The candidates define ‘rich’

I’d like to know if John and Cindy’s combined returns are just a hair under that $5 million cutoff…

To this point, we’ve heard almost nothing in the MSM about McKept’s wife’s fortune and their house bought with her money. Realize that they don’t live in all of them. They aren’t slumlords, though there was a problem with property taxes in San Diego, presumably resolved. Also, the $250,000 income to be increased is the taxable figure. Many wealthy have sheltered their income by investing taxfree in muni bonds.

“If anything from last night comes back to bite McCain on the butt, it’s this.”

I don’t think it will come back and bite him. And this is why he’ll do just fine in the debates. He’ll use the questions as springboards to go off on his favorite crowd-pleasing tangents. Nobody will care that he didn’t answer the questions or that he was largely incoherent. They will just care that he managed to step on their particular hot buttons as he careened around a tangled web of moronic verbiage.

I’m still confused how a guy who has been out of the senate for 4 months, missing major votes, can criticize the senate for taking a scheduled vacation instead of voting on a worthless gimmick issue.

Oh right, it’s politics. I forgot.

Obama’s response was simply based on $150K and $250K as income tax guidelines. McCain’s reponse was very in touch with how income taxation works – or rather, doesn’t.

The follow up should have been “define greed”. I would like to see the responses to that question.

I wonder if McCain finished his answer and thought to himself “YES!” or “Damn, I’m good.”

McCain was joking about the 5 mill like he was joking about the 100, 1,000 years in Iraq. He’s a real kidder, that guy.

Chas? The issue is that he couldn’t answer the question. I agree that he was joking, but what was the first number that popped into his head? For him, that obviously means a person is wealthy. For most of us, the ‘wealth line’ is a fraction of that. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt in that he’s not a stupid person. But that means he likely ticked through, and eliminated, any number below $5,000,000 before arriving at his ‘joke’.

I agree with you, JoeW, that it was a pathetic attempt to dodge the question. Especially all the rubbish about earmarks.

I just wanted to defend McCain from Steve’s main charge in the post because i’ve gotten sick of Republican sleazy truth-distortion over the years. And the last thing i want to see is a left-wing brand of the same bullsh!t. And i don’t think Obama would want that either. It’s part of the reason i support him so vehemently.

Thankfully the left are still light years more responsible than the right in that regard. Let’s hope things don’t change (on our side at least!)

Folks, you’re totally missing the point.

McCain does not wish to engage (as does Obama) in leftist class warfare, nor does he want to punish achievement by socializing government and redistributing wealth.

By McCain’s definition I’m quite rich but in strictly a monetary sense I’m very much middle class. And if I had a choice I’d never trade my home, my life or my family for any amount of money. One cannot place a dollar value on life, freedom, faith and the pursuit of happiness.

Oh by the way, I am NOT a McCain supporter — I am simply a conservative…
http://www.baldwin08.com

Overall, in the debate, I thought both Obama and McCain did well – however, most of the time McCain was the one with the direct answers, Obama the more nuanced one. That’s not meant as a shot at either of them – I think they both gave us insights into their thinking.

I do disagree with this interpretation of McCain’s response. McCain’s point was obviously that defining rich as above X amount of dollars is just setting an arbitrary number. I mean, in Orange County, if your family income is $200K a year, you are not rich, but in rural Texas, if you make $50,000 a year, you are at least upper middle-class. A small business person in Southern California who makes $5 million a year in income may be making $100K in profits on the business – if he gets taxes a additional 5%, then all of a sudden he’s losing $150K a year. So how does he break even? Maybe he fires a few workers?

One thing that is interesting – and this is factual, so people can look it up – the 5 states with the biggest budget deficits are also the ones with some of the most business-unfriendly environments. Guess what, when you create an environment that is hard on business, businesses leave your state, people lose jobs and the tax base shrinks. These 5 states include California, Michigan and New Jersey. They all tax the wealthy and small businesses at high rates, and so these groups leave. Places like North Carolina and Texas, which keep taxes low and have a business friendly climate have balanced budgets or even a budget surplus.

I realize it sound great to say “Let’s soak the rich”, but what people don’t seem to get – the rich have the resources to opt out of taxes. They hire attorneys to set up trusts or off-shore LLCs or they move abroad or in the case of small business owners, they may forgo expanding their business or they may fire workers. The end result is not more taxes, but the paradox of higher tax rates and lower tax revenues, coupled with the increased cost of enforcing the tax codes. That translates into less dollars to pay for things that help the poor and lower middle class – things like health care or education.

The best way to help the poor is to create good jobs for them – which means having a business friendly environment and fair trade rules so that more good are made in America and we stop exporting our jobs overseas. Interestingly, when countries lower their tax rates for business and do other business-friendly things, they attract foreign investment. If the US did this, as well as making sure any trade agreements were fair, we would see more jobs, which would increase our tax base and help us pay for things like health care for people who need that help.

Obama will never get my vote the jerk, period and i am not thrilled with McCain and if any one thinks that raising taxes is good for the economy is an idiot dumb a__. who should go back to take some econ 101 classes.

Are you stupid or just a hack? You are doing just what McCain said you would do…take seriously his $5 million dollar comment. IT WAS A JOKE.

For the most part I benefited from the interviews last night. I learned that one person answers questions straight forward and the other tells stories and reminds us how he suffered in a concentration camp, how we are spending three million on bear dna, but overlooks billions on a war we started with a country that did nothing to us ( I don’t think Iraqi citizens or soldiers were aboard the planes that brought down the towers), how rich is defined not by what you have or have not, how he suffered in a concentration camp, how the other party went on a planned vacation, how he gave up his early leave in a concentration camp because daddy was a big shot in the military. Humm, is this sounding like someone else who’s daddy was a big shot?
I’m not aligned with any of the parties in this country. In fact I don’t like or trust them, but I can listen to questions and answers and draw my own conclusions about whom I would trust in a thinking man’s job. I would prefer to start over and obtain a candidate with credentials that qualify, but alas that will not happen so if it’s between a story teller and an intellectual, I think I’ll opt for the intellectual.

McCain had to “joke” about 5 million, because he honestly doesn’t know what middle class is – doesn’t know what it’s like to have to decide whether to buy a couple of gallons of gas or a gallon of milk and a few groceries.

Obama is right, these things are relative. You cannot cite an arbitrary number such as 250k and say your rich. If you live in a high cost, high tax area your real income is much lower than if you live in a low cost low tax area. You will find many hard working people that are on the line getting screwed. This unfairness happens every time the government tries to make things “fair”. Remember the alternative minimum tax? This is just more class envy talk from Obama to elicite the “hate the rich” sentiment Democrats and Hollywood have fostered in the middle class.
Also, there are other ways the populace gets taxed. For instance if Obama gets his windfall tax on big oil this will get passed on as higher cost of business and the poor and working poor will get disproportionately hit with higher cost at the pump, higher cost in goods due to trucking, higher cost of food etc. The 1k per family will not even come close to covering the higher cost directly and indirectly attributed to his “going after big oil” Obama is smart enough to understand this however he is counting on the electorate not being so.
Just another politician playing to the emotions to buy votes. The single biggest thing any politician can do for you is to promise to cut government spending and live up to that promise. Get rid of earmarks. Get you own house in order Mr. government official and mine will be much better off. You can keep your handouts if you will just keep your hands out of my pocket. The answer to better government is never higer taxes, it is lower spending.

I don’t want to take any money from the rich. I want everybody to get rich.

Commie!

chas,

Like he was joking when he called his wife a cunt?

Or when he was joking when he called Chelsea clinton ugly?

McCain has a twisted sense of humor, and I absolutely don’t care if Steve Benen, Howard Dean, or Barack Obama use his ‘jokes’ against him.

To even have the gall to make a joke about it when we’re faced with a recession makes it worse. He cares nothing for the middle and lower class. Hell, he doesn’t even care for the people Obama defines as rich. Read between the lines of his joke and you’ll know exactly who McCain gives a damn about.

He was asked to put a number to the definition of rich. In his meandering attempt to avoid the question he threw out $5 million. That was an asinine, unforced error and the Democrats would be fools not to leverage it.

It reminds me very much of GHW Bush not knowing what the price of a loaf of bread was.

This is nothing like sleazy Republican distortion. It’s calling it like it is. Don’t be so quick to dismiss it’s significance in a meaningless quest for mythical fairness that will never be reciprocated.

McCain may have chuckled about it, but it was no joke. His gaffe was speaking the truth.

Can’t wait to see the furor in the Media, that McCain wasn’t wearing a Lapel Pin, last night.
Seriously though, the Media will not allow Obama to win.
How many stories did we see, about Obama not wearing a Lapel Pin?
The Media made it a big issue, and ya know it will never be mentioned about McCain.
The spin on last night, is all positive McCain, and negative Obama.
The Media scrutiny continues one-sided, and as long as that continues, Obama is toast.
Those who haven’t decided yet, obviously, aren’t of the type to look for answers themselves. So, they just take in what the Media feeds. If all they hear is Obama, Obama, Obama… inexperience, presumptuous, Muslim, Rev Wright, celebrity, etc… most of everything negative, and that McCain is a Maverick, Hero, GOP-Defying, Straight-Talking, Independent, Foreign Policy Wizard, with little scrutiny… they’ll be voting McCain. Which is why the Polls are moving in McCain’s direction.
By mid-week, McCain will be in the lead, after his bounce, based on last night’s media coverage. All I heard was McCain won, because he was clear & concise, while Obama was *nuanced.*
Using one’s brain, and thoughtfully answering questions, is a bad thing in 21st Century America. Say hi to Bush III.
As an aside, I am so tired of all the legions of fools, who continue to whine about taxes.
99% of you favor Iraq (never even part of the budget), want safe roads, want to bail out Banks, etc.
Check out the National Debt & Deficit… Someone, somewhere, sometime, is going to have to pay for all this. If you prefer that your kids & grandkids, don’t spend their lives working for China & Saudi Arabia, etc, then stop whining already, open your eyes, and look what Trickle-Down, Supply-Side Corporatism/Socialism & Welfare, has done to our economy, treasury, housing and job markets.

McCain was responding more to Obama’s answer than to the two word question, and by the way, Obama veered off the definition of rich just as well to go into the territory he’s most comfortable talking about – raising taxes, spending more money, and fostering class envy. McCain responded to that. The two word question was made wide open for a reason, so that the candidates could take it where they wanted, and it is telling. Obama defines rich solely in monetary, materialistic terms. McCain begins by defining rich as something deeply personal. For instance, spiritually rich, emotionally rich, rich in confidence, love, compassion, pride, etc. Obama doesn’t even see these things, and neither does this writer. Sad.

Some information for the “cutting government spending is always the answer” crowd:

You can get a kit to test your water supply for ecoli for only 10 dollars (each test.) You’ll need to test the water daily, so stock up now.

Testing food for ecoli is more difficult, but don’t worry: there are labs all over the country that will test your food. Expect to pay a few hundred dollars for each item of food tested, so expect your food budget to go up.

If the FDA budget is cut a bit more, it may turn out to be necessary to do your own testing.

Government, in a democracy, is simply the embodiment of the collective will of the people. People who think that government is always the problem are basically the lizard brain of the collective consciousness.

Why didn’t you publish Obama’s response in full?

I love when the rabid right decries the ‘class warfare of the left’. I guess they think we are as reality challenged as they are. I guess we aren’t supposed to notice the ever widening gap between the fabulously wealthy and the deteriorating ‘middle class’. I’d go so far as to suggest they would think it rude if we pointed out that the repubs have been waging class warfare for a half century (if not longer) – with their class kicking the crap out of most of the country.

But I would never dare suggest such a thing. My rabid right acquaintances tell me such thought is unpatriotic.

I thought the answers summarized everything that is wrong with McCain. Promise everyone tax cuts even larger than Bush’s, weighted even more heavily in favor of the rich, in the face of a $482 billion deficit and joke about making up for it by cutting things like a $3 million program to track DNA of bears (which might have some scientific usefulness, maybe to track the bear population, protect other wildlife or cattle, who knows) and sell it to the public. Add to it a plan to destroy the employer based health insurance coverage that 90 percent of Americans are under, and replace it with a tax credit that will not pay for even half of the annual premiums of a family of four.

Ok, I don’t get it… If you read McCain’s response, he did “define rich” in the very 2nd sentence!

“I think that rich is — should be defined by a home, a good job and education and the ability to hand to our children a more prosperous and safer world than the one that we inherited. ” -McCain

McCain defined $5 million as income, not “rich”.

And lastly, even as Obama said so—any number is relative. So what I don’t get is why is everyone dogging McCain on his $5 million dollars and saying he dodged the question.

I STILL DON’T UNDERSTAND JUST WHAT IT IS MCCAIN BRINGS TO THE AMERICAN VOTER. HE GOES OFF ON TANGENTS, HE LOSES HIS TRAIN OF THOUGHT, HE FORGETS WHAT HE SAYS, HE FORGETS THE QUESTION ASKED, HE DOESN’T KNOW GEOGRAPHY, LET ALONE WORLD POLITICS, LET ALONE AMERICAN POLITICS. HE DOESN’T KNOW ECONOMICS, AND CAN’T KEEP FACTS STRAIGHT. HIS NATIONAL SECURITY IDEAS ARE MOSTLY COLD WAR SLOGANS. JUST WHAT IS IT THAT HE THINKS WOULD MAKE HIM ANY KIND OF PRESIDENT, LET ALONE SENATOR??????

manapp99 @ 33 said:

The answer to better government is never higer taxes, it is lower spending.

Theoretically that is absolutely true. However, when you get rid of ALL ‘earmarks’ at the federal level, are you willing to pay for everything at your local level?

I mean we can all decry ‘pork’ but everybody does benefit from it. Sure we can decry the ‘bridge to nowhere’ but I’m sure you’ve got some federal dollars in your city/town, county, area, that you can’t deny being pure pork.

I’m all for getting rid of earmarks all together. If politicians want money for their districts, they can ask for it through the budgeting process, instead of sneaking it in.

However, I notice it here in my little neck in the woods. Lot’s of Republicans keep saying that we should lower taxes, reduce fees, etc…but they seem to be the first ones to complain when the roads aren’t plowed immediately, or that there are potholes to be fixed, etc…

Case in point: living in a republican district, but they’re all up in arms because the ‘Forest payment plan’ hasn’t been renewed. Which has resulted in some services being discontinued, and library branches being shuttered. Yet, they scream about the outrage of not getting that money. All of a sudden they forget that this money is ALSO taxpayer dollars. the dollars they do not want to give.

It’s always… give me more, but don’t take any from me. Typical republican attitude, with a short memory.

All the republicans who scream about federal waste. I applaud you, as soon as you start paying for your very own services in your location, without depending on Federal handouts.

Gee, I wonder how all those blue collar workers will feel now when they hear they aren’t rich until they have an income of $5 million a year! Yes, that shows us just how McCain is just a regular guy………you know so what if he wears $500 dollar shoes and owns about 7 homes give or take one! Reminds of George Bush Sr. when he went to buy some tube socks in one of his pr stunts and marveled at the price scanner! Good grief, how out of touch can this guy get!

Oh come on, you know damn well what the context was in which Mc Cain made the “rich” comment. To make anything out of it, as you did, is both stupid and designed to make political points. You obviously are not an objective reporter and shouldnt be taken seriously.

Manapp,

You were one of the ones who said, and I’m quoting directly from your earlier comment: “The answer to better government is never higer taxes, it is lower spending.” (complete with your spelling error.)

I didn’t disagree, I merely pointed out how you can do your own water and food testing. This wasn’t a strawman, but a “reductio ad absurdem” argument, and is not a logial fallacy. It is, in fact, the most straightforward way to prove that an absolute statement, such as the one you made, is false.

A thing I’ve always found interesting is that people like you, with only a dim grasp of reality or logic, are always using terms you do not comprehend, such as “strawman”.

A strawman argument is when you pretend that someone else said something, such as “all government spending is good”, when they didn’t, and then argue against that. This is a textbook example of a strawman argument, and you made it above.

For those that didn’t watch last nights Q & A, did you also not read what McCain said? It was a joke! McCain didn’t intend that to be his number for being “rich” and those trying to use it against him, as he said you would, know this. He feels as the majority of Americans do and that is to not punish a person because they have been successful in life. The richest among us pay the vast majority of all taxes in the country, and oh by the way they also provide the jobs. Have you ever been hired by a poor person? Go ahead and try to punish the wealthy and see who gets stuck with the bill in the end. Punish the evil corporations and see who’s 401k’s and retirement plans suffer as a result when stock prices tumble. Instead of trying to get a redistribution of the wealth, aka USSR, try becoming wealthy yourself. I know I’m trying and I don’t begrudge those who are already.

manapp99 @ 50 actually makes a good point when offering examples of government waste.

I agree completely, and the best solution to that problem is to get rid of the management team. Oh… right… they’re republicans.

That’s why this election is so important. We NEED to get rid of the republicans in government, because all they know is to screw things up to prove their point.

manapp99…. Can Obama count on your vote? Because you want sensible governemt, and that is exactly what he’s offering, unlike the Republican liars. You and your ‘lizard brain’ compatriots keep falling for the switch and bait techniques. Are you guys EVER going to learn?

I guess not.

the reason you democrats lose so ofter in national elections is that you have no sense of humor. the $5 million remark was clarified just like the 100 years in iraq was intentionally distorted (lied about by obama). you have given a clue to how the obama campaign will handle this also…distortions (lies) and quoting partial responses.
by the way, abortions are down to their lowest levels since the 70’s and obama did not cross the isle with the example he gave on bi-partisanship…he jumped ship and voted with the democratic party line. great example of change we can count on…much less believe in.

I have to say this was a very weak write-up, and I’m not sure why realclearpolitics bothered to link this. For anyone watching the forum, it was PERFECTLY CLEAR that the $5 million figure was said in jest. He even says, in the text that you quoted, that he was certainly there would be some who would misrepresent this the next day.

And you stepped up to the plate – irresponsible, feigning stupidity, and ready to misrepresent what he said. Honestly, how do you feel good about writing this?

McCain’s real answer was very clear: he rejected the premise of the question because he does not believe in wealth redistribution via taxation. I’m sure you could write and interesting and informed piece about the virtues of that answer, the extent to which you disagree with it, and why empirically you think that is a poor economic strategy. That would have been much more productive than this crap you wrote, frankly.

My personal income tax reflects around $300,000 but I own a business that is taxed at a personal income tax rate. I take home around $50,000. This is the major problem with the Obama tax plan.

More than 55% of the ‘rich’ who will be punished under Obama are small businesses. We are responsible for close to 60% of the jobs in the US. I will have to lay off workers, many of my colleagues will as well. Don’t any of you Obama supporters get it? Pick up an elementary economic book.

To all the Republican leaning posters here. For better or for worse. What are your thoughts on the following statement:

If Republican warriors like Hannity and Matalin think so highly of Corsi’s research into Obama, then perhaps we should take seriously Corsi’s scholarship about McCain. In recent articles at worldnetdaily.com, Corsi has claimed (among other charges) that the McCain campaign received “strong” financial support from a “group tied to Al Qaeda” and that “McCain’s personal fortune traces back to organized crime in Arizona.”

Should I believe that McCain has connection with organized crime, and that several of his backers are also backing Al Qaeda? Or do the talking points related to putting Obama down the ONLY truth in your universe? Corsi said it, so it MUST be true. McCain as a Manchurian candidate is far worse than a muslim president Obama in my opinion.

What are your thoughts? PS thoughts and critical thinking… keep the drivel for ‘Red State’

Charles you said:
“A strawman argument is when you pretend that someone else said something, such as “all government spending is good”, when they didn’t, and then argue against that. This is a textbook example of a strawman argument, and you made it above.”

Exactly. The strawman argument you made is that if government spending is reduced we will have to test our own water and food. I pointed out that government could easily cut without touching spending on saftey items.

Anyone willing to look at the facts knows that is wasteful and fraudulent with the money they take.

Bruno says this:

“You’re full of shit. Just because you chose to ignore the earmarks McCain has been bringing home, doesn’t mean they aren’t there.”

Actually, that is exactly what the article pointed out. Look at this line from the article I quoted you decided to ingore:

““A new report by the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense found that Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton steered millions of dollars to pet projects in their home states, a common congressional practice known as “earmarking,” while McCain had none.”

Note the last 4 words, “while McCain had none”

Bruno, you also say this:

“Theoretically that is absolutely true. However, when you get rid of ALL ‘earmarks’ at the federal level, are you willing to pay for everything at your local level?

I mean we can all decry ‘pork’ but everybody does benefit from it. Sure we can decry the ‘bridge to nowhere’ but I’m sure you’ve got some federal dollars in your city/town, county, area, that you can’t deny being pure pork.”

If you need money at the local level it makes far more sense to raise it a the local level. It cost massive amounts of money just to collect the money from the local level, decide where to spend it, then send it back. Also the scrutiny at the local level is far greater as you see your local politicians at the store, baseball games etc. There is no logic to taking 1 dollar from someone and using 41 cents of that dollar just to send it back.

Bruno, I think that Jerome Corsi’s book “The Obama Nation” has about the same credibility as Ron Suskinds new book “The Way of the World”
None.

McCain is 100% right. Raising taxes is not the way to grow an economy. Our corporate tax rates are already among the highest in the industrialized world. And Obama wants to double those corporate tax rates so that he can allegedly give a miniscule tax cut to those making under $150,000 a year, never mind paying for untold billions of dollars in new entitlement programs? Man, talk about jobs leaving the country!

At the core, Barack Obama is a socialist liberal who, along with a significant portion of the Democratic Party, has a deep-seeded resentment of those who are successful. This is not the “change” we need. Thankfully, most Americans don’t resent those who are successful. They admire them and aspire to be like them.

McCain cleaned Obama’s clock last night, providing clear, concise and direct answers to the questions put to him, looking far more “presidential” and exhibiting a depth of knowledge on specific subjects gained from a many years of experience.

Up to now, the focus of this campaign has been almost exclusively on Barack Obama. McCain has been almost an afterthought. But now, in the coming weeks, John McCain will get his turn to introduce himself to the American people. And when he does, I’m betting that a majority of those people will come to the same conclusion that I have: John McCain is the best man for the job.

RC,

You need to incorporate and keep your business and personal finances separate. Any business owner that doesn’t do that deserves what comes their way, including complete failure of their business and seizure of all their personal assets.

Seriously, out of the back of what magazine did you mail order your business degree?

Hey,he said it was a joke and then idiots like you would go after him. Same with a “hundred years”. Dems cut his quote off just as he continues” if our troops are not under fire”. Like Germany and S.Korea. You’ll see ads “McCain only wants to help you if you make over 5 Mill.”

Paladin: if it was a joke, that makes me angrier. Why don’t we deserve an answer to that question? Why does he think a $500 billion/year deficit and a $200 billion/year war that the top tax bracket isn’t willing to sacrifice $1 for, FUNNY? I don’t.

BTW: my request about cutting the jokes goes to Obama too. He only gets in trouble when he tries to make jokes. Like that stupid dollar bill one. The Britney Spears ad was stupid and treated us like we were stupid. I didn’t find that commercial funny, but insulting, and I didn’t find the “dollar bill joke” funny, but stupid too.

Is Benen an idiot? The five million comment was obviously a joke. McCain even said so. If you can’t get a joke after someone explains it to you, your ignorance is beyond comprehension and your political blinders so thick that you should refrain from voting until you clear them up.

Obviously, people making $4.999,999 a year are rich. What is not obvious is whether people making $250,001 are.

Our tax code has been made so deliberately complex that no one has any idea how much anyone is paying when all is said and done. And without that information, it becomes very difficult to argue that one group “deserves” to pay more or less of the tax burden than they currently do. Both parties want it this way to protect their constituents.

Come on Dems do you really think you can get traction with this one? How ridiculous!

Yes, it was a joke. I just don’t happen to think that the income disparities in this country are very funny.

No defense necessary doubtful, McCain was joking.

You would think that I would be happy to see some diversity of discussion. But, to be honest, the wingnuts just make me tired. Taking in of themselves, some of the comments almost sound coherent. It is only when you connect them to measurable reality that they become jibberish.

For example, take the flag waving, ‘McCain says I’m rich because I have my freedom…’, uh, McCain supports policies that have led us to wiretapping, secret prisons, indefinate detentions, and torture. That is, well, the antithesis of freedom.

Then there is the ‘spend less crowd’, don’t take my money for handouts… Let me guess, mostly home owners. Who don’t seem to mind two massive handouts in their own lives, the mortgage interest tax credit, and medicare. Stop subsidizing home ownership and Grandma’s health care, and ‘your’ hard earned castles will vanish in droves. But aside from being hypocrits, it again is incoherent to connect to McCain. We have doubled our national debt and taken a surplus to a record deficit in just 7 years. That is the economic policies that McCain supports. If you actually believe in financial responsbilitity (as opposed to simply describing oneself as being financially responsible), then the last few decades are clear, don’t vote for Republicans.

And, the trickle down set makes an appearance. Oh my God, California has a massive deficit!!!! It’s huge. But look at the underlying problems. First, tax revolt, between prop 13, and our required super majority, our state revenue stream is volatile and a small group of nutbag Republicans can hold the state hostage (and do so, annually). Second, look at our industries, we are hurt easily by high energy costs, hence punished brutally by terrible energy policy. Next, we are one of the most small enterprise driven states in the union. So the disasterous mismangement of liquid capitol and the mortgage crisis have hit us, an actual invest/produce state, hard. Last, there is the mortgage crisis itself. Unlike much of, say, Texas, much of California is, in fact, a nice place to live, so just like Texas firms like Enron exploited us with energy, banks from all over the nation exploited us in the real estate ponzi scheme.

We are, by ourselves, one of the largest economies in the world. And a driving economic engine in the nation. Remember, I live in a donor county, in a donor state. That is, I pay more into the Federal system than my local, or state, draws out. Texas is a welfare state. Desipite economic ‘success’, it still lives on handouts – and depiste both, is a national disgrace on many fronts, like children living in poverty, quality of education, access to health care…

The problem with the ‘Saipan’ model of governence, is that makes crap holes. If you are smart enough to be a valuable employee in the information age, you don’t want to live in a crap hole. Look at Raytheon. They bought a high tech division from Hughes and said, pack up and move, or clean out your desk… Only problem, California has the educational system and quality of life that the sorts of brains the enterprise needs want for themselves and their children. So 15 years later, my neighbor, who was one of the big brains that said, ‘fine, I’ll pack up my desk if that is the way you want it…’, is still here, and he and his fellow brainiacs are still drawing paychecks. But the last time I checked, all those poor folks at Enron whose pensions were intertwined with the company’s fate, are still screwed…

-jjf

I can see the comments here are roughly broekn down between the dems who love to play the blame card on someone either happier or ‘richer’ than them, and the conservatives, who are basically, well, right! To expect folks making over $250,000 to pay their fair share, is indeed a decent request. However I venture they currently pay MORE than their fair share. If indeed they represent 3-4% of the population, they prebably pay 20% of all taxes. By that standard they deserve a subsantial cut and all the class warfare, whining, willing to spend money to help others as long as it is someone else’s money weasels can go pound sand!

No defense necessary doubtful, McCain was joking. -votin4mac

Then stop defending him and watch as the middle class shifts from 50/50 to Obama’s side. It’s almost pathetic how McCain lost the whole race away before it really even started.

So Peter I would assume you are for income redistribution then right… -Sandy T

I don’t know about Peter, but I am. I like Social Security. I like paying taxes at a lower rate than the rich. I like knowing that people living on minimum wage are given access to social programs such as welfare and food stamps.

Come on people, you are completely missing McCain’s point. He disagreed with the premise of the question, which was, “what is the dividing line we use to decide which group of people should pay more taxes?”

McCain thinks that everyone should pay less taxes, and this can be made possible by reducing wasteful spending. I happen to agree!

Doubtful said: I don’t know about Peter, but I am. I like Social Security. I like paying taxes at a lower rate than the rich. I like knowing that people living on minimum wage are given access to social programs such as welfare and food stamps.

Then I would say doubtful – you got your man in BO – the most liberal Senator in the US Senate – didn’t take BO long to acquire that status – of course coming from Chicago was a big help to him.

Haha, Sandy T. You are so ignorant. Barack Obama isn’t even the most liberal Senator from Illinois. Dick Durbin is far more liberal than Obama. And no one in the Senate out-liberals Bernie Sanders, but you’ve likely never heard of him.

But wow, that comment was so stupid, I bet you get at least 100 McPoints for it.

I would expect no different from a Senator from Vermont………but you have it wrong doubtful, Obama is the most liberal Senator in the Senate……..

Doubtful, you really threw me off with your statement –

‘It’s irrelevant what portion of the population they represent, it’s what portion of the population’s wealth do they represent’.

Do you even live in the US? Are you from San Francisco?

Do you hate people based on their income?

Haha,

Looks like I need a spelling lesson, too.

reallize!

Oh well, I was only joking with you anyway. Since I said I was joking, you can’t criticize me for it from now on.

Doubtfull said:
I don’t know about Peter, but I am. I like Social Security. I like paying taxes at a lower rate than the rich. I like knowing that people living on minimum wage are given access to social programs such as welfare and food stamps.

To my earlier point the liberals are so very benevolent, always concerned about the poor, and ever generous as long as someone else is paying the tab. I am so glad Mr or Mrs doubtfull can sleep confortable at night having paid so little for what he/she supports so strongly. Now that is conviction!

Great point David S

Interesting critique, but can anyone here define what constitutes being rich? At what point should one’s tax rate increase 10%? Who here is prepared to look them in the face and tell them they aren’t paying enough taxes?

Ah David S,

Engaging in a little ad hominem (no, that doesn’t mean you’re gay).

You have no idea how much I pay in taxes, how much I donate in time or money, or what policy I’ve advocated for in an effort to help those less fortunate than I, but that doesn’t prevent you from avoiding the argument and attacking me personally.

Ad hominem is the last recourse for the hopelessly beaten, therefore I accept your surrender.

Jesus would be so disappointed in your support of abandoning the poor.

Well doubtful since 5% of the population already pays 54% of all of the taxes, I would say they are already paying their fair share.

He will just turn it around to say “of course anyone make 5 million is rich” and everyone will agree – making 5 million is rich. the context will be lost. And then he’ll say something like “you know, when i was shot down in my fighter jet….I never thought I’d see American soil again, etc, etc”

For me It’s not taxes but Abortion

Did Einstein know more about Physics than the common man? On that subject, you would listen to him before someone like me who knows very little of the
science and mathematics behind the interplay of space, time, and matter.
Did the late John Paul II and Mother Teresa know more about Christian philosophy and belief and how it should be applied in daily living than most? Surely they did.
Well according to them and even the present pope, abortion is the pre-eminent moral issue of our time.
Benedict XVI, when he was a cardinal said that one could disagree over
war and the death penalty and still be a good christian but not so with abortion and homsexuality. These are always and forever wrong.

Mr. Obama’s Pro-Life (National Right to Life) rating=
2005 0%,
2006 0%,
2007 0%
His Pro-Abortion (NARAL) rating=
2005 100%,
2006 100%,
2007 100%

What does one innocent human life mean to God( not man, but God)?

A spiritual person is not truely a spiritual person
by stating that he or she is one but by what they do or don’t do in their daily lives.

Obama’s voting record on abortion legislation gives every indication that as president he would support the Supreme Court’s decisions that have made the procedure legal in most cases.
Last August he voted against giving the states the option of providing medical insurance to unborn children under the State Children’s Health Insurance program. He also voted “no” on a 2006 bill to prohibit the transportation of a minor girl across state lines to obtain an abortion without
parental consent or notification.

Lastly,Obama spent 20 years hanging around racists and anti-semites(not 20 seconds-20 years!)
A true christian would not do that
(with the exception of trying to convert them from their ways). But this
would not mean hanging around them as
friends.

Nothing sanctioned by man can have any validity or lasting if it is not also likewise sanctioned by .

How any bible-believing loving Christian can even consider voting for this man is beyond me.

How one could even compare the taking of an innocent life with any other issue is beyond me.

In the hierarchy of injustices, this is number one.
It’s estimated Henry Hyde through his Hyde Amendment may have save a million lives. If he only
saved one is that not worth it?
”
Maggie Styles, staff counsel for Americans United for Life, says that a pro-life president “could help build a culture of life through judicial appointments, the enactment and defense of pro-life laws and policies, executive orders, vetoes and judicial appointments.”

There is a picture at the bottom of the National Right to LIfe web page(nrlc.org). Go there and
scroll down and take a look and think long and hard about how you’re going to vote.

We will have to ANSWER TO GOD for our decisions people.

Oh, for the love of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, we’ve got a single-issue voter basing his vote on faith in an imaginary being’s wrath.

E_lightened, you should really go by the name “Unenlightened.”

The question STATED was “Define rich.” The question HEARD by both candidates, and everybody listening, was “At what income level do you increase taxes?”

Obama answered: “Around $250,000…”
McCain answered: “I won’t raise taxes on anybody.”

We will have to ANSWER TO GOD for our decisions people.

It’s pretty simple, Sweets, but then, you may want to repeat it to yourself ’til you get it right: “Abortion is none of my damned business.”

Then go stand in front of the mirror and and promise yourself you’ll refrain from attempting to infringe on the inalienable rights of your American sisters.

Hey, Steve, congratulations. The McCain paid trolls finally discovered you and put you on their list of blogs to clog.

Typical McCain ‘brilliance’ btw, publicly announcing this so that any McCain poster — and there are some who are wrong but sincere — will automatically be discounted as part of the ‘win prizes brigade.’ McC-SCE (my new acronym — “McCain – Stupidest Candidate Ever.”)

david s said:

a first year economics student could also tell you a recesion is defined as 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth. We have yet to have 1

That all depends on who you believe. Your statement is correct, but you did not account for “The Math” as used by Rove and the Bush administration. I can guarantee you that the current administration is used as a bad example to illustrate to first year economics students what not to do.

Recently the numbers for the 4th quarter of 2007 were revised to reflect a negative. It’s only a matter of another month, and the first quarter will be revised as well.

With the Bush administration cooking the books, and discontinuing any reporting that reflects bad on their stewardship of the country, it is no wonder that it ‘looks on paper’ as if were not in a recession, but it certainly feels like on in the real world.

I bet you don’t get that information on your favorite Limbaugh/O’Reilly shows. It’s not for nothing that Republicans believe in ‘voodoo economics’ and trickle down shit.

“It doesn?t work to make some people rich by making others poorer.”

So … does it work to make some people richer by making the children of others poorer? Because that’s what the current tax setup is doing.

Be Real. I guess the distortion starts here!!! you hear what you want to hear and nothing else. One will push to raise taxes like Jimmy Carter did in the late 70’s and one will push to leave taxes unchanged or lower for all.

HEY STEVE…DOES RICH MEAN HAVING 135 RESPONSES TO ONE POST?

The measure of a man’s wealth is not what he has but what he’s learned to live without. (How to justify being poor)

As rich as Jesus..did he ever pay Roman taxes?

Maybe he should have asked the candidates to define ultra-rich and why they get tax breaks. Why corporations haven’t paid income taxes in 7yrs?

It’s the double talk express talking around the question as usual..

I love it! One blogger here said that Obama has “complex answers to complex questions!” He weaved and dodged all night, never answering. This one question is the only one he got somewhat specific on. Yep, y’all can keep doing the class warfare thing, and thinking that some dumb ad mischaracterizing McCain’s words will help your (vapid) candidate win the White House. As I’ve said for the last two elections, PEOPLE AREN’T THAT DUMB. Anyone could beat Obama, and will.

I would like to make something clear here. Steve Benen is either getting close to a record or will be breaking his record of the number of posts to one article.

All the trolls, morons, and McCain sycophants who have been posting here rather heavily do NOT represent true conservatives or true Christians. These miscreants are merely here to cause trouble, something they ‘love’ to do. It is one of those Rovian techniques.

As the saying goes: If McCain was to eat a live baby on TV, they would still defend him, and that includes E_lightened with her abortion fetish. She’d probably proclaim that McCain was doing God’s work and that God wanted that baby to be with him.

So…. for the progressive crowd here. Don’t worry too much. Obama will win, regardless of what those losers are saying. They’ll still be saying that Obama is a Muslim in 2015, without even realizing that they’re far more prosperous under his administration. The bonus being that they weren’t drafted to fight the Russians if their panderer was elected. America has a lot of low information voters, but I’m sure that when they look in their wallet on election day; it is rather obvious that a Democrat in office makes far more sense.

Keep having fun with the trolls pretending to be republicans. True Republicans would never stoop to their level. Only ideologues do that. Nazis and fascists come to mind in that respect.

Let the blast continue /snark

As a “recovering” republican, the low taxes, punish the successful, grow the economy lines are familiar, but they are misleading.

First, we increased the debt by $850 billion in October 2007 and again by $800 billion with the Fannie/Freddie bailout. So our actual deficit this year is close to a $trillion. Cutting wasteful spending will not get us there, and knocking the welfare moms off the tax rolls won’t do it either. There will have to be PAINFUL cuts to get the budget balanced – like to defense, the “family” farmer, the Justice department, prisons and parks. Take every discretionary agency and cut in HALF and we will still be short.

Second, Cheney told us very directly what deficits mean to the GOP: “Reagan proved deficits don’t matter.” Bush gave us $4.5 TRILLION in new debt, so clearly that line wasn’t a “joke.” It was a policy statement. Deficits don’t matter, so we have operated on a “borrow and spend” policy for the last several years. It’s gutless, and fiscally disastrous, but GOP voters like it and that is what Cheney was talking about. Deficits have not mattered politically.

Third, if deficits don’t matter to republicans, and they do not, then what is the incentive to cut spending. There is NONE. Which is why the “balanced budget” GOP emphasis has been disregarded for the “low taxes” obsession.

Finally, the best reason for tax increases, to balance the budget, is it will make even the GOP pay attention to spending again. If we were all told to take our tax bill and add a 25% surcharge – about what is needed to balance the budget – then maybe we’d think about whether we can continue to spend a $trillion or so on the military and the WOT. It would force a decision on national priorities. Right now politicians have NO incentive to make painful choices since no one is paying the bills. We’re giving it to our grandkids and great grandkids.

As an aside, the lines about “the top 1% pay X% of all taxes!!” is a sure sign a distorted argument is coming next. That takes into account ONLY income taxes. If you include payroll taxes, sales taxes, gasoline taxes, excise taxes, and all the other taxes, the spread between “rich” and “middle class” and “poor” is much more reasonable and is very much in line with what percentage of the income goes to that top fraction.

A study a couple of years ago looked at total tax burdens by income class and found that almost all of us pay somewhere around 40% per year – from the richest to the poorest. Focusing only on income taxes is ignorant or purposely misleading.

Jasper @149 said:

Focusing only on income taxes is ignorant or purposely misleading.

Aren’t you just describing how the Republican party operates? I mean isn’t that the information they provide for the trolls to bomb progressive sites? Those poor morons truly believe all that drivel, they just don’t realize they’ve been had.

low-information voters (majority of registered republicans) will vote against their own economic self interest. Over and over again, because they believe what they’ve been told.

Oh, come on. I saw the interviews. McCain was completely joking. And as soon as he said it, he commented that the media would distort his comment (duh), which made the audience laugh, as everyone knows that is true. Within an hour, the commentators on the various news programs were commenting that it would come back to bite him and what a surprise, It has….and only because some non-thinkers can’t wait to find a “gotcha” moment.

As a few of the other comments have pointed out, McCain said $5 million as a joke, he never claimed that to be a cut off nor did he claim that those making $4.9 million are not rich.

Aside from that misrepresentation, I don’t understand why so many people feel the need to take away money from the rich. Why should no one have the right to make as much money as they can? Why should no one be rewarded for their hard work and business skill? Rather than forcibly taking their money away from them, why not create incentives for them to help others of their own accord? People naturally have a desire to improve themselves and their situations, when some of them are successful at this, why punish them for it? What incentives are there to work hard and continue going to school in order to get a better paying job if the government is only going to take the fruits of your labor in order to distribute them to others. Wouldn’t it be better to encourage our citizens to work as hard as they can and do as well as they can and then encourage them to share some of their rewards with others because it makes them feel good to help out rather than because they are forced to do so?

Hmmm…

Taxes are for all practical purposes the rent we all pay for our citizenship. We never actually own our citizenship, we pay on it for our whole lifetimes, and the price seems to always go up over time.

…Why exactly should price of a weathy man’s citizenship be more than a pauper’s? Do we afford the wealthy man some higher degree of rights as a citizen? Is the man of lesser means not quite as fully a citizen? I mean if we are providing each an equal say in the affiars of our government, then why would either pay more or less for it?

…I mean I understand that we can’t charge anyone beyond thier ability to pay and so the actual dollar amount paid by the wealthy and the poor will always be very different. …but why should the poor man pay a lesser percentage of his total income than the weathy man does?

I’m not anywhere near wealthy, but I’ve too much pride to accept that others should have to do more to afford me a lighter share of the burden. To advocate else is shameful!

-Duece

McCain gave a straight answer. It was engaging, direct, and honest. And provocative. What would your own readers say?

Obamba’s response was cloying and silly. But what else can we expect from this empty South Side shell. No focus group or Axelrod to prompt him, unless his ear piece fell out.

McCain was honest. $5 million would probably be my accountant’s best answer as well. $5 million in assets would probably help one survive in a middle class life style for about twenty years.

That’s why he will be our next President. Thank God.

Sorry, vonbob. Not gonna happen, son. This election is ours.

You will eventually learn to accept it.

“It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” (Matthew 19:24)

“As an aside, the lines about “the top 1% pay X% of all taxes!!” is a sure sign a distorted argument is coming next. That takes into account ONLY income taxes. If you include payroll taxes, sales taxes, gasoline taxes, excise taxes, and all the other taxes, the spread between “rich” and “middle class” and “poor” is much more reasonable and is very much in line with what percentage of the income goes to that top fraction.”

It is very interesting that you left out corporate taxes, which are paid by the owners of the corporations…oh wait, that would be mostly the pesky “top 1%”.

Also, I would argue that payroll taxes and gasoline taxes are not of the same nature as income taxes or sales taxes, and should be analyzed seperately. What is the key distinction? For both payroll and gasoline taxes, you are directly paying for a government service and obtaining that service in direct proportion to what you pay. These “taxes” are really more applicably named “fees”. In the case of the payroll “tax”, you pay money to the government, and get money back later in proportion to what you put in. Almost all of the money you pay goes directly back to you and is not spent on “the general welfare” or public goods. Likewise, with gasoline taxes, you are paying for (a fraction of) the roads you are using when you burn the gas.

If we are talking about our shared burden required to pay for public goods and general welfare, neither payroll or gasoline taxes are applicable, because this money is not spent on either. It is spent on the person paying the tax. Therefore, they are not useful as a measure of how much someone is contributing to the shared burden.

Jasper – I think we may agree. Tax codes and exemptions are largely meant to obfusticate and clutter.

Taxes should be strictly proportional. That is to say, if one citizen is obliged to pay a 20% tax rate, (it really does not much matter what the basis is applied to), then all other citizens should be held to the same rate of taxation. Right?

Assuming that their citizenship is equivalent, their rate of taxation should similarly be equal. …and since under our form of constitution we are all considered equal and of one singular class, there should only be ONE RATE of taxation for all.

It takes no special knowledge of economics to understand fairness.

Rick in Miami, all of your talking points are the oft-repeated drivel of the leftist blogosphere…I’ve read the same filth almost word for word on numerous occasions…repeating it here again doesn’t make it any less scurrilous or fictional. Incidently, have you ever experienced the sensation of a bayonet passing through your skin, subcutaneous fat, finally nestling deep within a muscle or tendon? Have you ever been beaten with rods until your bones break? Just thought I’d ask.

Also, what does this really have to do with the original thread??

sorry rick in miami, i that post was directed to Bruno

McCain’s Military Record Shows He Is Unfit To Be President

There is now no doubt that John McCain will be the Republican candidate for President of the United States. For years, McCain has coasted on his reputation as a war hero and a “maverick Republican”, the kind of Republican that even decent people could vote for. Now that he’s in the running for the most important job in the world, however, it’s important to look a little more critically at his past.

Most of the major media outlets find it impossible to publish a story about McCain which doesn’t include the phrase “war hero” in it somewhere. If you know anything about John McCain, it’s that he’s a war hero. But is he?

McCain’s reputation as a war hero rests on the sum total of 20 hours in combat. That’s right. McCain spent only 20 hours in combat in the entire war. He flew 23 missions. He got 28 medals. In other words, he got more medals than he had missions. Not bad. It should be noted that none of McCain’s medals related to anything he did in combat. They were given for the supposed bravery he displayed after he had been shot down and captured.

It’s appropriate to ask whether McCain’s shoot-down was caused by bad luck or simple incompetence on his part. Of course, there is no way to answer definitively. But we can form an assessment based on the rest of McCain’s military record. At the Naval Academy, McCain graduated almost bottom of his class. He was 790th out of 795. McCain lost many aircraft over the course of his military career – five in total. Most pilots who lost aircraft at the rate McCain did would have been kicked out of the service. But McCain had protection from up on high. His father was an admiral. He was an untouchable. So McCain blundered his way through his military career until he was finally shot down.

McCain claims that he was tortured while in custody. There were no other American witnesses to this torture and some former POWs doubt that it happened at all. In fact, McCain himself admitted in a 1973 interview with the magazine US News and World Report that he volunteered to give military information in return for medical treatment, even before being subjected to any torture.
There are two ways to look at the torture claims. Either McCain is lying about it – in which case he’s unfit to be president; or he’s telling the truth – in which case he’s unfit to be president. Why? Because torture is one of those experiences, like being abused as a child, which inflicts permanent psychological damage.

Many of America’s veterans from the Korean and Vietnamese wars suffered lingering psychological trauma from their wartime experience. The rate is even higher among former prisoners of war (POWs). One study found that 85% of POWs who had been tortured experienced Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Was McCain one of the 85% or was he one of the lucky 15%?

There is every reason to suspect that McCain suffered deep-seated psychological trauma while a prisoner of war. He himself says that he was “reduced to an animal” and “broken”. He signed confessions – “I am a black criminal and have performed the deeds of an air pirate” – and made broadcasts denouncing his own country and its actions in the war. In fact, so great was his propensity to tell his captors what they wanted to hear, that, in the camp, McCain acquired the name of “Songbird”.

Bear in mind that McCain’s medals were awarded for resisting torture. Yet where was the resistance? Perhaps it is this gulf between the perception and the reality of John McCain that explains why so many Vietnam veterans’ groups openly despise him.

However much pity we might feel for a prisoner of war subjected to such intense pressures, the record is clear : McCain was no war hero. He was, rather, a coward, an incompetent, a collaborator and a traitor.

You don’t have to subscribe to the fully-fledged “Manchurian Candidate” hypothesis to fear that the long term psychological effects of McCain’s imprisonment make him unfit to be president. In McCain’s own words from his book Flags of our Fathers “solitary confinement causes some mental deterioration in even the most resilient personalities”. McCain later admitted that he was so ashamed of his own capitulation that he tried to commit suicide twice. Psychologists who evaluated McCain upon his return said that he had grown used to living in a fantasy world. When the camp guards came with food, he “was often so much in his private world, that he strongly resented their coming around and bringing him back to reality by intruding. He was enjoying his fantasies so much.”

So did McCain suffer psychological damage from his experience? To answer this, we’d need full access to McCain’s medical records, including the psychological evaluations he was subjected to after returning from Vietnam. Unfortunately, that access has never been granted. During his previous unsuccessful run for the presidency, the McCain campaign allowed only a few select journalists to briefly have access to a partial and redacted version of McCain’s medical history.

For years McCain has been known for his powderkeg temper. Many people, including even his own Republican colleagues, have seen the dark side of the man, which tends to manifest itself in the form of an almost hysterical anger, as he shouts and curses at those he disagrees with. Sometimes, McCain returns afterwards to apologise for his outbursts, showing that he had lost control of himself. Passion is no doubt commendable in a presidential candidate. But is that all it is? It seems much more likely that his angry bursts of temper are really manifestations of the lingering psychological fractures he suffered in the Vietnam war. Does America really need an unstable, psychologically stressed “war hero” to have his finger on the nuclear button?

http://www.forandagainst.com/articles/McCain_s_Military_Record_Shows_He_Is_Unfit_To_Be_President

Deuce
I actually do agree with you.

Eliminate the ceiling on payroll taxes, (Example, someone like Bill Gates, finishes paying his social security portion, about 25 minutes after midnight on January 1st, while most of us pay that the entire year, because we don’t hit that ceiling)

Close all loop holes for special interests.

Do not allow any corporations (foreign or domestic) to offshore their profits made in America.

Have one tax rate (20% as you suggested) on EVERYTHING, including passive income, investments, payroll, etc… (Example one of the hedge fund managers who made $1,600,000,000 last year would pay 20% on that, and not the so called capital gains taxes – that is billion, not million)

I think there probably would be enough to even give the poorest people a break on their portion, and plenty left to do some social programs: building infrastructure, invest in clean energy, better education affordable to all, excellent healthcare for all, etc..

I just don’t believe McCain and his free-market attitude is going to bring that to us. Free market has been discredited. Bear Stearns, Freddy Mack, etc… One bail out after another, each time the free market fails.

Under McCain’s senate leadership, where he boasts being responsible for the growth of the internet, we have actually fallen from our esteemed number 1 position in the world, to about 17th when it comes to broadband diversity. Courtesy of McCain’s close relationship with the telecoms and blocking any meaningful changes to allow competition to thrive.

etc…

Free market has been discredited.

…and what shall we use instead of a free market?

This is mainly addressed to Bruno and Jean.

Bruno, I would especially like to know what sources you are using to make your claims about McCain’s POW record. He did NOT give in to the torture, and how dare Jean cast aspersions as to whether or not it occurred, and neither did he appear in any promotional videos in support of the Communist North.
Have you ever heard of the story of Hanoi Jane? Jane Fonda, the Hollywood actress (and American Citizen) who, while her country was at war with North Vietnam, visited the POWs in the Hanoi Hilton. There were at least three American POWs who agreed to meet with her and had written their social security numbers on pieces of paper which they then handed to her as they shook hands for the cameras in the hopes that she would let their families know where they were. As soon as the cameras stopped rolling, she took those pieces of paper and handed them over to the North Vietnamese captors who then subjected her fellow American citizens to days of brutal beatings which led to the death of at least one of those American soldiers. How dare you claim McCain to be a traitor.

Just because he may not have been the most successful student while in the Naval Academy does not prove anything, Einstein failed math as much as Picasso failed art. Are you trying to tell us that no one ever makes any mistakes in their youth nor tries to have any fun?

That $5 million salary McCain thinks is the border of rich is so funny because many CEO don’t make much more than that in SALARY. You have to look at the whole compensation package: retirement benefits, corporate planes, country/golf club memberships, charitable contributions to the CEOs favorite charities, BONUSES and STOCK OPTIONS. Especially the bonuses and stock options… that’s where the real money is, often to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. And sometimes the companies pay the taxes on the those little extras, not the executive who gets them.

Saskboy @ 180 is actually stating the obvious:

I would love to be a poor republican with a $2 million / per year salary. I’d love to pay taxes on that one, regardless of how high they are. What’s left over will still be more than I’m making now before taxes.

How many of the trolls are poor republicans in that category? Do they even realize how silly their arguments are.

McCain made a great point. People who are rich in monetary terms contribute a lot to society, so those of us who don’t want to put in the long hours can pay (by not earning as much) someone to pick up the slack. The money is there for great roads and schools. The problem is government has an endless appetite so no amount of taxes will be enough unless we cut spending on stupid projects.

I have a better question: who cares? Enough with the perpetual envy mongering and class warfare.

Everyone…please remember GWBush’s simplistic answers to complex questions eight years ago….and see where he has led us.It is clear ,the world is too complex to zing away every problem with one or two liners and slogans and brevity like McBush did last night. Not again, not again, we are wiser. We will not allow a GWB third term.

“Rich” usually means how much you have, not how much you earn. I wonder if McCain was thinking $5 million in assets rather than in annual income. That bar would be pretty reasonable given only a couple million families meet it, though I’m sure some would consider $1 million rich and others $100 million.

Still, the point is that McCain threw out a real number when he shouldn’t have and he will see it used against him like the 100 years in Iraq statement.

dave I don’t know whether you’ve been paying attention to some of the comments on this blog today, but it certainly doesn’t look like some of them go with what you’re proposing.

For quite a few of them… those simplistic answers to complex questions are too complicated to understand. When they don’t understand it is easiest to call the person ‘uppity’ or ‘out of touch’ or ‘elitist’ or any other name to make yourself feel ‘better’.

McCain who actually is ‘out of touch’ and fits the definition of ‘elitist’ and being ‘ultra rich’ is able to fool voters because he tells them what they want to hear, not what they ‘need’ to hear. He uses small words, short sentences, and a patronizing tone, which makes most folks feel warm, cozy and secure. So what if he doesn’t sound coherent occasionally, ‘everybody’ has experienced those moments in their life.

I have to give it to the GOP machine for being able to put enough “lip stick on the pig”, to make it look as if McCain is one of the guys you can trust, and tells you like it is. Sure the MSM is culpable as well, but that doesn’t take away the fact that people are accepting what they’re being told, without checking it out. They won’t check it out, it is much easier to sit in the recliner and watch/listen for the sound bites.

Why do you think ‘commercials’ are usually less than 30 seconds? After that, people loose interest or become annoyed because its too long. The politician who understands that, can use that to their advantage.

As Mencken once said: “Nobody has ever lost money underestimating the stupidity of the American public.”

joe delaney @ 194….. can you please ask McCain to tell the country in a non-joking way, what amount of money he considers to be ‘rich’

I get it that it was meant as a joke, but he did not answer the question. He can’t have it both ways: Blurt out a number, and then claim it was a joke.

I’m all for jokes, but then when he said ‘seriously… but seriously…’ he didn’t get serious, he rambled on about things that had nothing to do with the question. Unless you see a connection between funding for bear DNA and and ‘defining rich’

In case joe isn’t around.. any other McCain supporter who has earned enough points can inquire at their head quarters….

$5 million… IT WAS A JOKE!
Do you not see what he says right after that? “But seriously…”

Watch the actual video of it if you still think he meant it.

Come on people, think!

I thought McCain’s answer was fine. The key part was “I want everyone to be rich.” I agree. Let’s help (or allow) everyone the freedom to be as successful (or “rich”) as they can due to their own abilities or desires. I think McCain was addressing not the simple issue of tax hikes but rather the class warfare rhetoric that Democrats use to point fingers at, penalize and divide segments of our national community. In short, “defining rich” puts us in the wrong mindset to begin with.

It is funny that Benen chose this answer to analyze. If you look at the entire event, McCain was actually the one who gave good straightforward answers to the same questions Obama danced around with. McCain, for the first time in this election, was refreshing. He won the “not-a-debate”.

You know Obama has no idea how much money Warren has kept from those 25 million sales. Almost none. Obama shows once again he has no interest in anyone but himself. Warrens house and car and bank account are amazingly low. Rick Warren is a class act.

$4.9 million a year and you’re poor. Nice… Who’s elitist now? McSame is a joke!

$4.9 million a year and you’re poor. Nice… Who’s elitist now? McSame is a joke!
—Jeff

He didn’t say that. He said just the opposite, that you can’t really define rich. He read Rich Warren’s book. Doesn’t sound like you have. That’s ok, but his answer here was nothing short of brilliant- something there for everybody, no matter if you’re rich or poor, or conservative or liberal.
————-

$500,000 per year, $125k in tax = $375,000 net. This comes out to $31,250 per month, $31,250 per month. Comparing that to someone that make $45k a year or $3,750 per month, come on!
–Jeff
That’s not what he said, either. Not even close. He said having to pay significantly higher taxes on the order of what Obama is proposing for him and his business may have negative consequences, unfortunately, for some of his employees. Some middle income earners may get a tax-cut, but then face the fact their job is being cut. He wasn’t comparing his income with that of his employees.

O’Hara says:

“A small business person in Southern California who makes $5 million a year in income may be making $100K in profits on the business – if he gets taxes a additional 5%, then all of a sudden he’s losing $150K a year.”

O’Hara needs to look up “income” and “profits” in the dictionary, then take a short H&R Block course on how “taxes” work.

ROTFLMAO.

I wonder how many scientists and volunteers and radio collars and lab technicians that $3mil for bears paid for.

As if it weren’t paying Americans.

If you give a stupid answer to a direct question (5 million), and then spend the rest of your answer with BS (being happy is what really makes a person rich), saying “I know this will be taken out of context” does not excuse your bad answer or give you immunity from criticism. McCain deserves all the criticism on this board and more for his equivocation – and utter cluelessness.