Oh man the Ale House is packed. You’d think there was a championship football game or something. Maybe I’ll post some observations, maybe I won’t, but if I do, I’ll probably eventually get bored or distracted.
UPDATE [6:07]:
McCain: “I’ve not been feeling to great about a lot of things lately.” Huh. I’m guessing it’s his prostate.
UPDATE [6:10]:
McCain, first to use an antimetabole.
UPDATE [6:15]:
Jim Lehrer sounds downright animated. (Or perhaps that’s just relative to John McCain.)
UPDATE [6:17]:
John McCain has a pen. I didn’t know that. Also, he apparently thinks that the corrupt congressman serving prison sentences are victims of the earmark system or something.
UPDATE [6:20]:
So if Republicans buy McCain’s criticism of Obama for rejecting earmarks only after he started running for president, will they buy Darcy Burner’s criticism of Dave Reichert for his new found (and temporary) anti-earmark religion? (Oh… and Obama does indeed have prominent ears. He reminds me a bit of that Vulcan character on Star Trek: Voyager.)
UPDATE [6:26]:
I love the fact that Jim Lehrer is letting the rules slide a bit, and allowing more of a back and forth between the candidates. This has been one of the better political debate formats I’ve seen.
UPDATE [6:30]:
“The point is…” How many times has McCain said “the point is” in the first half hour alone? The point is, if you have to constantly be saying “the point is,” you’re not making your point very well.
UPDATE [6:32]:
When asked about what he plans to cut from the budget, McCain mentioned Boeing. Needless to say, he got rather loud boos from this partisan Seattle audience.
UPDATE [6:34]:
Obama finally hit the softball on what he wants to cut: the $10 billion a month we’re spending in Iraq. Cheers all around.
UPDATE [6:38]:
McCain wants to make sure that we don’t put health care in the hands of the government. You mean, like Medicare. (“Keep government’s hands off my Medicare, dang nab it!”)
UPDATE [6:39]:
The dial test people really like the word “orgy”. It went through the roof. Now there’s a political platform.
UPDATE [6:43]:
By the way, he didn’t quite say it this time, but every time I hear McCain warn against putting our health care in the hands of “government bureaucrats,” I have to point out that it is already in the hands of insurance company bureaucrats. A bureaucrat is a bureaucrat is a bureaucrat, and at least theoretically, the government bureaucrats are supposed to work for you rather than the interests of the shareholders.
UPDATE [6:44]:
McCain: “The next president will not have to decide whether to send the troops into Iraq.” No… the next president will have to make the decision whether to send troops into Iran. That’s what I’m afraid of.
UPDATE [6:46]:
Dial test folks really liked Obama crediting the “extraordinary performance of our troops.” If he can only manage to get “extraordinary orgy of our troops” into a sentence, I think he’ll have this election wrapped up.
UPDATE [6:49]:
Question: Is McCain’s perpetual shit-eating grin the result of his various surgeries? His torture at the hands of the Vietnamese? Or just his personality? Just curious.
UPDATE [6:52]:
Applause and laughter at CNN’s pan of the two debate watch parties: the Democratic watch party was younger, multi-ethnic, and engaged… the Republican watch party was a bunch of dour, white old people.
UPDATE [6:54]:
Did McCain just say he knew Alexander the Great?
UPDATE [6:59]:
McCain wants to set the record straight on bombing Iran, and it is true, that he’s never actually bombed Iran. And if he had tried, he probably would have been shot down.
UPDATE [7:02]:
To his credit, McCain is coming of a helluva lot more coherent than Sarah Palin, and she sets a very high bar. In limbo.
UPDATE [7:04]:
Are those McCain’s real arms? Behind that podium he looks like a muppet.
UPDATE [7:06]:
McCain: “The Iranians have a rotten government, and therefore their economy is rotten.” So… our economy is rotten, ergo….
UPDATE [7:11]:
What the hell is wrong with McCain’s eyebrows? It’s like they’re painted on his face. I know it’s petty, but it’s really distracting me.
UPDATE [7:15]:
In all seriousness, according to the polls, foreign policy is by far McCain’s greatest strength, and while there are no knock out punches or major gaffes, I think Obama is doing very well for himself. If he can close the gap in this one area, McCain is in trouble.
UPDATE [7:17]:
McCain just got pissed about “my friend Henry Kissinger” and nearly lost it. Not very presidential, and the dial test folks didn’t like it. Obama should have gone in for the kill while McCain was on the edge of blowing up..
UPDATE [7:20]:
I look into McCain’s eyes and see three letters: “LOL”
UPDATE [7:34]:
I don’t know if Obama is winning this debate on points, but he sure as hell isn’t losing it, and as the new kid on the block, that means Obama wins. I don’t see how truly undecided voters watch this debate and determine that Obama doesn’t have the demeanor, temperament, knowledge and ability to lead on foreign policy issues. In other words, I don’t see how this makes voters uncomfortable with the notion of Obama as commander in chief. So yeah… I’m partisan… but I think this is a win for Obama. And on top of the bad week McCain has had, I think that makes it a loss for him.
UPDATE [7:37]:
McCain: “Jim, when I came home from prison…” A last gambit of a desperate man.
The EVIL of earmarks. It’s an important distinction.
He seems very upset about the Ted Stevens trial.
Tuvok
Sarah @3,
You win the geek award for actually knowing the name of the Star Trek character. And not just any Star Trek, but Voyager.
Lordy, when John says things like that it sometimes creeps me out.
Yeah, I caught that one.
Funny, that McCain didn’t mention how many of those indicted congressmen are Republicans.
Why the hell was McCain promoting nuclear power? Wasn’t he supposed to be talking about what to cut from the budget?
I loved Obama’s line about ending the Iraq war as a money saver.
Of course McCain enjoys the benefit of healthcare via the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program.
– He can choose from 11 different health care plans
– All plans offer prescription drug benefits
@3
Wow, not only can she gut a moose she’s great at Star Trek trivia too!
@7
Before that he got health care though the navy and before that from his daddy who was in the navy. The mans had health insurance though the federal government for his entire life.
See #’s 7 & 9
Oh I’m loving this.
You know, it occurs to me that many righties deride Our Good Governor as a career government bureaucrat, but so is John McCain. The man’s worked for the government for his whole life and he’s spent a hell of a lot more time sitting behind a desk than in a airplane cockpit (to the best of my knowledge hes never crashed a desk).
Two good things today of course you liberal ignoramouses do not post: 1. The Dems lose their frivolous attempt on Rossi’s “GOP” vs. “Republican” wording on the ballots, 2. Their other chickenshit lawsuit on BIAW’s campaign spending goes down in flames. I smell sheer desperation from the left. How nice. And Rodent, before you go off on your barage of next 100 posts with your delusional responses-talk to the hand.
Obama got his clocked cleaned tonight. He does not know the first thing about foreign policy
great insight, Goldy. you were dead on. And McCain couldn’t answer a single thing directly so you lost track of what the question was and Obama took the high road when being attacked by an old man losing control.
@13
I’m with you on that one. Rossi (and everyone else) can put what ever the fuck they want next to their name.
Yeah, but the recent PDC rulings stand don’t they? The money’s not frozen, but it sure as hell looks to me like the BIAW and the WSRP broke campaign fiance law. I hope the Democrats appeal this one. Why should the BIAW be able to spend dirty money?
Not a good night for obama.
He said “i agree with john” enough times I was expecting obama to admit he was going to vote for mcsame.
Oh well, it was fun for the democrats while it lasted.
See ya in 4 years.
Maybe you can find a real candidate next time.
michealspew. Which debate were you listening too
Oh yeah…
932 million $$ is a lot of taxpayer money for earmarks in such a short time in office.
You could see obama cringe each and every time mcsame made that point public knowledge.
Obama did get rattled…
How many times did he try talking over mcsame.
After all the press about mcsame and his temper I was expecting the opposite. Guess that’s what happens when you watch the liberal media, misinformation.
marvin stamm
I agree, Obama caved and Mcain did great
Interesting that goldy only wrote about mcsame except for the “orgy” comments.
Is it because obama didn’t say anything of importance and so goldy was reduced to attacking mcsame?
Maybe next time obama will say something worth reporting.
If corporation taxes are driving companies overseas, are higher taxes going to bring them back?
Too bad obama couldn’t explain how his tax policy was going to bring corporations back to the us.
I think that Obama won the debate
OBAMA
Stuttering Obama really impressed me… kind of reminded me of carter refering to Amy on nuclar arms….
@18
See comments 7,9&10. Everything you need to know about McSame is contained within.
Well Yawnie didn’t accuse Obama of being a muslim. He missed a few other slimes but he did manage to cover most of the talking points and end with POW.
I wonder at the the public response. How many can spot the lies. Obama didn’t rip him a new one. He did come back strong a few times., but then throttled back a bit to far IMO. Yawnie offered a lot more oportunites to do so than were taken.
So the Cons will be declaring victory eary and often, as usual.
I don’t regard that to be a bad thing.
Maybe I’m the odd man out on this one, but for the most part I don’t care about earmarks and find the projects worthwhile.
Earmarks allow local governments to tell the feds what they need. How is that a bad thing. People in Tacoma have a far better grasp on what’s needed in Tacoma than the president does.
It’s obvious who won the debate.
None of the ha hooligans are here to talk about obama.
No rabbit, no ylb, no left foot, no steve, although steve has an excuse with being at the zoo.
Did all the regulars refuse to wait until tuesday to drown their sorrows?
Oops, isn’t seattle the suicide capital of the nation.
Good news…
At the studio yesterday I entered the pool how many times obama would say “um.” I picked the highest with 53.
I won $35.
A couple pieces of sushi thanks to obama.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I say a pox on both their houses.
Interesting
Split decision tonight.
On a side note I’d like to know what meds McCain is taking.
Anyone heard of anything?
TLG
@30
I’ve always disagreed with the concept that you can have a “winner” in these things.
I think, for the most part, you had two (maybe more)(probably more) Crowds that were looking for two different things and they both found what they were looking for. Obama was well spoken, offered up details of his plans and countered McCain with specifics. I liked that.
The McCain folks seemed to like that he talked in generalizations, jumped topics and owns a pen. Whatever.
Goldy, I was going to go out tonight to eat
and everywhere we went it was busy as hell.
Sort of looks like the economy is fundamentally
sound.
Marvin Stamn, what are you going to do with all
that money? You could be patriotic and pay more taxes. BIDEN, the original poster child
for birth control.
31
um That wasn’t ummm funny.
@30
What? I don’t rate as a HA hooligan? That hurts my feelings!
Obama can only get a split decision against a guy on meds?
Damn, you know it’s over for obama.
Next up is biden, the human gaffe machine.
Like I said in #31, a couple pieces of sushi.
On CNN, AC cites polls, from multiple networks, saying that Obama won the night. I didn’t think it was a huge victory, honestly.
David Gergen is saying that McCain needed to win big tonight because he was heavily favored on foreign policy, and I certainly don’t think McCain won, much less big. Sure, McCain been to Waziristan, but so what? He’s still wrong on the issues.
It’s hard to reach across the aisle when you are that far to the left.
What I want to know is why the hell are we still paying McCain and Obama their annual senator salaries and benefits while they are campaigning? Joe Average couldn’t quit his job to run for office and expect to be fully compensated.
Come back in a generation wingnuts.
You’ve lost.
@42
It’s hard to reach across the aisle when all you get are lies, daggers in the back and snark. Obama’s not even that far to the left.
Who said these lines:
“I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there.”
“In fact, I think it will do the reverse.”
“We cannot impose a military solution on what has effectively become a civil war. And until we acknowledge that reality — we can send 15,000 more troops, 20,000 more troops, 30,000 more troops, I don’t know any expert on the region or any military officer that I’ve spoken to privately that believes that that is going to make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground.”
As I always do on HA, I’ll be objective and give my honest appraisal in this comment.
McCain came into tonight’s debate trailing Obama in the polls, so he needed a win. I think this debate was a draw. All Obama had to do was avoid a significant movement of swing voters to McCain, and he probably accomplished that.
Both candidates looked “presidential.” While that was crucial for McCain, even more important for McCain was Obama giving a rambling, unfocused, professorial performance — but that didn’t happen. Obama looked like a candidate instead of a professor, and that’s effectively a loss for McCain.
McCain came out punching, but Obama was effective in countering. McCain’s best line, obviously scripted, was “what Senator Obama doesn’t understand is …” but Obama did a pretty good job of neutralizing it (although he could have done better). My main criticism of Obama is that he shouldn’t have said “I agree with John” even once.
In a presidential debate, it’s important not to be pushed around by your opponent, for obvious reasons. Key tools here are interrupting and overtalking the opponent. Obama used these tools appropriately at the right moments in the debate. McCain, for all his aggressiveness, was a bit weaker in this department.
One thing I wish Obama had done, that he didn’t, was question McCain’s judgment in picking a foreign policy novice as his running mate. It’s difficult to directly attack McCain on foreign policy because McCain’s knowledge of foreign policy is deep and sophisticated, but his choice of Palin as the person who would take over the presidency if anything happened to him can be used to undercut McCain’s own foreign policy strengths. It should have been, but wasn’t. Obama missed an opportunity there.
In conclusion, being in a come-from-behind position, McCain needed to dominate the foreign policy debate, and his failure to do so will be costly to him. This was probably his best (and perhaps last) chance to overtake Obama in the polls, but Obama’s performance in the foreign policy debate was too strong for McCain to get into the end zone. Obama will have the subject matter advantage in the remaining debates, and if he continues to perform on stage like he did tonight, Obama could dominate those debates. In short, McCain was tough tonight, but didn’t get what he needed from this debate. For him, tonight’s draw won’t be enough.
Oh Michael@45: Your good friend and HAs most irrational clueless idiot, yelling loser boy, told me over and over again Obama IS the most liberal senator in the Senate.
Just ask yelling loser boy. He posted #44.
@13 Rabbits don’t have hands, dumbshit. We have paws.
@19 “932 million $$ is a lot of taxpayer money for earmarks in such a short time in office.”
Last year, Sarah Palin asked for $800 of earmarks for every Alaska resident. The average for the entire U.S. is $35. So if you don’t like earmarks, how can you even consider voting for a ticket with Palin on it?
@23 “If corporation taxes are driving companies overseas, are higher taxes going to bring them back?”
As Obama correctly pointed out, nominal corporate tax rates that no one pays are meaningless. Two-thirds of American corporations pay no taxes at all.
The flip side of this, of course, is that if McCain cuts nominal corporate tax rates that no one pays, he won’t really cut anyone’s taxes and his cuts will have no effect on jobs.
Polls, polls, where are the g– d— polls, dammmit!? Anyone seen any? Obama won the Luntz focus group on Fox, FWIW.
As Obama correctly pointed out, nominal corporate tax rates that no one pays are meaningless. Two-thirds of American corporations pay no taxes at all.
So are you equating a small non profit corporation to a large international corporation who employs thousands…. How liberal of you. Geeeesh.
Sarah was in congress?
I think that root you’re nibblin’ on is from a marijuana plant. You better put it down and sober up.
@29 As you point out, earmarks aren’t necessarily “bad” spending.
Most people don’t even understand what earmarks are. They’re not appropriations, therefore do not increase spending. They only direct appropriated monies to specific projects.
The vast majority of those projects are things communities need and want. Obama mentioned “senior centers” but earmarks also include roads, bridges, levees, etc.
In fact, I’ll bet even McCain would sign the vast majority of earmarks crossing his desk. But even if he imposes a policy of categorically vetoing earmarks, you know what’ll happen — they’ll be called a different name, and he’ll sign them.
@54 “Sarah was in congress?”
No, and I didn’t say she was. As governor, she submitted her earmark requests to her state’s congressional delegation, and they then follow through with those requests in Congress. But as a low-information voter, you wouldn’t know how that process works, so I’m using this space to explain it to you. Consider this an elementary civics lesson, from me to you.
So taxes aren’t the factor for corporations leaving the country?
Why would they leave then?
This election will be won or lost by the religous right. If Palin can convince enough religous righties to come out and vote the repubs win, if they stay home Obama wins.
Of course she wasn’t, so your comment about earmarks was utter garbage.
I want the residents of my community to get $10,000 each. How do you feel about that rabbit?
@35 “I think, for the most part, you had two (maybe more)(probably more) Crowds …”
Three — only one of which matters. 1) Voters who have decided to vote for McCain; 2) voters who have decided to vote for Obama; 3) undecideds.
@36 “Sort of looks like the economy is fundamentally sound.”
Please please please campaign on that platform! I hope your party campaigns on it, too.
Re 61: Jiminy christmas, why can’t we get better quality trolls in this blog? Why do we have to put up with garbage like Mark? Can’t you Republicans send us something besides your dregs?
@53 “So are you equating a small non profit corporation to a large international corporation who employs thousands….”
No.
@57 “So taxes aren’t the factor for corporations leaving the country? Why would they leave then?”
Cheap labor.
Being the idiot you are, it probably wouldn’t occur to you that Cheap Labor Conservatives would move their plants to foreign countries where labor is cheaper. But it occurred to them.
So staying here they have to pay more for the same level of employee they can get elsewhere for cheaper. Sad commentary about america’s overpriced workers.
Should that be the new motto… pay more just so some american can have a job?
How much more are you willing to pay for a carrot?
You have to understand that McCain is playing checkers against a chess master.
One aspect of Obama’s victory over Hillary is how he came back to every debate using her words against her about what she spoke about in the previous debate.
Watch for a carefully crafted set of TV ads using McCains words against him. Then, in the next debate, he will have prepared statements that will re-iterate his TV campaign’s talking points.
McCain won on emotion, but lost in body language. He showed a great deal of disrespect toward Obama. While partisans may think this is a small point, undecided voters pick up on this kind of arrogance. Hillary did the same thing, acting as if Obama was not good enough to be on stage with her.
Obama won because he allowed McCain to talk himself into a noose. Obama will now start to tighten that noose.
One week from now, Sarah Palin gets this same spotlight. Ouch, baby, very ouch.
@59 “Of course she wasn’t, so your comment about earmarks was utter garbage.”
I’m sorry the fact that Palin, of the 50 governors, is the biggest earmark hog of them all is inconvenient for you, but unfortunately for you (and her) it’s a fact.
BTW, the $938 million of earmarks Sen. Obama requested for his home state works out to $17 per Illinois resident per year — half the U.S. average of $34 and 1/47th of what Palin requested for her state last year.
“I want the residents of my community to get $10,000 each. How do you feel about that rabbit?”
That’s exactly what I expect from a greedy Republican. It’s well known that red states are welfare hogs: Almost all blue states pay more taxes than they get in federal spending, and almost all red states get more federal spending than they pay in taxes. So, it doesn’t surprise me to see a Republican like you making outlandish demands on the taxpayers. That’s very much in character for you guys.
Marv @20
He tried to talk over him because a) McCain rambled and his stories did tell his age and b) it was the design of the format. The intent was to have the two talk to each other and correct the bullshit political generalizations.
Lehrer, did a poor job. But McCain refused to look at Obama. Obama tried his best to talk to McCain.
Who’s afraid? I mean, other than the pitbull (with lipstick– of course).
@65 “How much more are you willing to pay for a carrot?”
If there are no jobs in America because you sent them all overseas, who are you going to sell your carrots to?
But I don’t need to explain this to you, because you’re going to see it with your own eyes. American workers no longer have the money to buy as much from businesses. Guess what’s going to happen to business owners in the next few years?
Don’t assume that everyone that goes overseas is conservative.
Taking a music score to london is 10 cents on the dollar for what it costs here. And that’s including airfare for the composer, composer assistant, conductor, and a couple big-wigs the producers choose.
Wanna guess which way these hollywood movie producers lean politically?
Sell them to rabbits like you.
Haven’t you bragged many times about making all that $$ not working. Sitting around playing with stocks?
Lower the cost of their product. Make less profit.
The veep debate will be a disaster for Palin. She will look like a beauty contestant reading scripted lines she doesn’t comprehend — which is exactly what she is.
@72 Nope. Sell less product. Make no profit. And a lot of small business people who have been voting Republican will go out of business for lack of customers. For example, how well do you think the BIAW’s builder members are doing right now?
@71 “Sell them to rabbits like you. Haven’t you bragged many times about making all that $$ not working. Sitting around playing with stocks?”
It’s true that I don’t work, and sit here on my cute cottontail playing with stocks, but damned few of you stupid humans have my purchasing power. You see, I was smart: I had a government job, and now I get a government pension, while all the private sector workers have had their pensions stolen by greedy bosses. We don’t have that problem in the public sector. And because I live on my government pension, I don’t have to make profits in the stock market — or, more to the point, I have the cash to buy stocks in times like these when stocks are dirt cheap and the patience to wait for years, if necessary, for them to triple or quadruple in value. Sure beats working 30 years for a self-centered boss who only cares about his own profits and rewards your loyal service by laying you off and sending your job to India, doesn’t it? The only catch to it — and it’s a big one — is that you have to spend 30 years serving the public … meaning assholes like you … to get the pension. Most of you humans can’t tough it out, but we feral rabbits are made of stern stuff.
I have to go count my carrots now, so ta-ta trolls, I’ll see you again real soon.
No I don’t, because I couldn’t pretend to know the political affiliaton of every executive of every film production company in the US.
I do know, however, that a lot of films get scored in Seattle, because the AFM is pretty weak up here.
So what’s your point?
“According to publically available data from Taxpayers for Common Sense, the average state got about $50 per person in earmarked funds in 2008. Alaska, represented by Ted Stevens, the Senate’s earmarker-in-chief, got $506 per person-about 10 times the national average. Wasilla between 2000 and 2003, on Palins watch, was getting well over $1,000 per person-twice the Alaska state average in 2008.”
Quoted under fair use from iReport.com, “Sarah Palin Earmark Facts”
That it’s not just conservatives that look for cheaper employees.
Why record in los angeles if you can find musicians willing to work for less elsewhere.
Of course the quality isn’t the same but the general public is so ignorant (see- smooth jazz music/kenny g) that no one notices.
Anybody who says he is making money in this market is either damn lucky, or a damn liar.
Marvin, your ignorance is showing in your arguments of basic economic theory. Many businesses are leveraged, and dependent on credit to purchase product for resale. The present liquidity crisis shows how fragile the American economy is. If you think business owners will survive a severe downturn by magically deciding to lower their price, you have obviously no idea how the marketplace works.
The rabbit ain’t lucky…
So he must be a damn liar.
@53 “So are you equating a small non profit corporation to a large international corporation who employs thousands….”
No.
Well I guess it doesn’t matter how big the corporation is then. I wonder which of the top fortune 500 (almost all corporations) companies don’t pay corporate income tax????? It must be 2/3rds right????
BTW Arizona is dead last in earmark spending at around $18 per capita. Obama had $311 in earmark spending for $25 per person. Palin’s earmark requests are still $153 million less than her predecessor’s final year in office.
McCain boasts that he can save $100 billion a year “immediately” by eliminating the so-called earmarks that legislators attach to spending bills to finance pet projects, usually in their home state. But he has refused to say exactly which projects he would cut, and his estimates of the amount of money that is being spent on earmarks have been challenged by independent experts.
The Facts
The Arizona senator is promising to balance the budget by the end of his first term, while simultaneously extending the George W. Bush tax cuts, introducing billions of dollars of new tax cuts of his own, and remaining in Iraq as long as is necessary to stabilize that country. Asked how this miracle will be accomplished, McCain told George Stephanopoulos of ABC News This Week on April 20 that he could come up with $100 billion “tomorrow” by vetoing pork-barrel spending bills.
Here’s $100 billion right here for you, George. Two years in a row, the last two years, the president of the United States has signed into law two big spending, pork barrel-laden bills with $35 billion (in earmarks). In the years before that, $65 billion. You do away with those, there’s $100 billion right before you look at any agency.
Pouff! $100 billion in taxpayer money! Saved! Just like that! With a flick of the presidential veto pen!
There are a number of problems with this magical budgetary balancing act. First of all, the suspiciously round $100 billion figure is largely a figment of the McCain campaign’s imagination. I have not been able to find a single independent budget expert to vouch for it. McCain’s economics adviser, Doug Holtz-Eakin, will not say how the campaign arrived at the figure, other than that it is an extrapolation from various studies, including a 2006 study by the Congressional Research Service available here.
Bruce Riedl, a budget analyst with the Heritage Foundation, says it might be possible to eliminate roughly half the expenditure on earmarks every year, i.e. around $9 billion, using the Taxpayers for Commonsense figures. He identified $5 billion in Community Development Block Grant funds, most of which goes to local governments, as a prime target for cuts. Even if earmarks were eliminated altogether, many other expenditures would have to be shifted to other parts of the budget.
Like other analysts, Riedl was mystified by McCain’s argument that previous year’s earmarks automatically become a “permanent part of the budget.” “I don’t understand how they come up with that,” he told me.
Excluding those programs McCain has promised to preserve, the draconian slashing of earmark expenditures might save around $10 billion a year. But that is still a long way from the $100 billion in savings that McCain says that he can identify “immediately.”The McCain camp now says that the senator never meant to suggest that his proposed $100 billion in savings would all come from earmarks. Holtz-Eakin told me that McCain had simply promised to cut overall spending by around $100 billion. Some of these savings will come from earmarks, some from other parts of the budget. He declined to identify which specific projects would be cut.
Asked whether McCain had misspoke or whether he had been misunderstood in his focus on eliminating earmarks, Holtz-Eakin replied: “a bit of both.”
@79
I think you missed my point: that you are generalizing. Unless you cite specific instances of liberal, card-carrying, registered democrat film producers being directly responsible for the decision to “outsource” to non-union venues, be they here or overseas, then you don’t have an argument. (And incidentally, the quality they’ll get here is no different than that which they’d find in LA, or London, or Bratislava, or wherever they might decide to record with professional-level, orchestral musicians. But that’s beside the point.)
Am I the only one that noticed McCain’s #@$%up at the end on the subject of alternative energy?
McCain said “I’ve always voted for alternate energy”! WTF!
In all his years he has never supported any energy form except oil. Or, maybe it was a calculated mis-speak when he said ‘alternate energy’ (as in alternate current electricity) instead of ‘alternative energy.’
If he’s not familiar enough with the concept to say it right,…and never voted for it in his entire career, then lies and says he did…Wazupwiththat?
Let’s see if the media runs with that one.
Yeah, right. All the great studio musicians flock to seattle.
They don’t; again you missed the point. The available talent pool is equivalent. And you still haven’t proved your original point either.
Well these recent factoids won’t come as new news to Roger, but I sure hope he is putting a few of those extra carrots under his mattress.
And if Obama get in with his tax and spend plan OMG Just sayin!
WaMu’s Failure Will Cost State Pension Funds $47M.
http://www.kirotv.com/money/17.....8;psp=news
Lehman bankruptcy costs Washington state pension fund $130M
http://www.portfolio.com/news-.....-fund-130m
State pension fund billions in red
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/.....ons09.html
McCain looks like an aged Ferengi.
Prove what original point, that liberal leaning producers look for cheaper employees?
You’ve even admitted that work has been brought up to seattle because your union is weak. Isn’t that enough proof for you?
Equivalent talent? As far as studio musicians, not a chance.
Name a trumpet player from seattle… Compare him to chuck findley.
Yes.
I know you’re not being serious. How stupid would you have to be to think that liberals don’t care about saving $ or making $.
To quote you-
Your own comment proves my point.
I am being serious, and am beginning to think that you must be thicker than a post. So let me simplify: you asserted that Hollywood film producers or some subset thereof are “liberals” and that these same “liberals” cut costs by moving their recording sessions to cheaper locales. Your implication by association is that liberals are hypocrites. Right? But as this is only an implication, you have proven nothing until you can provide substantive proof. You need to give actual examples: production companies, names (with documented political affiliation), films, etc. to establish a pattern between political ideology and business practices.
@59
“I want the residents of my community to get $10,000 each. How do you feel about that rabbit?”
I think you should move to a state like Alaska, where they pay those kinds of dividends.
Of course, you’d have to put up with socialism. But the very assertion makes it look like you don’t mind that.
Like I said, your own comment proves my point.
No it doesn’t: it’s a simple statement of fact. (Which can easily be proven, viz. the most recent Rambo film, which was scored here this spring.) It does not assert any connection between this fact and the imputed politics of unspecified film executives. Maybe this rather simple logical exercise is just too complicated for you, I dunno. But seeing as how it’s only marginally on-topic, I’m not going to waste my time with you any further.
People in alaska are getting $10,000 checks funded by taxpayers?
I haven’t heard about that.
Got a link?
@65
“So staying here they have to pay more for the same level of employee they can get elsewhere for cheaper. Sad commentary about america’s overpriced workers.”
OK, it seems you’re a Republican, so I understand you don’t know much about business, or supply and demand, and you like to blame America first. But to review:
Things are expensive when demand is high. Things are cheap when demand is low.
So, when companies move overseas they don’t get “the same level of employee.” They get ones that are cheaper because they’re less desirable — mostly to do a smash-and-grab one-time increase of their profit margins before buyers realize their product has declined in quality.
So, when companies move overseas they don’t get “the same level of employee.” They get ones that are cheaper because they’re less desirable — mostly to do a smash-and-grab one-time increase of their profit margins before buyers realize their product has declined in quality.
Wow. That is why American cars are selling so well???!! Why is this so easy. hehehe
I’ve tried to respond — Goldy, I know Bruce Schneier says all security is a tradeoff, and I bet you’ve gotten a lot of spam, but honestly… The number of hoops to jump through just to use simple not-even-HTML in these comments is extraordinarily high. (If I were cynical, I’d think Marvin asked for a link just so I could bang my head against the wall with your anti-spam measures — because of course I had two.)
If you could please review and unflag my prior comment, that’d be appreciated. Thanks.
“Wow. That is why American cars are selling so well???!! Why is this so easy. hehehe”
With all their factories in Canada and Mexico, while Japanese, German, and Korean manufacturers increasingly use American labor?
Yes.
Another edited post, another alleged spam flag. This is getting boring.
Let’s try it this way.
Back on topic… I think Obama performed very well tonight, and McCain moderately well, at best.
It didn’t help him much when he “corrected” Obama over the difference between strategy and tactics when Obama was right, and McCain was wrong. Obama’s citation of the many times McCain has had poor judgment and made the wrong call was also illuminating.
But the real revelation was watching McCain’s continued fear, and fearmongering. McCain could never manage to look Obama in the eye, scared as he was. He was hunched over, with amazingly near-hysteric body language.
Watch the footage with the sound turned low some time.
Obama, on the other hand, consistently came across as knowledgeable and resolute. Polite but unyielding.
Much more presidential — someone dealing from a position of strength, who knew and was comfortable with it. The contrast with McCain’s squirming and constant attack dog demeanor — too anxious and fearful to give any hint of accommodation, lest he be viewed somehow as “soft” — was startling.
Wesley Clark was right: “Everybody admires John McCain’s service as a fighter pilot, his courage as a prisoner of war. There’s no issue there. He’s a great man and an honorable man. But having served as a fighter pilot — and I know my experience as a company commander in Vietnam — that doesn’t prepare you to be commander in chief in terms of dealing with the national strategic issues that are involved. It may give you a feeling for what the troops are going through in the process, but it doesn’t give you the experience first hand of the national strategic issues.”
Especially when you don’t correctly know the difference between strategic and tactical. “It’s not what we don’t know that’s the problem, it’s what we know that ain’t so.”
@99:
State of Alaska Permanent Fund — “The 2008 Dividend Amount is $3,269.00”
https://www.pfd.state.ak.us/
@99 (cont.)
Taxpayers for Common Sense:
“Senator Stevens has secured or played a significant role in securing more than 891 earmarks worth $3.2 billion, which comes to $4,872 per capita over the last four years.”
@99 (cont.)
3269 + 4872 = 8141. Oh, no, wait, it’s over four years — (3269 * 4) + 4872 = 17948.
Close enough for jazz.
And, to anticipate given your hedge of “funded by taxpayers” — corporations are taxpayers, too. They’re people, even, if one agrees with the Supreme Court.
Yup. The anti-spam really dislikes dollar signs.
And, McCain’s most startling gaffe:
From the transcript:
MCCAIN: So we have a long way to go in our intelligence services. We have to do a better job in human intelligence. And we’ve got to — to make sure that we have people who are trained interrogators so that we don’t ever torture a prisoner ever again. (emphasis added)
But… But… “This government does not torture people.”
Hm.
And, Obama’s best statement, from the same transcript:
“There has never been a country on Earth that saw its economy decline and yet maintained its military superiority. So this is a national security issue.”
Given that the economy historically is stronger under Democrats, there’s an obvious way to vote.
Or, consider Reagan’s questions from a debate back when:
“It might be well if you ask yourself are you better off than you were four years ago? Is it easier for you to go and buy things in the stores than it was four years ago? Is there more or less unemployment in the country than there was four years ago? Is America as respected throughout the world as it was? Do you feel that our security is as safe? That we’re as strong as we were four years ago? And if you answer all of those questions yes, why then I think your choice is very obvious as to who you’ll vote for. If you don’t agree, if you don’t think that this course that we’ve been on for the last four years is what you would like to see us follow for the next four, then I could suggest another choice that you have.”
@84 “Even if earmarks were eliminated altogether, many other expenditures would have to be shifted to other parts of the budget.”
Not to be overlooked is that if federal earmarks were eliminated, many of those expenditures would merely be shifted to taxpayers at the state and local level.
What it really boils down to is that Republicans like McCain would rather cut spending on senior centers, traffic lights, and other things that help our citizens and communities than give up one penny for their recreational wars.
@89 State pensions are entirely self-funded by state employees, employer contributions, and investment earnings so why is it any skin off your back? The state pension fund is over $50 billion, so its loss on WaMu is a drop in the bucket. The fund is well diversified; and, like any investor, it wins some and loses some, but on the whole the state pension fund consistently earns double digit returns.
@99 “People in alaska are getting $10,000 checks funded by taxpayers?”
Alaskans not only don’t pay state or local taxes, they get oil royalty checks from state government, which this year amounted to $3,200 per person. That means a household of 4 persons got $13,200 in state largesse. Where does that money come from? Here’s where: Alaska charges you the same price for oil that OPEC does.
I do’ understand why so many people are dead wrong abut earmarks. Eliminate ALL earmarks and here’s how much money it will save:
$0
Appropriations set amount of federal spending. Earmarks direct federal spending. Appropriations that are not directed via earmarks are directed by the executive branch.
Earmarks are merely a way for the Congress to have a hand in direcing spending for their districts and their constituents. It is to some extent a courtesy extended to them by the executive branch. It greases the wheels of government.
But eliminate earmarks to save money? That’s just fiction, folks.
Hal OBrien: Wrong “earmarks” math. BULLSHITTIUM Alert.
One, Sarah Palin has NOT been guvnur for the last four years. What? 18 months?
Two, Can you provide evidence Sarah Palin gets use of the military largesse Ted Stevens brings in as your “earmarks” claim? Did you subtract the military part first? Nope You Dope!
Three, where did she personally lobby for them?
Four, some of that came from oil windfall profits.
Good try Hal. You can go back to your Daily Kos reading now!
O-blah-blah has good intentions. It seemed like he was repeating certain talking points and struggling to be credible on foreign policy. McCain, on the other hand, really knew has stuff. McCain was much more passionate about defending our Country…and much, much more knowledge about the issues, the players and how dangerous the world is.
O-blah-blah seemed to have to try so hard to be passionate about fighting our enemies.
McCain is ready to lead in a dangerous world.
O-blah-blah simply is not. Good intentions will only carry him so far in this dangerous world. But O-blah-blah is “ARTICULATELY WRONG!” on many issues….like the surge.
In the end, voters have a clear choice..
McCain==Knowledgeable, experienced, passionate
versus
O-blah-blah==Good intentions, rookie, no deep-down passion
Ahhhhhhhhhh So Daddy Love likes earmarks.
Well your Princess Nancy Stretch Pelosi campaigned on removing them. Another Donkey lie.
The reason people “thought” Obama won is feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings not his command of the facts.
Rog–
STOP LYING ABOUT THE MASSIVELY UNDERFUNDED STATE PENSION FUND!!
There are $78 BILLION in assets…over $38 BILLION are in equities and BILLIONS in real estate. The Fund was underfunded by $5.1 BILLION @ 6/30/07..it is obvious much worse off now with stuff like this–
September 26, 2008
OLYMPIA, Wash. — The Washington State Investment Board’s funds will lose about $47 million because of the failure of Washington Mutual, state officials tell KIRO 7 Eyewitness News.
The State Investment Board said the loss represents 0.059% of a total of $78 billion in assets.
Here is where you are a misleading liar Rog–
You fail to make clear that the Underfunded Portion is the responsibility of WE THE TAXPAYERS OF WASHINGTON. You are a misleading liar Rog. State Employees like yourself are GUARANTEED a fixed pension per month. This deck of cards is based on actuaries projecting good returns. When the returns drop or go negative, it increases the underfunding (UNDERFUNDING IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF TAXPAYERS!!)
Get it right Rog. Be honest.
Washington State is a fiscal trainwreck under Gregoire. The buck stops with HER.
She increased spending $8 BILLION in the face of this recession and market decline.
What a mess.
OBAMA,
I was surprised how Obama acted insecure as a little boy waiting to say something.
He was rude and kept signaling to the monitor I need to talk I need to say something.
This was like Gore’s debate.
115 Pud
Read the fucking paper. While mayor and and while governor, she sent letters and memoes detailing her long list of earmark requests to her Senators and Congresspeople. The letters are public record. Here’s an example of the State of Alaska’s recordkeeping of earmark requests.
118 Pud
As opposed to your secret knowledge of McCain’s “true victory?”
Get over it. The consensus is that Obama won, because lots and lots more people “think” that he did. That means he really did win, because who most people think won is the only measure there is.
116 Cyn
McCain and Obama did about equally well in this debate, and the consensus opinion and polling indicate that most people think Obama won. Given that this is thought to be McCain’s strongest issue, that’s bad news for McCain. And I’d say it bodes really poorly for his chances in the next two.
He’s behind in this race, and he really needed to score points in THIS debate to gain ground, and guess what? HE DIDN’T.
As far as the cnn poll about obama winning…
The headline says-
Buried way down at the end of the article-
I wonder if the percentages were reversed how the poll would turn out. But that wouldn’t produce the results that cnn wanted to promote.
If they did equally well what could the reason be for feeling obama won.
Probably most democrats thought obama was so bright clean and articulate for an african american.
He exceeded their low expectations of all those other stupid dirty and mumbling african americans.
CBS News poll:
Yet more proof that CNN is the media mouthpiece of the democrat party.
Imagine the outrage is mcsame told his supporters to watch fox news.
But the good news is that liberals are hypocrites and will blindly ignore the double standard as they watch the debate on the democrat news channel.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....29689.html
125 MS
So, is it my OPINION that they did about equally, but the conventional wisdom said that this is McCain’s strong issue and Obama’s weak one, so if they did about the same then hell yeah, I’d say Obama won, and the guy who is behind lost.
Let’s look at all this another way. This election is about the economy, and this debate was about foreign affairs. MCain and Obama both did OK in an area people don’t care so much about right now (although CNN shows people coming out of this feeling that OBAMA will do a better job dealing with Iraq).
When it gets to economic debate, McCain will be toast. He doesn’t even know what he’s talking about.
And the good news obama can ask his advisors that contributed to the problem about the problem.
Priceless.
One of the funniest parts of the debate is when obama had to act like the little brother and say I got a bracelet too.
Was it just a prop to make the naive believe obama cares about the troops?
He had to look down to read the name off of it and he stumbled with it.
I bet if even goldy was wearing a bracelet for a while he could remember the name on it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r_jTgGeVU4
(the last 20 seconds)
Daddy Love:
Declared Obama the winner: ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, pollster Frank Luntz on Fox, Slate’s John Dickerson, Time magazine’s Mark Halperin, CBS News instant poll and CNN post-debate poll.
Declared McCain the winner: Politico’s Roger Simon (“The Mac is back”), Fortune magazine’s Nina Easton, The Weekly Standard’s William Kristol and Fred Barnes, Fox News Texting Poll and Drudge online poll.
The Politico…
Here is your candidate in action: http://governor.mo.gov/cgi-bin.....l=newsitem
“St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, Jefferson County Sheriff Glenn Boyer, and Obama and the leader of his Missouri campaign Senator Claire McCaskill have attached the stench of police state tactics to the Obama-Biden campaign.
“What Senator Obama and his helpers are doing is scandalous beyond words, the party that claims to be the party of Thomas Jefferson is abusing the justice system and offices of public trust to silence political criticism with threats of prosecution and criminal punishment.”
“Barack Obama needs to grow up. Leftist blogs and others in the press constantly say false things about me and my family. Usually, we ignore false and scurrilous accusations because the purveyors have no credibility. When necessary, we refute them. Enlisting Missouri law enforcement to intimidate people and kill free debate is reminiscent of the Sedition Acts – not a free society.”
http://www.tribune-democrat.co.....00717.html
Good. Murtha is an ASS!
And another one…
And the deadly point…
Doom and gloom, the democrat agenda.
http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs.....print=true
Daddy Love@121: Yes, I saw those “earmarks”
-Improved rural sanitation
-Improved drinking water
-Stop invasive species on Alaska’s environment
-The feds create a halibut fishing database so the fed data can be processed by feds instead of Alaska
-Identify why salmon runs fail
-Understand why Bering Sea crab runs are failing and how to restock them
-DARE teacher to teach DARE to local law enforcement
-Mgmt of alaskan king crab, tanner crab, scallops and groundfish.
Wow daddy love those are some really worthless “earmarks”. Having the feds pay for fed data.
Thanks for playing…
136
That’s what earmarks are, dumbass.
Wow Daddy Love
– Provide runway lighting for 8 Alaskan runways.
Yep so emergency aircraft can safely land in rural areas to deliver needed medicine and evacuate injured residents. That’s a nasty earmark.
Thanks for playing…
131 MS
McCain didn’t have a bracelet, but Obama did. So who cares more–you think it might be the guy who wears the bracelet ALL THE TIME?
First I just found this:
“Media reports that Congress killed the Bridge to Nowhere are not accurate,” said Schatz. “The 2006 transportation appropriations bill allowed Alaska to decide whether or not to move forward. Governor Murkowski said yes; Governor Palin said no. Any discussion about the project should begin with facts.”
So Sarah really did kill the bridge to nowhere! Damn, this has to be a shocker to the HA liberal idiots!
http://councilfor.cagw.org/sit.....8;id=11594
Daddy Love@137: These are “earmarks”
Robert C. Byrd Drive, from Beckley to Sophia (Byrd’s hometown)
Robert C. Byrd National Technology Transfer Center at Wheeling Jesuit University
Robert C. Byrd Highway
Robert C. Byrd Federal Correctional Institution
Robert C. Byrd High School
Robert C. Byrd Freeway
Robert C. Byrd Center for Hospitality and Tourism
Robert C. Byrd Science Center
Robert C. Byrd Health Sciences Center of West Virginia
Robert C. Byrd Cancer Research Center
Robert C. Byrd Technology Center at Alderson-Broaddus College
Robert C. Byrd Hardwood Technologies Center, near Princeton
Robert C. Byrd Bridge between Huntington and Chesapeake, Ohio
Robert C. Byrd addition to the lodge at Oglebay Park, Wheeling
Robert C. Byrd Community Center, Pine Grove
Robert C. Byrd Honors Scholarships
Robert C. Byrd Expressway, U.S. 52 near Weirton
Robert C. Byrd Institute in Charleston
Robert C. Byrd Institute for Advanced Flexible Manufacturing
Robert C. Byrd Visitor Center at Harpers Ferry National Historic Park
Robert C. Byrd Federal Courthouse
Robert C. Byrd Academic and Technology Center
Robert C. Byrd United Technical Center
Robert C. Byrd Federal Building (there are two)
Robert C. Byrd Hilltop Office Complex
Robert C. Byrd Library and Robert C. Byrd Learning Resource Center
Robert C. Byrd Rural Health Center
Robert C. Byrd Clinical Addition to the veteran’s hospital in Huntington
Robert C. Byrd Industrial Park, Hardy County
Robert C. Byrd Scholastic Recognition Award
Robert C. Byrd Community Center in the naval station, Sugar Grove
Robert C. Byrd Clinic at the West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine
Robert C. Byrd Biotechnology Science Center at Marshall University
What, no earmark for the tree that senator byrd used to earn the rank of grand kleagle?
oops, I forgot, those racists that fillerbusted the civil rights act switched parties.
It was obvious that obama had one, he had to read the name off of it. Kinda like teleprompter jewelry.
Just because obama couldn’t remember the name without looking, don’t assume that mcsame suffers from the same lack of mental acuity.
That’s the difference between supporting the troops and using the troops as a prop. Let’s not forget how obama “visited” the troops on his world tour.
143
I don’t have to “assume” that McCain suffers from a lack of mental acuity.
132
Pud
Declared McCain the winner:
Four consevative columnists and two unscientific polls.
The random samplings of ACTUAL VOTERS show Obama winning. If you can find one of THOSE that show sMcCain winnning, ‘d love to see it.
Daddy Love Frank Luntz poll is scientific? CBS poll scientific?
Yeah baby!
Republicans fuck mules as well as goats.
http://www.newshounds.us/2005/.....htwing.php
146 Pud
Yes, Pud, you’re a fool.
The CNN poll and the CBS news polls were scientific polls; that is, they were conducted according to recognized sampling pratices and as such can be considered to be representative of larger populations than those polled.
Frank Luntz convened a focus group for Fox News who overwhelmingly said Obama won. However, I don’t know his sampling method for choosing these people. Given that he’s a Republican pollster reporting his results on Fox News, one might think this credible given that the result is against their well-known interests.
But as I said, Puddybud, you show me a fucking scientific poll that shows real voters considering that McCain won and I’ll think you have something. Until then you don’t have shit.
This must be really sad news for Puddylips. Florida Republican Bob Allen’s appeal was denied. Puddy remembers Bob Allen. He was convicted of offering to pay an undercover black cop $20 if he could blow him in a park toilet. Say, what’s up with you Republican freaks and park toilets? That’s some weird shit you guys are up to.
http://blogs.orlandosentinel.c.....p-bob.html
This has been yet another edition of “Puddy’s Heroes”.
Daddy Love, thank Goldy. He answered your question.
Butt, Friday night on CNN, a snap poll of 524 adults who watched the debate suggested more thought Obama had won, by a 51% to 38% margin. But CNN correspondent John King cautioned that the poll was heavy with Democratic viewers: “Looking at our poll…the audience watching has a higher percentage of Democrats than the country as a whole.”
150 Pud
That sounds to me like the current party ID brekdown, all right.
@115
“Hal OBrien”
COBOL programmer, are you? Or merely illiterate? Apostrophes are your friend (and no, they don’t mean, “Here comes the ‘S’!”).
“Wrong “earmarks” math.”
Wrong how? Other than your say-so? If you have a specific point to make with my sources, make it.
“BULLSHITTIUM Alert.”
Thanks for the self-reference.
“One, Sarah Palin has NOT been guvnur for the last four years. What? 18 months?”
Please quote where I’ve previously mentioned Ms. Palin in this thread. I was referring to Alaska. Last I checked, unless you’re a believer in monarchy, Ms. Palin isn’t herself the state of Alaska.
“Two, Can you provide evidence Sarah Palin gets use of the military largesse Ted Stevens brings in as your “earmarks” claim? Did you subtract the military part first? Nope You Dope!”
Again, I said nothing about Ms. Palin. Second, so what? Are you maintaining that military spending is 100% efficient? Or is it just maybe possible there’s a squidge of waste there?
“Three, where did she personally lobby for them?”
Since she’s not under discussion, this isn’t relevant.
“Four, some of that came from oil windfall profits.”
Yup. It’s called taxpayer dollars.
“Good try Hal. You can go back to your Daily Kos reading now!”
That’d be great, except I don’t read Kos. I understand how someone impersonating a conservative like yourself might, though.
On party ID from ABC News:
Honestly, I don’t see how you could overrepresent Democrats this year. Even Dino Rossi runs like hell from identifying as a Republican, and John McCain makes every effort to minimize his party ID.