Print
E-mail
Share
digg
Newsvine
Facebook
Stumble
Technorati
reddit
Fark
twitterwinning the west:
As Democrats fret, Obama gets more direct
After friendly critics weigh in, Obama zings rival on tax plan Democrat says helps the rich
Leila Navidi
Sen. Barack Obama shakes hands with the crowd after a town hall meeting at Rio Grande High School in Albuquerque
Tuesday, Aug. 19, 2008 | 2 a.m.
Albuquerque Ladies' Man
Barack Obama answers questions from a group of Albuquerque women. Topics range from health care, to immigration, to the Iraq war. (4:50)
Rio Grande High School students, from left, Tiana Clovis, 17; Estephania Loya, 17; and Olivia Legarda, 15, talk about being in the audience as Sen. Barack Obama spoke Monday at the predominantly Hispanic school in Albuquerque.
Sun Expanded Coverage
Sun Archives
- Obama focuses on women's issues (8-18-2008)
- Arriving in Albuquerque (8-17-2008)
Beyond the Sun
Albuquerque — Democrats are anxious these days.
Since Sen. Barack Obama returned from a trip to the Middle East and Europe, he has slipped slightly in the polls and his main opponent, Sen. John McCain, has driven the race onto ground friendlier to the Republican.
McCain has accused Obama of being a substance-free celebrity willing to sell out his country for a political campaign. McCain has attacked Obama for using race as a political tool.
One battleground-state Democrat said this: “I particularly hope he strengthens his economic message — even Sen. Obama can speak more clearly and specifically about the kitchen-table, bread-and-butter issues like high energy costs,” Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland told The New York Times recently.
Times columnist Paul Krugman disagreed, saying Obama’s Web site is thick with policy detail: “No, the problem isn’t lack of specifics — it’s lack of passion. When it comes to the economy, Mr. Obama’s campaign seems oddly lethargic.”
Meanwhile, McCain continues to use the kind of rhetoric that, if not giving him a lead in the polls, has at least garnered attention: “Not content to merely predict failure in Iraq, my opponent tried to legislate failure,” he told a veterans group Monday, using a phrase identical to one he used recently in Las Vegas.
Democrats fret that Obama hasn’t responded forcefully — and in kind — to this type of rhetoric. The widely read blogger Josh Marshall represents this thinking, writing Monday: “The lack of any consistent lines of attack against McCain is becoming palpable.”
Either Obama got the message, and is getting a little anxious himself, or his campaign, always known for having an impressive feel for pacing, has decided it’s time. The campaign, now 19 months old, is upon us: The Democratic National Convention begins next week, and Obama is expected to announce his vice presidential nominee this week.
At a rally at a heavily Hispanic high school on the edge of the city here, Obama drove home economic issues, dropping his usual cool pose for more passion and a hard-edged mockery of McCain.
Obama capitalized on an awkward McCain moment, when the Republican was asked what constitutes “rich.” McCain said $5 million.
“This explains why his tax plan gives (money in tax breaks) to people making 2 1/2 million dollars,” Obama said Monday. “I guess that’s middle class. Everyone here making
2 1/2 million dollars, raise your hands.”
Obama then capitalized on another McCain gaffe, though this time by McCain’s former economic adviser Phil Gramm, the former senator from Texas who said America is experiencing a “mental recession” and that the country is filled with “whiners.”
“He’s got major economic advisers calling you whiners,” Obama said. “This guy obviously doesn’t pump his own gas, do his own shopping or pay his own bills.”
At the rally Obama also responded to the Strickland criticism with a laundry list of specific policies. The Illinois Democrat promised to achieve universal health care in his first term, provide a middle-class tax cut, spend $10 billion a year on renewable energy technologies, expand family and medical leave and early childhood education, overhaul the No Child Left Behind education law and give a $4,000 college tax credit for anyone willing to do community service afterward.
He would pay for it with an upper-income tax hike and with savings from withdrawing troops from Iraq in 16 months. Economists say those measures wouldn’t pay for all his proposed programs, however.
Obama closed by trying to ease nerves among the faithful: “Democrats haven’t been that successful in presidential elections lately,” he said. “So everywhere I go people tell me, ‘I’m getting nervous.’
“They say Republicans are so mean ...
“I’m here to tell you now it’s not gonna work this time.”
Discussion: 45 comments so far…
Post a comment
- Most Read
- Discussed
- Most E-mailed
- Three arrested in fatal shooting of Metro officer
- Franchione potential early candidate for UNLV football post
- Police: 3 arrested in officer’s death have gang ties
- Big fight headed for a New Frontier?
- Mayor: Morale not good among LV city employees
- Creditors want to expand probe of Station Casinos deal
- MGM Mirage (finally) makes George Strait show official
- Reserve Rebels didn’t have time to panic
- Hotels rein in risque advertising campaigns
- $60 million to stabilize neighborhoods buys five homes
Blogs
Elsewhere
Marquardt v. Sonnen scheduled for UFC 109
Bloggity, Bloggity, Bloggity
Will a fourth consecutive title by Jimmie Johnson be good or bad for NASCAR?
Top Chef: Las Vegas
The Jet Stream: And then there were four
Top Chef Episode 12: On keeping it simple
Miech Again
Chilly start for Chace, but Stanback says he'll warm up (1 Comment)
Elsewhere
Harvard Poker Pro: Texas Hold 'Em skills can help traders
Oscar De La Hoya wants to see Pacquiao/Mayweather
- Live chat
- Tuesday, noon PST
- Chat with Krista Creelman
- Problem Gambling Center executive director Krista Creelman will answer questions about gambling addiction from Las Vegas Sun readers from noon to 1 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. ... Submit question
Calendar »
- 21 Sat
- 22 Sun
- 23 Mon
- 24 Tue
- 25 Wed
-
UFC 106 at Mandalay Bay Events Center
Mandalay Bay Events Center | 7 p.m. to 11 p.m.
-
The Four Tops at The Orleans Showroom
Orleans Hotel-Casino
-
Julio Iglesias at the Las Vegas Hilton
Las Vegas Hilton
-
The Four Tops at The Orleans Showroom
Orleans Hotel-Casino
The Sun
Locally owned and independent for more than 50 years.
Comment removed by staff.
Obama is leaking support by the week. As the electorate finds out more about him, Barry should find the line of other liberal POTUS losers like Algore, Kerry, Dukakis, Mondale - then get in that line!
Read the latest:
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles...
Obama plan for middle class folks earning between $35k to $70k will give $1.69 daily tax break over McCain.
Wooooooweeeeeeee $1.69 a day...I will be able to buy an extra cheesburger now.
He tax the hell out of the 'rich'. In some states, they will pay over 65% in income taxes.
He slams new taxes on capital investments.
That will hurt gaming companies in Nevada.
It hurts job creation in Nevada.
McCain's tax plan increase incentives for job creation investments.
Hey, nance; assuming what you wrote is correct (and I have my doubts, I'll admit; no source once again), that's over $600/yr.
While not the greatest, it sure beats giving more tax breaks to the wealthy & corporations, dontcha think?
Or DON'T you think?
Oh and NV, "ibdeditorials" does NOT constitute an unbiased, evidentiary source. (One would think you'd recognize that in the name alone, but apparently not.) I might have mentioned that to you once or twice.
"Oh and NV, "ibdeditorials" does NOT constitute an unbiased, evidentiary source. (One would think you'd recognize that in the name alone, but apparently not.) I might have mentioned that to you once or twice."
IBD is a lot more unbiased, evidentiary and right than you are, P.
I understand! You have nothing to rebut or contribute.
Leave it to Nance to criticize tax breaks to working families. How's that working out for ya?
McCain's tax breaks for the superwealthy and corporations will saddle our children with a $5 trillion national debt.
McCain's plan will force us to borrow even more money from China, Dubai and Saudi Arabia. The neocons around here love to caterwaul about buying foreign oil, but apparently they're thrilled to see $5 trillion in debt being held by foreign countries.
It if came down to people getting $1.69 per day vs. a rich dude investing in a company in Las Vegas and creating jobs then I choose the rich dude investing in a company in Las Vegas and creating jobs.
Obama's plan is anti-growth.
McCain's plan is pro-growth.
What makes you think that "rich dude" is going to "[invest] in a company in Las Vegas and [create] jobs"?
Aren't you the idealistic one ....
More likely, that "rich dude" will "invest" in outsourcing more American jobs overseas so his bank account(s) can add more zeroes.
Nance, who do you think buys the goods and services sold by the company owned by the "rich dude"?
Ours is a consumer-driven economy. And the majority of consumers are in the income brackets you're so dismissive of. Perhaps if you actually experienced what it's like to live in a lower income bracket, you wouldn't be so snotty and dismissive of giving them an extra two bucks a day.
Why are you so opposed to creating more disposable income for the vast majority of American consumers? Isn't that anti-growth?
Or are you just a short-sighted elitist who doesn't give two craps about anyone other than the uberwealthy?
As to "job creation in Nevada", the only time THAT will happen is when this state realizes that "gaming" isn't the only industry and starts at least trying to attract a variety of industries.
If you based your opinion solely on the local ads, we have about four industries here:
1. Gaming
2. Furniture stores
3. Car dealerships
4. Lawyers
That's about it.
I guess you are saying that raising/lowering taxes on captial investments has zero impact on the rich guy investment habits.
Sounds like Obamanomics...........
No need to "guess" about what any of are saying, nance. We've spelled it out quite clearly.
$1.69 a day from Obama will set the economy on fire!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
McDonalds....here we come!!!!!
Mr X, you want capital to build a new plant....sorry no money here...the Obama's high capital investment taxes make it not worth it.
Here is $1.69 go buy yourself a cheesburger.
Obamanomics at work.................
PatriciaLV: "only industry and starts at least trying to attract a variety of industries."
I think you are out of tune with the local Nevada party.
They want to "restructure" taxes in Nevada which is just code words for raising taxes on non-gaming industry in the state.
I guess that put a damper on non-gaming industry business activity and will hampeer diversification of Nevada's economy.
Well, *I* think you are out of tune with what I was saying.
I'm not surprised.
Nance, in what way is McCain's $5 trillion national debt "pro-growth?"
It's growth paid for by foreign capital.
In what way is increase deficit spending "pro-growth?"
It isn't.
Should have finished that thought first LOL.
You said that "they WANT to 'restructure' taxes in Nevada". You then opined what you claim it really means.
You then stated that you "guess that put a damper on ....."
So tell us, Karnac; how could ANYONE "know" when (a) there are no solid plans (see: "they want"); (b) nothing has become "law" (see: "they want"); (c) no non-gaming industry has expressed pleasure or displeasure as yet (see: a & b above, and "I guess").
Nance, considering your track record here, do you honestly think anyone is going to take your word for anything? You RARELY provide sources for any of your rantings. You simply bleat the same nonsense over and over and over.
People are trying to have genuine discussions with you, yet you resist.
One has to wonder why.
Patricia,
Not sure why we bother arguing with Nance, really... he's kind of like a kid that sticks his fingers in his ears and starts yelling at the top of his lungs whenever you say something that contradicts him.
I had this picture .... OMG LMAO! Thanks, TAG. I needed that one this morning.
Obamanomics is anti-growth.
Also, Obama has 1,000 of new spending items that most observers say can not all be paid for by his crunshing new taxes on capital investments and 65% combined income tax on "rich" people.
One should not trust his website for predicting how much deficit spending he will need to make up for the difference.
McCain is pro-growth and pro-jobs
It is that simple.
Any independent, non-biased sources for any of that, Nance?
Or was an AM radio host your "source"?
LOL! Nance thinks a $5 trillion national debt is "pro-growth" and "pro-jobs!"
What happens when it comes time to pay that bill, genius?
No wonder our economy is in shambles!
Obama is offering 1,000 of spending programs that are not covered by his hugh tax increase on job creation investments.
In this LA Times (a left lending Democratic paper) article, it says that Obama spending will result in higher deficit spending.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-...
So, Obama is going push crunshing taxes on capital job creation investments.
Obama is going to give middle class ($35k to $70k) per day $1.69 in tax cuts more than McCain.
Plus Obama has no plan to reduce deficit spending or balance the budget.
In fact, observers are say that he will increase the yearly budget deficits. They his health care spending is grossly under estimated and this net tax increases come up far short.
McCain is not promising a 1,000 new spending programs. He is promising to balance the budget.
McCain will increase incentives for job creation capital investment spending.
So you have a choice.
You can continue to drink the kool-aid that comes from the Obama's website or from opinion pieces that are written by his paid campaign staff or you can believe the liberal Democratic LA times.
Obama's plan will result in higher deficit spending.
"With interest, Obama's plans would increase the national debt by an estimated $3.4 trillion."
And McCain's plan will take Obama's debt AND MAKE IT WORSE!
"With interest costs, McCain's plans would add $5 trillion to the national debt over 10 years, the center concluded."
So you have a choice:
Take Obama's plan, which offers nearly universal health care coverage and less national debt...
Or McCain's plan, which offers... uh, his health care tax scheme and MORE national debt.
Thanks, Nance. That makes it clear!
theBs......chose to drink the kool-aid from Obama's website and the opinion pieces written by paid Obama staff...
He chose to ignore the liberal Democratic LA Times which says that Obama websites and opinion pieces are falsely stating the amount of deficit spending in Obama's plan.
.....no big surprise here
I had to set aside the fact that the LA Times publishes one Jonah Goldberg (spawn of Lucianne Goldberg) before I could stop laughing long enough at your "liberal media" tags to read the article. It appeared to be fairly balanced (with a few minor exceptions), until I got to the very last paragraph:
"Another burden is the rising cost of Medicare and other entitlement programs."
The ONLY people who refer to Medicare as an "entitlement program" sit way, way off to the right.
The sub-title alone tells you it's not even an in-depth, researched article:
"Some budget analysts say the Democrat's proposals for funding tens of billions of dollars in programs may not be enough."
There were a lot of opinions included in the article, but that's all they are -- opinions. No supporting documentation for anyone's opinion. (Kind of like your posts, nance.) And each of those opinions was a criticism of what you fondly refer to as "Obamanomics". Not much balance there, though at least the author DID appear to contact the campaign for their rebuttals. It's a huge step beyond where most of these opinion pieces go.
All it is is an election-time article, one of many we will see between now and November. Take them all at face value.
I have to hand it to you, though; you DO understand how this game is played -- you bleat your beliefs long enough and often enough and (to you and your fellow worshippers) they become fact.
Doesn't make it so, however.
And articles such as you've presented do NOTHING to educate ANYONE.
... says the guy who believes, without reservations of any kind, that John McCain will eliminate the deficit by 2013.
You certainly would know all about Kool-Aid chugging, nance.
That's it, Nance. Run away from facts.
Those quotes are from the Tax Policy Center, not from a campaign.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publicati...
You made deficit spending an issue, and choked when shown that McCain's deficit spending is worse.
Seems you're arguing in favor of Obama's tax plan, while criticizing it for providing tax relief for middle-class families... middle class as WE define it, not as McCain (aka 5 million is middle-class) defines it.
Meanwhile wholesale prices are inflating at levels not seen since the early '80's and you would deny extra relief to middle class families?
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080819/economy.h...
That's so elitist.
First, the Tax Policy Center is a left leaning organization that is really a combination of the left leaning Urban Institute and Brookings Institute.
Second, the Tax Policy Center made a lot of assumptions because neither candidates plans have that much detail in them. They say, "Thus, we have filled in the blanks, making assumptions about key missing details....Particular uncertainty surrounds the health proposals....Senator Obama has not specified..."
Third, when talking about specific tax cuts the paper says, that tax proposals would reduce tax revenues by $3.6 trillion (McCain) and $2.7 trillion (Obama) over the next 10 years.
Fourth, the paper says, that Obama's plan estimates are overoptimistic than McCain's plan. And it seems the paper gives Obama this overoptimistic edge. Obama is hedging a bet that his policies will save $80 billion a year in government health care spending. That theory has been laughed by many non-partisan observers.
Obama is promising massive new spending and at least $400 billion a year in deficit spending. Most observers are saying that it will be much higher. Some wall street observers are saying that Obama's plan will produce the first $1 trillion deficit at the end of his term.
McCain is promising to balance the budget by cutting spending.
Hey, you were quoting the Tax Policy Center in your own comments, so it's fair game. You were working off of it's assumptions, so it's fair game.
Now, when it makes you choke on a statistic, it's wrong? No, it doesn't work that way.
YOU provided the measure by which to judge the candidates' tax policy: "In this LA Times (a left lending Democratic paper) article, it says that Obama spending will result in higher deficit spending."
Higher deficit spending was YOUR benchmark, and the Tax Policy Center study, which YOU endorsed when YOU used their statistics to come up with YOUR $1.69/day tax cuts talking point, found that McCain's tax policy will cause the national debt to be 150% higher than the same debt with Obama.
Your own benchmark proves you wrong, with statistics you endorsed.
Now you try to backpedal and say the study is flawed? How positively Republican!
Not to mention all your citation-free "some experts say" and "most observers" claims.
McCain is promising to increase the debt by $5 trillion. A pinky-swear to balance the budget four years AFTER he takes office? Well now, that's fiscal discipline we can believe in! So he's gonna run up the national debt and THEN balance it for his legacy by dismantling Social Security or Medicare?
Face it, his fiscal policy is dead in the water. He's exactly what the Republicans feared he would be: a false conservative. He's George W. Bush all over again.
When McCain runs up a higher national debt than someone you claim is a tax and spend liberal, what does that make McCain? A spend and spend liberal! He's gonna give huge tax breaks to oil companies and billionaires and run this country into the ground.
And you think that's "pro-growth?" HA!
Obama Plans and Promises:
1) Tax the hell of the "rich". In some states, the "rich" will pay over 65% in taxes.
2) The ??big?? middle class (between $35k and $70K) tax break that Obama promises is only $1.69 a day more McCain's tax break promises.
3) Obama is promising massive new spending
4) Obama promises that the budget deficit will be at least $400 billion a year
5) Most observers say Obama estimates are very rosy and some are predicting by the end of his term that the deficits will be over $1 trillion a year
6) Obama is going to heavily increase taxes on capital job creation investments
McCain promises and plan:
1) McCain will increase incentives for capital job creation investments
2) McCain is promising to cut spending and balance the budget by the end of his first term
LOL, when your argument fails, just go back to the same broken talking points, which reference source material YOU SAID WAS WRONG!
LOL! Nance, you kill me, you're so transparent.
McCain promises to mire us $5 trillion further in debt to China, Dubai and Saudi Arabia.
You still haven't defended McCain's $5 trillion increase in national debt as "pro-growth" or "pro-jobs." Because you know it's the opposite!
You criticize Obama's policies for creating a national debt that's LESS THAN McCAIN's! And then you cower from answering the charge.
That's it, run away!
Obama promises mostly the same tax policies that were in effect in the '90's, under Clinton, when we experienced phenomenal growth and a large REPUBLICAN deficit which was paid off.
McCain promises more of the Bush team's tax policies, which have run us into the ground, financially. But hey, since Nance thinks a $5 trillion debt is great fiscal policy, vote for McCain!
Obama Plans and Promises:
1) Tax the hell of the "rich".
What states? What's your source? Define "taxes" (e.g., income, sales, capital gains, etc.)
2) ... tax break ... is only $1.69 a day more [than] McCain's ...
And why is MORE a problem?
3) Obama is promising massive new spending
Cite it.
4) Obama promises that the budget deficit will be at least $400 billion a year
And how is LESS THAN McCain's deficit a bad thing?
5) Most observers say ...
Define "most" (I want a solid number). Name the "observers" and cite their qualifications. Show me their crystal balls ("predicting").
6) Obama is going to heavily increase taxes on capital job creation investments
Clarify EXACTLY what you mean by this. Solid numbers, specific examples.
McCain promises and plan:
1) McCain will increase incentives for capital job creation investments
Clarify his plans with SPECIFIC ACTIONS he "promises" to take. And then show us the SOLID FIGURES that WILL BE the results. (Not "predictions".)
2) McCain is promising to cut spending and balance the budget by the end of his first term
Cut spending how? By how much? How does he plan to "balance the budget"? Cutting spending ISN'T going to do it on its own. List the other ways he will hold to his "promise".
Or else shut up, nance. Your incessant broken record is really tiresome.
Actually, nance, the correct figure is $1.98 per day for the tax bracket you're referring to. Not that you care about facts or anything. Why don't you break it down per second and really trivialize it?
http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/eco...
Of course, another way to look at it is that John McCain wants to give multimillionaires another $737 a day in tax breaks while giving the lowest income bracket a whopping nickel a day.
Great priorities, there.
The lowest bracket does not pay any income taxes at all.
The tax credits are pure welfare in that bracket.
I think the number is in despite because neither candidate gives full details on their tax plans, but I am ok with $1.98. LOL........wooooeeeeeee...Granny I now get $1.98 instead of $1.64 per day....lets go to Burger King...I am now going to get a Deluxe Cheesburger......wooooeeeeeeeewwweeeeee
Come on Granny we got to go....Obama is about to annouce the VP you selected....
"I think the number is in despite because neither candidate gives full details on their tax plans ..."
And yet you spout your nonsense as fact. So typical of one with a shaky belief system. LOL.
Be careful what you say....Granny will get mad....she might tell Obama to attack Russia or something if you tick her off.
I'm impressed, Nance. Way to completely abandon your argument.
I'll take the points.
It gets old going back and forth and repeating the same thing over and over again.
Then why do you do it? Why can't you provide any SUBSTANCE for your nonsense?
Sigh. Why am I even asking?
Y'all are pretty funny thinking either of these candidates will make a difference.
Seriously.
Step back, take off whatever tinted glasses you have on, reference the history books you should have read.
They are the same. Just different messages to appeal to weak minded fools who believe the drivel their PR machines spout.
Either one will be an improvement on the frat boy fool in office now - and I thought his dad was embarassing when I was living abroad.
I'm not sure if either will really make a difference (and I have to admit I'm not really a fan of either of them), but I'm pretty sure an Obama presidency will be a damn sight better than a McSame-As-Bush presidency. If nothing else, an Obama presidency SHOULD help to return the US to its pre-frat boy reputation.
JMHO, of course.
Oh and his dad WAS embarrassing, but at least he knew when to fade quietly into the sunset. You get the feeling the frat boy won't be following in Dad's footsteps in that respect.
"but I'm pretty sure an Obama presidency will be a damn sight better than a McSame-As-Bush presidency."
Kim Jong Il, Achmini-jihad, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, The Castros, Hugo Chavez and other global anti-American anti-freedom leaders not on the record yet agree with you. THEY support Barry Obama as well.
They didn't like George W. Bush standing up against them. They SURE liked the LSDs attacking Bush, though.
They liked a liberal Democratic Administration (don't all dictators and terrorists?), where they could be anti-freedom terrorist-supporting dictators with more impunity and greater comfort levels.
They await the second-term of Jimmy Carter, with a twist of William Ayers, Frank Marshall Davis and Jeremiah Wright thrown in!
http://michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/...
"Group tied to al-Qaida backs McCain for prez"
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?f...
So by your "logic," a vote for John McCain is a vote for al-quaida.
And a link to Malkin? LOL!
Sure, keep bashing the rich. It hasn't helped you so far, but why not keep trying?