Don't Play Me Like I'm Stupid

I don't care if we are talking sports or politics, one thing I absolutely hate is for someone to insult my intelligence by lying dead to my face. It's somewhat of a common practice in sports.

We, in the media, call it coach-speak. Coaches will say certain things they know may not be completely true in order to keep their team focused on the task at hand or so they won't tip their hand before a game is played. Oftentimes, it's blatant, but always harmless in the grand scheme of things.

However, in the world of politics, insulting society's intelligence isn't just commonplace, it's the norm, and as we have seen with Iraq, it can be gravely dangerous.

Politicians have made a career out of saying whatever is necessary to get re-elected, and voters have been falling for such tactics for centuries.

But to quote an old, wise sage from the 90's, "Homey don't play that!"

I know in some parts of our country--especially the part where I live now--it's acceptable to openly lie to any and everyone about any and everything. But I grew up in the South, and down there you can't just knowingly lie to people and expect them to take you at your word. As we Southerners like to say, "Don't piss on my head and tell me it's raining!"

I raise this point, because I'm starting to get a little upset at the current presidential campaign, particularly the Republican party. I've already touched on the hypocrisy of the McCain campaign.

Check out this latest example:



So, being a mayor or governor for only a short time disqualifies you from the presidency, but it doesn't disqualify you from being one heartbeat away from it? Whew, I feel so much better now.

But beyond the hypocrisy, it's the outright, blatant lies that are originating from McCain supporters, and oftentimes his campaign itself.

New York Times Columnist Paul Krugman writes, "Did you hear about how Barack Obama wants to have sex education in kindergarten, and called Sarah Palin a pig? Did you hear about how Ms. Palin told Congress, "Thanks, but no thanks" when it wanted to buy Alaska a Bridge to Nowhere. These stories have two things in common: they’re all claims recently made by the McCain campaign — and they’re all out-and-out lies."

Charles Babbington from the Associated Press says, "The "Straight Talk Express" has detoured into doublespeak."

And James Rainey writes in the Los Angeles Times, "News organizations and these admirable truth-squadding outfits, including PolitiFact.com, do not collaborate. But in independent news reports and commentaries this week, they seemed to reach a consensus to say ‘enough’ to the McCain camp's efforts to demonize Barack Obama."

Enough already. I'm beyond fed up with these low-rate political tactics. Don't disguise your lack of solid viewpoints and arguments on the issues that affect us the most with lies and smears of the opposition.

Don't play me like I'm stupid. Don't play the American voters like they are stupid. This election is too damned important to be playing games!

Tax Plans: Obaba vs. McCain

There seems to be quite a bit of confusion about the differences in the proposed tax plans of Barack Obama of John McCain. A recent article in The Washington Post broke down the numbers according to annual salaries.

I will be honest and tell you that my tax burden will go up under Obama's plan. However, losing a few additional thousand dollars a year will not hurt me financially. I am much more concerned about the larger population of tax payers. Plus, if the economy grows under Obama has it has historically done under Democratic presidents, I will recoup that money down the road. (see earlier post)

So, check out the numbers below and decide for yourself which plan makes the most sense for not only you, but for the country.

Obama and McCain Tax Proposals
According to a new analysis by the Tax Policy Center, a joint project of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain are both proposing tax plans that would result in cuts for most American families. Obama's plan gives the biggest cuts to those who make the least, while McCain would give the largest cuts to the very wealthy. For the approximately 147,000 families that make up the top 0.1 percent of the income scale, the difference between the two plans is stark. While McCain offers a $269,364 tax cut, Obama would raise their taxes, on average, by $701,885 - a difference of nearly $1 million.

(Courtesy: The Washington Post)

Is History Siding With Obama’s Economic Plan?

A friend sent me this New York Times article, which examined the effect Democratic and Republican presidents have had on the national economy.

The article includes some really pertinent information, especially as it relates to the upcoming election.

"Simply put, the United States economy has grown faster, on average, under Democratic presidents than under Republicans.

The stark contrast between the whiz-bang Clinton years and the dreary Bush years is familiar because it is so recent. But while it is extreme, it is not atypical. Data for the whole period from 1948 to 2007, during which Republicans occupied the White House for 34 years and Democrats for 26, show average annual growth of real gross national product of 1.64 percent per capita under Republican presidents versus 2.78 percent under Democrats.

That 1.14-point difference, if maintained for eight years, would yield 9.33 percent more income per person, which is a lot more than almost anyone can expect from a tax cut."

So regardless of your views on the upcoming presidential election or your opinions on the differences between Barack Obama and John McCain's respective economic plans, the article definitely makes for an interesting read.

Is History Siding With Obama’s Economic Plan?

Allegations Of Racist & Sexist Remarks By McCain/Palin Surface

I don't know the authenticity or credibility of these respective articles and internet sites, but someone please, please, please tell me these stories aren't true.

Unfortunately, however, my life experiences have prepared me not to be shocked in the least if any of these stories turn out to be true. I pray for the day when I will be shocked.

McCain: racist, bigot & homophobe

Alaskans Speak (In A Frightened Whisper): Palin Is “Racist, Sexist, Vindictive, And Mean”

More Of The Same: Bush = McCain

Republican Inaccuracies And Hypocrisy Show No Bounds

I realize that in this day and age of modern American politics, one side is going to constantly attack the other side on the issues-- both real and unreal. So, as much as I hate such tactics, I get it.

However, the only thing I would ask for--and I assume the majority of Americans would hope for as well--is that the attacks are factual in nature and they are not hypocritical. The speeches and some of the commentary we heard Wednesday night at the Republican National Convention did not live up to those requests.

In the words of Associated Press journalist, Jim Kuhnnenn, Sarah Palin and her Republican supporters "stretched the truth" in their reproach of Barack Obama and their praise of one another.

As far as the hypocrisy is concerned, I think I'll just turn it over to The Daily Show's Jon Stewart.




Again, I understand the relentless attacking of the other side, but those attacks, even if aimed towards my favored party, would carry much more weight with me if they were accurate and fair.

I'm beginning to think, unfortunately, that such a request is far too much to ask in today's political forum, especially from conservatives.

UPDATE: Speaking of hypocrisy!

McCain Congratulates Obama In TV Ad

I just witnessed something so rare in modern American politics that I could barely believe my eyes.

A new John McCain television ad features the Arizona Senator actually congratulating Barack Obama on his historical nomination. McCain even referred to the anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King's "I Have A Dream" speech, which took place on this day 45 years ago without actually mentioning it by name. As I said, he "referred" to it.

But nonetheless, I thought the ad was actually heartfelt and sincere. McCain actually seemed genuine in his congratulations, and for the first time since his campaign started, I felt as if he was speaking from his own heart, instead of the notepad from one of his advisors.

But don't expect this type of civility to continue. As McCain, himself, said in the ad, "Tomorrow, we will be back at it."

US Deficit Zooming To Half-trillion As Bush Leaves

What if you gave me $236 only to find out later that I now owed several people in excess of $482? So, not only did I blow through the money you gave me, but then I turned around and spent another $482 that I didn't have.

Well, that's exactly what the George W. Bush administration has done since taking office, except we aren't talking dollars, but rather BILLIONS of them.

That's right, President Bush will leave office with the United States facing a record deficit of nearly $500 billion. How's that for a welcome gift for Barack Obama or John McCain?

As bad as that number is, I fear it will only get worse if the Republicans run the White House for the next four years. Senator McCain has publicly admitted several times that the economy is not his strong suit, thus one could conclude that he will be more likely to be swayed by Republican economic strategists, and that would mean more of the same from the White House.

What? You're saying just because President Bush subscribed to a certain economic plan that it doesn't mean Senator McCain would do the same thing if he became president? Really?

Well, I've always believed the reason we study history is to prevent us from repeating mistakes from the past, but evidently the Republicans do not believe in such a philosophy.

Check out this excerpt from an article written by Robert Freeman on CommonDreams.org in October of 2004:

When Reagan took office in 1981, the national debt stood at $995 billion. Twelve years later, by the end of George H.W. Bush’s presidency, it had exploded to $4 trillion. Reagan was a “B” grade movie actor and a doddering, probably clinically senile president, but he was a sheer genius at rewarding his friends by saddling other people with debts.

Bill Clinton reversed Reagan’s course, raising taxes on the wealthy, and lowering them for the working and middle classes. This produced the longest sustained economic expansion in American history. Importantly, it also produced budgetary surpluses allowing the government to begin paying down the crippling debt begun under Reagan. In 2000, Clinton’s last year, the surplus amounted to $236 billion. The forecast ten year surplus stood at $5.6 trillion. It was the last black ink America would see for decades, perhaps forever.

George W. Bush immediately reversed Clinton’s policy in order to revive Reagan’s, once again showering an embarrassment of riches on the already most embarrassingly rich, his “base” as he calls them. He ladled out some $630 billion in tax cuts to the top 1% of income earners. In true Republican fashion, they returned the favor by investing over $200 million to ensure Bush’s re-election. Do the math. A $630 billion return on a $200 million investment: $3,160 for $1. I’ll give you $3,160. All I ask is that you give me $1 back so I can keep the goodness flowing. Do we have a deal? Republicans know return on investment.

But the cost to the public has been a return to the exploding deficits of the Reagan years. Bush blew through Clinton’s surplus in his first year. The 2004 deficit reached $415 billion, a record.

And it's only gotten worse sense.

Look, I am not saying I am some sort of economic genius. Heck, I didn't even take one money-related class in college. However, I do have sense enough to know when something isn't working that I should try something else. And the republican economic strategies simply do not work for the entire population.

Giving the wealthiest people tax breaks with hopes of them investing that money on Wall Street is not a proven means of boosting the economy. It never has been. What really moves the stock market is when companies show positive gains in their annual projections, and that money does not come from investments, but rather people and companies actually buying their goods and services. And we all know that goods and services are mostly purchased by working and middle-class families.

If Ronald Reagan taught us anything, it was that the economy does not trickle down, but rather up!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/29/AR2008072900539.html

Obama Tells NAACP Blacks Must Take Responsibility

Amen!

CINCINNATI (AP)- Democrat Barack Obama insisted Monday that blacks must show greater responsibility for their actions.

In remarks prepared for delivery at the annual NAACP convention, the man who could become the first black president, said Washington must provide greater education and economic assistance, but that blacks must demand more of themselves.

"If we're serious about reclaiming that dream, we have to do more in our own lives, our own families and our own communities," the Democratic presidential candidate said. "That starts with providing the guidance our children need, turning off the TV and putting away the video games; attending those parent-teacher conferences, helping our children with their homework and setting a good example."

He added: "I know some say I've been too tough on folks about this responsibility stuff. But I'm not going to stop talking about it. Because I believe that in the end, it doesn't matter how much money we invest in our communities, or how many 10-point plans we propose, or how many government programs we launch — none of it will make any difference if we don't seize more responsibility in our own lives."

Obama speaks often on this issue.

A similar speech on Father's Day prompted an awkward rebuke from the Rev. Jesse Jackson, a Democratic presidential contender in 1984 and 1988, a protege of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and a fellow Chicago political activist.

Jackson apologized last week after being caught saying on an open microphone that he wanted to castrate Obama for speaking down to blacks.

Republican presidential candidate John McCain is scheduled to address the convention on Wednesday.

Obama Launches Online Campaign Against 'Smears'

Check out this Associated Press story about a new website launched by the Barack Obama campaign. I think it's a great idea, actually. When people are constantly putting out lies about you, then you should do whatever you can to dispel them. What saddens me, however, is that a candidate would need such a tool in the first place.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Democratic White House hopeful Barack Obama launched a new website Thursday devoted to dousing "smears" against the first African-American with a serious shot at the presidency.

The site at http://www.fightthesmears.com/ debunks false rumors doing the rounds of the Internet and right-wing media outlets -- including one recent assertion that Obama's wife Michelle has been caught on tape slurring white people.

Obama's main campaign website already had a fact-check section to refute rumors such as the Christian candidate is a secret Muslim. But aides said the new site went further in inviting supporters to spread the word.

"We created an interactive tool to allow our supporters to fight back against these smears in the same way that they received them -- on the Internet," campaign spokesman Tommy Vietor said.

"People can upload their address books and easily send fact-based emails to their friends and family," he said.

"Just knowing the truth isn't enough -- you have to proactively tell people the truth to fight back."

The new initiative was launched after reports, by conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh among others, that a videotape existed showing Michelle Obama using the derogatory term "whitey" in the couple's former church.

No such tape has surfaced despite frenzied speculation by right-wing pundits and blogs, and Obama last week decried the mainstream media's attention to "dirt and lies."

Political candidates have traditionally refused to acknowledge slanderous rumors for fear of giving them respectability.

But given the slew of emailed attacks being spread against Obama, his campaign said it had no choice but to respond in kind.

"Whenever challenged with these lies, we will aggressively push back with the truth and help our supporters debunk the false rumors floating around the Internet," Vietor said.

Courtesy: Associated Press