McCain: Obama Is Running To Be "Redistributionist In Chief"
On the trail right now in Pennsylvania, John McCain is keeping up with his efforts to paint Barack Obama as a closet socialist, seizing again on that 2001 interview in which Obama allegedly called for the state to seize the assets of hard-working Americans and redistribute the booty to the poor and lazy.
From McCain's prepared remarks:
Senator Obama is running to be Redistributionist in Chief. I'm running to be Commander in Chief. Senator Obama is running to spread the wealth. I'm running to create more wealth. Senator Obama is running to punish the successful. I'm running to make everyone successful.
Not to belabor the point, but unless McCain plans to disband the entire Federal government and amend the Constitution to ensure that it can never gear up again, he too is running for the post of "redistributionist in chief." If McCain doesn't think the job of President entails drawing up budgets that determine how the citizenry's tax money should be spent, he should say so. It would certainly be newsworthy.
Again: This is yet another silly stunt from a candidate who is suffering badly from what might be called the "Seriousness Gap" between himself and his opponent. I'd really be interested to see detailed polling on whether the electorate is buying the argument that Obama harbors the shadowy socialist and redistributionist leanings that McCain and Sarah Palin are alleging.
Full McCain remarks after the jump.
It's great to be back in Pennsylvania. We need to win Pennsylvania on November 4th, and with your help we're going to win here, and bring real change to Washington, DC.We cannot spend the next four years as we have spent much of the last eight: hoping for our luck to change at home and abroad. We have to act. We need a new direction, and we have to fight for it.
I've been fighting for this country since I was seventeen years old, and I have the scars to prove it. If I'm elected President, I will fight to shake up Washington and take America in a new direction from my first day in office until my last. I'm not afraid of the fight, I'm ready for it.
I have a plan to hold the line on taxes and cut them to make America more competitive and create jobs here at home. We're going to double the child deduction for working families. We will cut the capital gains tax. And we will cut business taxes to help create jobs, and keep American businesses in America. Raising taxes makes a bad economy much worse. Keeping taxes low creates jobs, keeps money in your hands and strengthens our economy.
If I'm elected President, I won't spend nearly a trillion dollars more of your money. Senator Obama will. And he can't do that without raising your taxes or digging us further into debt. I'm going to make government live on a budget just like you do.
I will freeze government spending on all but the most important programs like defense, veterans care, Social Security and health care until we scrub every single government program and get rid of the ones that aren't working for the American people. And I will veto every single pork barrel bill Congresses passes.
I'm not going to spend $750 billion dollars of your money just bailing out the Wall Street bankers and brokers who got us into this mess. I'm going to make sure we take care of the working people who were devastated by the excesses of Wall Street and Washington.
I have a plan to fix our housing market, so that your home value doesn't go down when your neighbor defaults, and so that people in danger of defaulting have a path to pay off their loan.
If I'm elected President, we're going to stop spending $700 billion to buy oil from countries that don't like us very much. Senator Obama will argue to delay drilling for more oil and gas and against building new nuclear power plants in America. If I am president, we will start new drilling now. We will invest in all energy alternatives -- nuclear, wind, solar, and tide. We will encourage the manufacture of hybrid, flex fuel and electric automobiles. We will invest in clean coal technology. We will lower the cost of energy within months, and we will create millions of new jobs.
We've learned more about Senator Obama's real goals for our country over the last two weeks than we learned over the past two years, and that only because Joe the plumber asked him a question in Ohio. That's when Senator Obama revealed he wants to quote "spread the wealth around."
Now, Joe didn't ask for Senator Obama to come to his house, and he didn't ask to be famous. He certainly didn't ask for the political attacks on him from the Obama campaign. Joe's dream is to own a small business that will create jobs, and the attacks on him are an attack on small businesses all over the country. Small businesses employ 84 percent of Americans, and we need to support small businesses, not tax them.
After months of campaign trail eloquence, we've finally learned what Senator Obama's economic goal is: to spread the wealth. In a radio interview revealed this week, he said the same thing -- that one of the quote, "tragedies" of the civil rights movement is that it didn't bring about "redistributive change."
You see, Senator Obama believes in redistributing wealth, not in policies that grow our economy and create jobs. He said that even though lower taxes on investment help our economy, he favors higher taxes on investment for quote "fairness." There's nothing "fair" about driving our economy into the ground. We all suffer when that happens, and that is the problem with Senator Obama's approach to our economy. He is more interested in controlling wealth than in creating it ... in redistributing money instead of spreading opportunity. I am going to create wealth for all Americans, by creating opportunity for all Americans.
Senator Obama is running to be Redistributionist in Chief. I'm running to be Commander in Chief. Senator Obama is running to spread the wealth. I'm running to create more wealth. Senator Obama is running to punish the successful. I'm running to make everyone successful.
Senator Obama has made a lot of promises. First he said people making less than 250,000 dollars would benefit from his plan, then this weekend he announced in an ad that if you're a family making less than 200,000 dollars you'll benefit -- but yesterday, right here in Pennsylvania, Senator Biden said tax relief should only go to "middle class people -- people making under 150,000 dollars a year." It's interesting how their definition of rich has a way of creeping down. At this rate, it won't be long before Senator Obama is right back to his vote that Americans making just 42,000 dollars a year should get a tax increase. We can't let that happen.
My opponent's massive new tax increase is exactly the wrong approach in an economic slowdown. The answer to a slowing economy is not higher taxes, but that is exactly what is going to happen when the Democrats have total control of Washington. We can't let that happen. We need pro-growth and pro-jobs economic policies, not pro-government spending programs paid for with higher taxes.
This is the fundamental difference between Senator Obama and me. We both disagree with President Bush on economic policy. The difference is that he thinks taxes have been too low, and I think that spending has been too high.
If we are going to change Washington, we need a President who has actually fought for change and made it happen. The next President won't have time to get used to the office. We face many challenges here at home, and many enemies abroad in this dangerous world.
Senator Biden warned that Senator Obama would be tested with an international crisis. I have been tested. Senator Obama hasn't. Senator Biden referred to how Jack Kennedy was tested in the Cuban Missile Crisis and I have a little personal experience in that. I was on board the U.S.S. Enterprise, and I sat in a jet cockpit on the flight deck waiting to take off. We had a target. I know how close we came to a nuclear war and I will not be a president that needs to be tested.
We know Senator Obama won't have the right response to that test, because we've seen the wrong response from him over and over during this campaign. He opposed the surge strategy that is bringing us victory in Iraq and will bring us victory in Afghanistan. He said he would sit down unconditionally with the world's worst dictators. When Russia invaded Georgia, Sen. Obama said the invaded country should show restraint. He's been wrong on all of these. When I am president, we are going to win in Iraq and win in Afghanistan, and our troops will come home in victory and honor.
Let me give you the state of the race today. There's one week to go. We're a few points down. The pundits have written us off, just like they've done before. My opponent is working out the details with Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid of their plans to raise your taxes, increase spending, and concede defeat in Iraq. He's measuring the drapes, and he's planned his first address to the nation for before the election. I guess I'm old fashioned about these things I prefer to let the voters weigh in before presuming the outcome.
What America needs now is someone who will finish the race before the starting the victory lap ... someone who will fight to the end, and not for himself but for his country.
I have fought for you most of my life, and in places where defeat meant more than returning to the Senate. There are other ways to love this country, but I've never been the kind to back down when the stakes are high.
I know you're worried. America is a great country, but we are at a moment of national crisis that will determine our future.
Will we continue to lead the world's economies or will we be overtaken? Will the world become safer or more dangerous? Will our military remain the strongest in the world? Will our children and grandchildren's future be brighter than ours?
My answer to you is yes. Yes, we will lead. Yes, we will prosper. Yes, we will be safer. Yes, we will pass on to our children a stronger, better country. But we must be prepared to act swiftly, boldly, with courage and wisdom.
I'm an American. And I choose to fight. Don't give up hope. Be strong. Have courage. And fight. Fight for a new direction for our country. Fight for what's right for America.
Fight to clean up the mess of corruption, infighting and selfishness in Washington.
Fight to get our economy out of the ditch and back in the lead.
Fight for the ideals and character of a free people.
Fight for our children's future.
Fight for justice and opportunity for all.
Stand up to defend our country from its enemies.
Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight. America is worth fighting for. Nothing is inevitable here. We never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history. Now, let's go win this election and get this country moving again.















McCain is a 'redistributor' as well.
Give it up John. How can you make your argument against Obama when you are in favor of the same type of 'redistribution'?
October 28, 2008 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
O for the love of Pete!
McLame, unless you mean your words only for the top 10% in this country - nobody else cares. Everybody else would like very much to get in on a bit of what the top 10% is holding on to - to the detriment of the the rest of the country.
October 28, 2008 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes.
Senator Obama is running to punish the successful. I'm running to make everyone successful.
That sounds like really bizzare....
October 28, 2008 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
It is bizarre.
He's telling the middle class over and over the same fucking thing - if we give more to the upper class it will trickle down.
We've already seen this doesn't work - we've seen it more than once.
October 28, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Republican economic philosophy reminds me of my favorite Sopranos quote: "Money flows up, $hit flows down."
October 28, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Personally, I'm really, really tired of getting trickled on. I was tired of it in 1982, I'm sick of it now.
October 28, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry meant to Italacize.
October 28, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, the odd thing is that I'm running to make everyone successful doesn't sound like an anti-socialism message.
October 28, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
In McCain's America, plumbers will make $250,000 a year, and everyone will donate their $150,000 wardrobes to charity.
It's a bold vision.
October 28, 2008 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I love that he's making his argument for the top 10%. The other 90% of us will vote against him.
Quid pro quo, Johnny: No tax-breaky, no-votie!
October 28, 2008 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is what's so weird - apparently McShame has no clue that the redistributive economy (from poor to wealthy) of the last eight years has left the vast majority of Americans not just tolerant of reverse redistribution back to them, but downright eager for it.
Every time McShame accuses Obama of wanting to "spread the wealth," Obama picks up another 100,000 votes.
Call it whatever you want - progressive taxation, socialism, communism, hell, McShame, call it islamofascism - if it sounds to Americans like it might make billionaires cough up enough that the middle class could keep their homes, we're for it!
October 28, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
That Islamofascist Warren Buffett seems to favor redistribution, also.
October 28, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nice! Thanks for summarizing, PajamaPundit!
October 28, 2008 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
As silly as you might find it to be, Obama explaining it means he's on defense in the final week of the campaign. He needs to find something to hit back with to at least partially change the subject because this is gaining certain traction.
Of course most folks have made up their minds and have tuned out the election by now. However Pennsylvania is still in play since they're camping out in the State and Penn doesn't have any early voting.
October 28, 2008 10:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why do you think this is gaining traction?
This "spread the wealth" attack has been going on for almost 2 weeks now and McCain has made no progress in the polls.
October 28, 2008 10:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
However it got renewed interest with the "discovered" audio tape interview.
October 28, 2008 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
You're too plugged in, Jonze. Low to average info voters don't know a thing about this interview, and even if they do this whole ideological argument goes right over their heads.
They don't care about that crap. I just posted my opinion as to why I think this downthread.
October 28, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's a strong possibility (about me being too plugged in). Sorta like with the 24 hour news now everybody is afraid to allow their kids to play outside because of all of the pervs and kidnappings. When in reality cases have gone down significantly, but now folks are hearing about every one so it seems more widespread than ever.
October 28, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
I suppose. Although, I don't think that audiotape has gotten much mainstream attention. I've seen it talked about on Drudge and on here.
Even if you're right and the tape has given the attack more fuel,I still don't think it'll get enough traction to allow McCain to come back from ~10pts back in PA in a week.
And I certainly don't think Obama needs to address it. I think he'll just ignore it and stick to the issues and his closing argument. That's why he's winning. He's been consistant and stable while McCain has been flailing around, throwing mud.
October 28, 2008 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pew has Obama up 16 nationally! I'd say that trumps McCain yelling at clouds.
http://people-press.org/report/465/mccain-support-declines
http://pufferfish.typepad.com/
October 28, 2008 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
OT -- but if Stevens resigns, will Palin get to appoint his replacement? What if she chooses herself and the Repugs substitute Joe Lieberman to finish out the with McCain?
Arrgh. Please tell me she can't appoint Stevens' replacement.
October 28, 2008 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Can't and won't.
October 28, 2008 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Depends on the laws in Alaska.
Every state does that differently - in some the gov appoints and then there is an election, in some there are special elections. I don't know what the law in Alaska is, but I am willing to bet that Stevens is long gone - The Repugs don't want him.
Just like I don't want John Edwards or Mahoney. I want serious people who are focused on our serious problems and not seriously getting laid or stealing money.
October 28, 2008 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Still, isn't it plausible that Stevens will step down this week, Palin will step in as Senate candidate with lots of support in Alaska, and Lieberman take the running mate job? After all, this is the McCain campaign we're talking about -- not sane people.
October 28, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
What kind of reaction do you think changing one's VP 7 days before an election would elicit?
Dumping Palin for Liebermann would piss off the GOP base. And McCain would lose in historic fashion.
October 28, 2008 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
No, its not plausible. It would be a disasterous mistake because it would make McCain's campaign look ridiculous, gimmicky and unhinged. The derision would be universal and his numbers would take an immediate huge hit as people saw him in yet another stunt that people would interpret as a pathetic cry for attention.
Oh, wait. Never mind. For this campaign, yes, its plausible.
October 28, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
No - not 6 days out.
That ain't happening - you don't drop your running mate 6 days out from the election.
She's in legal trouble, too - so they get rid of Stevens and get her and she goes into court just like Stevens did - or if not, she gets hit with the ethics violation and that's that anyway.
October 28, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let's break this down, shall we?
isn't it plausible that
1) Stevens will step down this week
yes, that's plausible. Not likely though, given his stubbornness, and assertions of his innocence
2) Palin will step in as Senate candidate with lots of support in Alaska
Absurd. Not even this gimmicky, stunt-driven campaign would allow this. Palin is not about to jump ship, when she is instead preparing to knife McCain in the back Nov 5th. She'll be better prepared for that battle by staying right where she is, in the spotlight in front of her growing base of adoring right-wing nutjobs.
3) and Lieberman take the running mate job?
No. Lieberman is already calculating his way back into the good graces of the Senate leadership. He's a disgusting person, but he can read the writing on the wall, and knows full well that McCain's ship is sinking rapidly.
Basically, the whole premise of your handwringing is way out in left field. No wait, it's 300 rows further out in the parking lot outside the stadium, more like.
October 28, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ooops. When I said, "Yes, that's plausible, but not likely", I meant, "Yes, that's possible, etc."
Brain fart.
October 28, 2008 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Somebody posted on an earlier thread: AK has a special election.
October 28, 2008 11:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree - Palin jumping ship and Liebermann jumping on would also send a sign that McCain's campaign is completely disorganized (which we all know it is) AND it would piss off A LOT of female voters who are ga ga over Palin...they'd say McCain threw her to the curb.
October 28, 2008 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, women do not like Palin.
Only a handful of fundie wackjob women like her. In general she polls terrible with women - we see through her.
That's bullshit, Joe, I'm sorry - but all her numbers prove that she is far more unpopular with women than with men.
O gee, there's a surprise.
October 28, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Precisely. A female relative of mine who is a longtime wingnut freakazoid of exactly the type mcshame thinks loves palin is actually seriously considering voting for Obama for one reason:
She HATES Palin. She's middle-aged and has never been as insulted in her life as she is by mcshame offering up palin as VP.
When red states like Georgia and Montana and North Dakota and ARIZONA go blue next Tuesday, it'll be because republican women who hate Palin voted for Obama.
October 28, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Same experience here - a lifelong Republican woman told me last week she's voting for Obama. The clincher was Palin. She's furious - she was literally yelling about McCain - "Does he think we're stupid?!?!"
Between the Couric interviews and the female-using-her-wiles-flirty-winky routine Palin pissed a lot of women off permanently.
October 28, 2008 11:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Piling on with more of the same.
Country club Republican type women in Dallas are voting Obama because they are offended by Klondike Barbie.
October 28, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Palin replacing Stevens and Liberman replacing Palin.....No offense Pol, but are you high or something? LOL
October 28, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't Stevens running for re-election? First of all, he won't resign, but if he did, wouldn't the Senator-elect just take over? Wouldn't that be the most sensible thing to do?
Oh, I forgot -- we're talking about Alaska -- nothing "up there" makes sense except that everyone has their hand out for freebies.
October 28, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is interesting - Olbermann should be on this tonight!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/28/news-orgs-investigate-pos_n_138449.html
October 28, 2008 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
hmmmmm....interesting.
October 28, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
...but Barack wasn't even 8 years old when that happend...?
October 28, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Huh?
http://pro.corbis.com/images/42-16421176.jpg?size=572&uid=%7B71780E3F-C299-4637-A802-B6B0B3D785FC%7D
October 28, 2008 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's what they say when you ask about his association with Ayers..."It was the sixties, Barack was 8 years old."
October 28, 2008 11:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
You're right. Barack was 8 and John was already demented. Excused.
October 28, 2008 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
And that has what, exactly, to do with this story about McCain and the alleged car accident?
October 28, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nothing really, just a throw away line.
October 28, 2008 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Figured as much. Thanks for contributing.
October 28, 2008 11:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Glad to see you're in a good mood today.
October 28, 2008 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am, actually. Sorry if the above came off as snarky.
October 28, 2008 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Barack is 47 years old when the latest McCain trainwreck is happening right in front of your unbelieving eyes, SFC.
October 28, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bah - your old av was easier to notice and skip.
October 28, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah...but the new one is more appropriate given the current poll numbers....
October 28, 2008 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
The poll numbers have been like this for almsot 3 weeks now. But, better late than never, I guess.
October 28, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
...there's less time for "adjustment"...a point a day is all I ask.
October 28, 2008 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
A point a day movement is unheard of this close to the election. McCain is going down, no matter how you slice it. The only question is by how big a margin.
October 28, 2008 11:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, but to be "really you" the batter needs to be a Brave or an Indian.
October 28, 2008 11:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry; you google "hit in the face" and your choice is this or a Portuguese soccer player...
October 28, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
I feel some sympathy. I, too, had hopes for a candidate who turned out to be a lame-o, and felt like I was beaned the first Wednesday of Nov. 2004.
October 28, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
My feeling is that if it really happened the Bush/Rove 2000 Campaign would have been all over it. Same reason I doubt any "game changer" rumors that the Freepers like to delude themselves with - if they existed, the Clinton Campaign would have found it and used it.
Now if it was about Palin...
October 28, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting, but not needed.
We've been watching a McCain car wreck in slow motion over the past few months.
October 28, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
What's really funny is that his speech writers actually include "My Friends" into the speech text.
If they added "Pause for Applause" onto the teleprompter, would McCain actually say that out loud??
October 28, 2008 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
McCain doesn't understand - the people who support him are generally not all that bright. Hardworking yes, but not all that bright.
You think they understand the concept of wealth redistribution?
No.
They do understand getting more money, which is what Obama is promising them.
That's my guess on why this messaging isn't sticking.
October 28, 2008 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
This new line is emblematic of the entire McCain campaign. At every turn, they have gone with messages that test well with their base, and have only sought to fire up that base while neglecting the independent voter battleground where the election is actually being contested. They have yet to come to grips with the fundamental generational fact that their base is shrinking, that the old hatreds, old resentments and old messages just don't have the extensive bite and play they once had, and that they need to reach out to the center with a broader appeal.
This despite the fact that they went into the general election with a candidate who had spent decades building up a lot of mavericky, centrist street cred. They totally squandered that advantage and have spent the whole election going after FOX viewers and Limbaugh listeners. Incredible. They really are a bunch of dumbasses.
October 28, 2008 10:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
He lost me at "It's great to be back in Pennsylvania."
October 28, 2008 11:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
ABC just confirmed they WILL NOT air Obama's speech tomorrow - they declined to say what will air in its place.
October 28, 2008 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
which speech? the half hour in the evening?
October 28, 2008 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Greg,
Here's the link for more information...
http://www.thrfeed.com/2008/10/abc-will-air-da.html
October 28, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Do we know for sure at this point that its going to be a "speech"?
And I'm shocked ABC would turn this down. I won't read into what that means. Although that shitty made for TV movie about OBL kind of told me what I needed to know.
October 28, 2008 11:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pushing Up Daisies (or whatever). Supposedly they offered Obama the slot, but he declined. I wonder if it's a money issue or he just figured that anybody who wanted to watch his infomercial could find it elsewhere and decided to spend that $1M elsewhere.
McCain should have swooped in and bought the ABC slot and go head to head...
October 28, 2008 11:07 AM | Reply | Permalink
If Obama is on NBC, CBS and FOX, why would he need to also be on ABC? If someone wants to watch it, they'll watch it on one of the other 3 networks.
October 28, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
That would have been awesome. We could directly compare the competing ratings. I wonder who would win. Hmm.
October 28, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
The show Pushin' Daisies. I don't think it will be a speech. He did one yesterday.
October 28, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Last time I checked, the "earned income tax credit" was a perfect example of redistribution of wealth via the tax system. And who was the biggest prononent of it? Who was it that made sure it was passed into law? President Ronald Reagan, that's who! I guess he was a Socialist too, Senator McCain.
October 28, 2008 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
McCain's whole problem with this line of attack is that he is fighting a battle other than the one that the electorate is deciding upon. Pragmatism trumps ideology every time when it comes to the family checkbook.
McCain would like to make the argument about Free-Trade Capitalism versus Socialistic Redistribution, but the battle lies in a simpler arena: that of responsible stewardship.
To use Joe Biden's kitchen table illustration, Americans are sitting down at America's kitchen table to decide what to do about the fact that the keeper of America's checkbook spent the house payment on crack, and then spent the food budget on hookers and rounds for the house at Hooters.
Deciding to take the checkbook away from this person - McCain and his party - isn't a difficult decision. If the polls are even half right, the decision has already been made.
McCain is done. This is all but over.
October 28, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. They've gone completely nuts. They have convinced themselves that they can get a majority of Americans to rise up against their own self-interest, and from pure laissez faire or Social Darwinist principles say, "Do not take any more money from Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and John McCain so that I can keep more of what I've earned! I am a docile lamb, and deserve to be used as the tool and submissive butthole of the rich."
What kind of boobs does McCain have advising him? Not ones who live in the real political world.
October 28, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
You raise a good point, Dan. Micheal Moore makes the statement in one of his books - I don't remember which one - that Horatio Alger must die.
The whole belief that 'anyone' can become rich, and therefore the working class should sacrifice all to protect the economic hegemony of the rich - since they too could one day become rich - is a nauseating lie.
Why don't we see this the other way around instead? It is far more true that any member of the working class can become dirt poor, so shouldn't we rather protect the rights of the poor instead?
October 28, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
A clear case of misplaced priorities. It is a well known fact that The House of Wings, a.k.a. Hooters, has an excellent selection of buffalo wings and would be the proper venue to blow the food budget.
October 28, 2008 11:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
I always find it pretty remarkable how the wealthy Republicans have the middle to lower class arguing for the top 5% to have lower taxes. They must have done a mass dark side mind trick on everyone.
On a side note, Obama just came out with a new add showing his tax calculator. I hope everyone sees it and uses it. My wife and I will get $1800 back. That means, in eight years, I'll get back 10x my investment in Obama with my donations. That beats the heck out of most investments I know of. :)
October 28, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, and Republican policies have created loads of wealth the past eight years, right?
October 28, 2008 11:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sure have.....
If you are a trans national corp. Or a wall street CEO, or an arms dealer, etc..
I sat here and watched his last speech and my cat hid under the couch. Pretty sure my neighbors heard several expletives from my place as well. I can't wait till we get this slime bag off the tele.
October 28, 2008 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes they have - for about 20% or so of the population.
The rest of the population is reeling -
October 28, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
There's nothing "fair" about driving our economy into the ground. We all suffer when that happens,
wait a minute, if "we all suffer," then it's "fair," no?
October 28, 2008 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
McCain must realize by now that when this is all over, he and Joe Lieberman are going to be the loneliest men in Washington.
October 28, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, but they'll always have each other.
October 28, 2008 11:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
The visual - gag!
October 28, 2008 11:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
buenos dias.
i just found this site from Ben Smith at politico. he has a spread sheet with tons of early voting info. apparently cnn has a similar thing, but I haven't seen theirs.
enjoy.....
http://elections.gmu.edu/early_vote_2008.html
October 28, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
buenos dias, mamacita! :)
October 28, 2008 11:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
but really, where is the call for the flat tax? -- or even a flat fee, regardless of income. if mcCain won't step up and endorse these policies, then he's no different than karl marx.
October 28, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's definitely what he's proposing, whether he'll say so or not.
October 28, 2008 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Three points, two of which I've made before (albeit in some of my least successful diaries ever).
1. "Joe the Plumber" has his panties in twist because the tax rate on the 30K he's hypoticating his hypothetical business would make in excess of 250K would go up three percent under Obama's plan. That's $900.00 in total extra taxes under Obama's plan on total hypothetical taxable income of 280K. Oh my god the economy will crumble if Joe can't keep that 900 bucks. Oh, wait, Joe will never pay it because a) his business and his income are hypothetical and, b) even if they weren't, there is no one in the history of progressive taxation in this country who was that close to the income threshold limit who couldn't find a way to get his taxable income below it. I can think of half a dozen ways off the top of my head, and taxation is totally not my specialty.
2. The concept of progressivity in taxation was originated by well known socialist radical Adam Smith in his dangerous revolutionary screed "The Wealth of Nations."
Why do Republicans hate capitalism?
3. McCain's "budget freeze" is a yet another faux policy. "I will freeze government spending on all but the most important programs like defense, veterans care, Social Security and health care?" Ummm, alrighty then. adding up the costs of defense, "Global War on Terror" (which, evidently, does not count as "defense" in Bushworld) veterans care, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP, and, oops, interest on the national debt which you can't "freeze," you've exempted a whopping 72.1% of the federal budget from your "freeze," Johnny Maverick. But, hey, I'm sure you'll be able to make up for that by scrounging for spare change under the cushions of the sofas in the Commerce and Interior Departments.
October 28, 2008 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think we had this conversation, but it seems to me that a spending freeze is exactly the recipe to totally crater our economy right now -
The last thing this economy needs is for money to tighten up further. One of the best things that could happen would be to put more money in circulation.
*sigh*'
McLame has all the economic acumen of a Bulgarian shoe salesman.
October 28, 2008 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
I just love it when good old Adam Smith is rolled out to counter a current GOP meme. He is a demigod in the eyes of the (supposed) fiscal conservatives.
He just doesn't fit into the shell game operations of the neocons who've run the show for eight years.
Or the prize package propounded by McCain.
October 28, 2008 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
...once youโve made a narrative choice, you do have to stick with it - you canโt just keep bouncing around, or people become confused. If you are telling the story of a scary vampire, you canโt decide in chapter 2 that heโs also 500 feet tall and radioactive and bent on destroying Tokyo, in chapter 3 that he is actually a giant man-eating shark, and in chapter 4 that he is all this and a super-terrorist trying to plant a nuclear bomb in Los Angeles. All of these things are, indeed, scary, but taken together they add up to a muddle.
This is the problem. Itโs not just the McCain campaignโs problem - although their inability to pick a narrative and stick to it is a special kind of inexcusable - itโs a problem for the entire wingnut noise machine. Obama is a Marxist Muslim Arab Jesus Black White Terrorist Technocrat Racist Do-Gooder Liberal FDR Stalin Hilter Commie Fascist Gay Womanizing Naive Cynical Insider Noob Boring Radical Unaccomplished Elite Slick Gaffe-Prone Pedophile Pedophile-Seducing Liberation Theology Atheist Etc. & Anti-Etc. with a bunch of scary friends from - wait for it! - the Nineteen Hundred And Sixties. It makes no sense. Itโs a jumble sale of fears and scary associations from 50 years of wingnut witch hunts and smear campaigns, a flea market of pre-owned and antique resentments, and if one does detect a semi-consistent 1960โs motif running through it all, thatโs because thatโs when most of these ideas were coined.
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/10/simple-argument.html#more
October 28, 2008 11:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Socialist
Marxist
Communist
Elitist
Redistributionist
How many more ist's can the come up with before Tuesday?
October 28, 2008 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
i keep expecting to hear "islamosocialist" but maybe "islamomarxist" is more likely
October 28, 2008 12:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, TPM, you and all progressives need to help put this word there. Since Obama is doing a LOUSY job of pushing back on this. You are absolutely correct. All Obama is calling for is accentuating the ALREADY progressive, graduated tax code. Even McCain's plan takes more from the wealthy.
It is that simple and Obama's ads and crew need to hit back harder to drown out the insanity of the right taking this to the next level of communism, Marxism, etc.
Just because SOME people will believe it ...
October 28, 2008 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, he's doing such a lousy job that McLame is trying to defend red states where he should be able to let them sit there.
He can't afford to cause he's losing.
Somehow it seems to be getting across to people despite Obama's "lousy campaign pushback" on this.
Perhaps you just think it's successful.
October 28, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
The thing with these scare tactics is that they're subject to the Law of Diminishing Returns. If I yell, "Look out, a terrorist!" at my cat, the first few times he'll jump, the next few times he'll open his eyes and look around and finally he'll just keep on snoozing.
McCombover keeps yelling, "Look out!" and instead of being frightened, the audience just wish this daffy old fruit-cake would shut the fuck up and go away...
October 28, 2008 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Selig said he descended to field level in the fourth inning, so he could consult with the umpires and grounds crew. He kept hearing the field was playable, but he should have trusted his own two eyes. We can't blame him for listening, but common sense should have prevailed, and the game should have been stopped immediately." - LA Times 10-28-08
This excerpt in an article about last night's World Series soak-fest is the most eery analogy to "Staying the Course in Iraq" that could ever be. For umpires and ground crew read 'Generals in the field'. Bud Selig? Plug in Dubya, McSame, Failin', Losermman or a myriad of others. Take your pick. I guess this is the American Way now. We need a new 'commissioner' and fresh umps.
October 28, 2008 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wouldn't underestimate the appeal of that silly McCain/ Palin socialist rhetoric. I think poll numbers are moving --- even though slightly --- in their direction. I think Obama should come up with some sort of crisp defense, citing Warren Buffet's support of his economic policies, crouching his tax plan in terms of a return to Clintonism and reminding voters that McCain was for a more redistributive tax system before he is against it.
October 28, 2008 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think poll numbers are moving --- even though slightly --- in their direction
All evidence to the contrary.
October 28, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
This is true. I mean, even the biggest meat-head in America has got to wonder why the world's richest man and the head of one of the world's richest companies, (Google), are supporting Obama, if he's going to take away their money.
...duuuhhhh...yeah, take your time Gomer...here, have a chaw...
October 28, 2008 12:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Guess if he had not been so underhanded I might be inclined be empathic but not now...
He has turned into such a pitiful person--sold his soul, dishonored his legacy, shamed and split his party...
SAD really!
October 28, 2008 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
It seems to me that the reason people are having trouble understanding the "Redistributionist" and "Socialist" message is that they are taking it too literally. Of course it doesn't make any sense. It doesn't have to. It's the familiar racist dog whistle. What he's really saying is that Obama is going to take your hard-earned money and give it to lazy, shiftless black people. It's a reprise of Reagan's "Welfare queen" attack.
October 28, 2008 12:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I must confess that John McIIIrd's "new economics" has me confused. Maybe someone here can help me out!
My problem is that McIIIrd keeps saying that he's going to help small businesses create new jobs by cutting their tax rates. But, I learned in college, many moons ago, that a business expands - creates new jobs - only when the demand for its products or services exceeds the business's supply.
Call me old fashined or an elitist, but I still have a hard time ignoring those pesky supply and demand curves.
Obama/Biden08
October 28, 2008 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
This focus by McCain on "redistribution of wealth" is starting to remind me of George Bush's worries about the Estate Tax.
We don't need another President who's MAIN FOCUS of domestic policy is what is good for himself and his own checkboook.
Does he think America is so, so worried that HE, John McCain, might have to "redistribute" some of his own wealth (well actually, his wife's) to the middle and working classes of America?
I think John McCain could survive with only 5 houses and not 7 and I don't think this kind of "redistribution" is really the biggest issue in America today.
The old canard was that rich people having money would invest in industries that create American jobs.
The new truth is that rich people invest in companies that are shipping our jobs overseas and concealing tax burdens by pretending to be headquartered in the Caiman Islands.
What benefit is this to America?
October 28, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
So Obama said in that radio interview that the people who had to march in the streets, risk their lives and well-being just to be treated as equal human beings 190 after the founding of this country should have pressed their case for more economic justice through the political system rather then through the courts.
And John McCain's answer is they should have been happy with what they got. They should not have pushed for greater investments in education, health, and housing, equal pay. They should have stayed in their ghettos and neighborhoods across the tracks. Don't do what every other political group does. Just sit quietly and wait for some old white guy to lower taxes on the welathy. Then everything will be OK.
I know McCain is trying to distort what Obama said to fit into his ridiculous red-baiting strategy, but in substance he is saying he disagrees with Obama that those people who fought so hard to achieve justice under law should not have done anything within the political system (as opposed to the legal system) to address the massive economic inequality that resulted from decades upon decades of segregation and discrimination.
McCain to America: We gave them what they wanted in the 60's, now Black folks should shut up and sit down.
October 28, 2008 1:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
He'd better start pushing back on this crap--it's dominating the discussion, and Gallup (just out) shows McCain continuing to close the gap somewhat. Not panicking, but wishing Obama would work more to change the subject--this is ridiculous! He can't let McCain keep getting away with making him out to be a socialist because he supports returning tax rates to the Clinton era.
Glad the state polls still look good.
October 28, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
If at first you don't succeed, lie, lie again!
(Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over again in the same way and expecting a different result?)
October 28, 2008 1:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
but, but, but...."rich people work hard too"... that's all that matters... who cares if there is gross income disparity and stagnant wages..... think of the rich people....
October 28, 2008 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I believe the goal of the McCain campaign right now is not to win the Presidency, but to bolster the chances of those Republican senators who are in danger of losing their seats to Democrats.
Thus, the whole socialist, must avoid liberal's total control over government meme.
October 28, 2008 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
During the last week of the election, I request that the headline writers of TPM ask themselves this question before they commit to a banner: How does this help? The topper of this article, for instance, is a GOP talking point. How does that help? Why not a headline that refutes the charge or turns it back on the GOP? Fight the bilge; don't reinforce it.
October 28, 2008 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Since when is "spread the wealth" a negative thing for most people?
October 28, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
If I'm elected President, we're going to stop spending $700 billion to buy oil from countries that don't like us very much. Senator Obama will argue to delay drilling for more oil and gas and against building new nuclear power plants in America. If I am president, we will start new drilling now.
Has McCain ever explained where this $700B in oil is going to come from if it's not from countries that don't like us very much?
There isn't enough drill-baby-drill US oil to cover that $700B.
After we leave Iraq, there's another country that doesn't like us.
Where does this Mystery Oil come from?
John
October 28, 2008 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's "ties" to marxism are now front page on fox:
"Obama Affinity to Marxists Dates Back to College Days"
http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/28/obama-affinity-marxists-dates-college-days/
October 28, 2008 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I forgot to add: check the comments for batshit stuff.
October 28, 2008 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why are they sticking with this age-old horseshit?
Somebody tell these people, please, that it's not 1953!
October 28, 2008 2:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Since when is "spread the wealth" a negative thing for most people?
October 28, 2008 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Since never. That's what has me astonished about the rethugs thist year. They seem to truly believe that middle and working class voters have completely absorbed the values and interests of our rulers. They've forgotten that the only reason Republicans were able to get a foothold on voters earning less than six figures a year in the 1980s was by draining the most basic questions of economic disparity out of the national debate; replacing them with so-called 'values' issues like abortion, gun control, etc. (the fact that Clinton-era Democrats eagerly consented to this only demonstrates how successful a strategy it was in the prior decade). If the McManiac campaign seriously expects working class America to feel revulsion at the mere thought of wealth redistribution, then they're just . . . sad.
October 28, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
WOW, Senator Obama is up by 10 in Nevada in the latest poll (50 to 40), and he is up by one in Indiana...
It is really is getting better by the day:)
October 28, 2008 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think this is where I should point out that I dearly HOPE Sen. Obama is as inclined toward Socialism as the Repuglicans are saying he is. Unfortunately for them (and me), he's probably not. He is, instead, a center-left Democrat with a fully-functioning sense of economic and social justice and superlative organizational abaility . . . which only means he'll stand a damn good chance of being one of the greatest Presidents this country has ever had.
I'll setlle for that anyday.
October 28, 2008 2:40 PM | Reply | Permalink