the Director of Jews for Jesus, who preaches that terrorist attacks in Israel are God’s ‘judgment’ against Israelis for failing to believe in Jesus as the Messiah. Barack Obama’s record and his words have been consistent and strongly supportive of Israel. Just read the letter from Rabbi Jacob of Congregation KAM Isaiah Israel, the Chicago synagogue across the street from Obama’s Chicago home. Rabbi Jacob has known and worked with Senator Obama for many years and he is urging Americans to vote for Obama for many of the same reasons I have given. Obama can lead the U.S.A.; he can marshal its legions of talented people to continue to lead the world, as they have for centuries. They are the ones that will make all of us safe, sound and secure. Check out the website I set up with other letters, great videos and a blog.
The McCains Gave Less to Charity Than The Obamas October 21, 2008March 12, 2017 REPUBLICANS FOR OBAMA To my list yesterday (Colin Powell, Susan Eisenhower, Julie Nixon Eisenhower, Christopher Buckley, etc.), I should have added Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel’s wife, Lilibet. A Republican who contributed to Senator McCain’s 2000 primary, she, too, has endorsed Senator Obama. And Republican talk show host Michael Smerconish* – who liked President Bush so much in 2004 he emceed his final Pennsylvania rally – has declared for Obama. People loved Sarah Palin on Saturday Night Live, but doubt she’s fit for the most important job on Earth, should something happen to John McCain . . . and fear something already has happened to John McCain for having chosen her. *If you like Jackie Mason, click the link. FIBS Since February, at least 158 independent, non-partisan ‘fact checks’ have debunked McCain campaign claims. See them here. Whether you consider them fibs, lies, or just intentionally misleading distortions, one thing they are not: straight talk. SPREADING IT AROUND Andy Shore: ‘Can you explain to me how Palin’s increase in Alaska’s windfall profits tax on oil companies, and handout of an extra $1200 to every man, woman, and child in Alaska, is not ‘spreading the wealth around?’ McCain/Palin are ‘spreading it around,’ too, and it smells.’ ☞ When a Republican gives money to people who pay no taxes, or bails out the banks, that’s free market capitalism and small government at its best. See the difference? BEING RAPED A quick message from a teen to a former beauty queen. BEING RICH Carolyn Kistler: ‘Please tell me, when has it not been a glorious time to be rich and powerful?’ ☞ Good point. I guess I should say these past eight years have been ‘an even grander time than usual.’ Speaking of which . . . McCAIN INCOME AND GIVING A couple of weeks ago I noted that The John and Cindy McCain Family Foundation gave out $78,000 last year and $188,000 in 2006 – $93,000 of it to the private prep school his sons attended and the private prep school his daughter attends. ‘These are huge amounts to give to charity (or to prep schools) if your household income is a few hundred thousand dollars,’ I wrote, ‘but theirs tops $6 million.’ I was guessing on that figure, because Mrs. McCain had not released her tax returns. Now she has, at least in summary form, for 2005 and 2006. She reported $5 million or so a year. But of course that’s just reportable income. Most years, there is likely a few million more in unrealized appreciation that is neither reported nor taxed. And the significant share of her income that comes from real estate is presumably understated by depreciation (which lowers reportable income but not, generally, actual income). So really, she may be making $8 million or $10 million in an average year. Plus, the household budget is augmented by her husband’s not inconsiderable earnings and tax-free disability pay. In that context, $78,000 in giving last year seems modest. Less than one-tenth of one percent of their estimated $100 million fortune. It’s totally their choice, of course, but speaks to their priorities. And to the sense of urgency they feel about the problems of the world and the intensity of their compassion. (The Obamas gave $77,315 in 2005, $60,307 in 2006, and $240,370 in 2007. From 2000 through 2004, their giving was negligible, but they were still paying off their student loans.)
What Does It Say? October 20, 2008January 3, 2017 ANOTHER LIFELONG REPUBLICAN FOR OBAMA What does it say to moderate Republicans that Colin Powell joins Susan Eisenhower, Julie Nixon Eisenhower, and such other lifelong Republican voters as William F. Buckley Jr. scion Chris Buckley, and former National Review publisher Wick Allison, in endorsing Senator Obama? Can the case really be made, with endorsements by superbly thoughtful people like Warren Buffett and former Federal Reserve Chair Paul Volcker that Senator Obama is a radical socialist who ‘pals around with terrorists?’ What does it say about the McCain/Palin candidacy that this is how they’re trying to win? What does it say when lifelong Republican CEOs like Lennar’s Stuart Miller have switched to Obama? (Lennar is the nation’s largest home builder.) When the Chicago Tribune endorses a Democrat for the first time in 161 years? Writing, in small part: Many Americans say they’re uneasy about Obama. He’s pretty new to them. We can provide some assurance. We have known Obama since he entered politics a dozen years ago. We have watched him, worked with him, argued with him as he rose from an effective state senator to an inspiring U.S. senator to the Democratic Party’s nominee for president. We have tremendous confidence in his intellectual rigor, his moral compass and his ability to make sound, thoughtful, careful decisions. He is ready. JOE THE PLUMBER, PHIL THE BRICKLAYER . . . Everybody does know, don’t they, that both Joe the plumber and now his imaginary friends Phil the bricklayer and Wendy the waitress would pay less tax under Obama’s proposals than under McCain’s? Could the McCain campaign have known this when they chose Joe to be their standard bearer? Was it another case of inadequate vetting? What really seems to have happened is simply this: Step 1. Milking decades of Republican branding as the party of small government (except big wars and bridges to nowhere) and of fiscal responsibility (except 85% of our $10 trillion Nation Debt was racked up under their administrations) and of low taxes (except the overwhelming share of their tax cuts have gone to the best off) and of small government (I know I’m repeating myself, but did I mention that after their excessive deregulation of the financial system, thanks in good measure to key McCain advisor Phil Gramm, they have now in effect taken over the financial system?) – milking all that, the McCain campaign has persuaded many good Americans that Senator Obama will raise their taxes. Joe was one of those.* *He may also have been one of the 70% of Bush voters led to believe Iraq attacked us on 9/11. The Republican Party has proven masterful at getting tens of millions of people to believe things that are not true. Step 2. Having persuaded Joe of this falsehood, McCain now uses Joe’s misperception as proof Obama will raise taxes. Hey, you may not believe politicians, but surely you can believe Joe. The fact that Joe has grudgingly acknowledged he would get a larger tax cut under >Obama’s proposal than McCain’s is ignored. (Joe the plumber, like Phil the bricklayer and Wendy the waitress – and like almost everybody else in America – earns very substantially less than $250,000 a year.) The fact that only 2% – not 50% – of small business owners earn more than $250,00 . . . well, why should Senator McCain be even remotely truthful about this? Candidate Bush never was. Candidate Bush said in 2000 he favored a humble foreign policy, opposed nation building, would balance the budget and scoffed at Gore’s charge that his tax cuts went mainly to the rich. No, Bush swore, ‘the vast majority’ of his tax cuts would go to average Joes. Average Joes believed Bush instead of Gore and the result is now both tragic and plain to see.* The McCain hope – having, among other things, hired the same practitioners of personal destruction that Bush used in 2000 – is that lightning will strike a third term time. *Though it has been a positively grand time to be rich and powerful.