THE LAST WORD
George F. Will
Questions for Obama
Have you told young couples straining to buy their first home that declining prices of houses are a misfortune?
Senator, concerning the criteria by which you will nominate judges, you said: "We need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it's like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old." Such sensitivities might serve an admirable legislator, but what have they to do with judging? Should a judge side with whichever party in a controversy stirs his or her empathy? Is such personalization of the judicial function inimical to the rule of law?
• Voting against the confirmation of Chief Justice John Roberts, you said: Deciding "truly difficult cases" should involve "one's deepest values, one's core concerns, one's broader perspectives on how the world works, and the depth and breadth of one's empathy." Is that not essentially how Chief Justice Roger Taney decided the Dred Scott case? Should other factors—say, the language of the constitutional or statutory provision at issue—matter?
• You say, "The insurance companies, the drug companies, they're not going to give up their profits easily when it comes to health care." Why should they? Who will profit from making those industries unprofitable? When pharmaceutical companies have given up their profits, who will fund pharmaceutical innovations, without which there will be much preventable suffering and death? What other industries should "give up their profits"?
• ExxonMobil's 2007 profit of $40.6 billion annoys you. Do you know that its profit, relative to its revenue, was smaller than Microsoft's and many other corporations'? And that reducing ExxonMobil's profits will injure people who participate in mutual funds, index funds and pension funds that own 52 percent of the company?
• You say John McCain is content to "watch [Americans'] home prices decline." So, government should prop up housing prices generally? How? Why? Were prices ideal before the bubble popped? How does a senator know ideal prices? Have you explained to young couples straining to buy their first house that declining prices are a misfortune?
• Telling young people "don't go into corporate America," your wife, Michelle, urged them to become social workers or others in "the helping industry," not "the moneymaking industry." Given that the moneymakers pay for 100 percent of American jobs, in both public and private sectors, is it not helpful?
• Michelle, who was born in 1964, says that most Americans' lives have "gotten progressively worse since I was a little girl." Since 1960, real per capita income has increased 143 percent, life expectancy has increased by seven years, infant mortality has declined 74 percent, deaths from heart disease have been halved, childhood leukemia has stopped being a death sentence, depression has become a treatable disease, air and water pollution have been drastically reduced, the number of women earning a bachelor's degree has more than doubled, the rate of homeownership has increased 10.2 percent, the size of the average American home has doubled, the percentage of homes with air conditioning has risen from 12 to 77, the portion of Americans who own shares of stock has quintupled … Has your wife perhaps missed some pertinent developments in this country that she calls "just downright mean"?
• You favor raising the capital gains tax rate to "20 percent or 25 percent." You say this will not "distort" economic decision making. Your tax returns on your 2007 income of $4.2 million show that you and Michelle own few stocks. Are you sure you understand how investors make decisions?
- 1
- 2
- Next Page »
Loading Menu
Member Comments
Posted By: Steve From PA @ 05/13/2008 9:26:31 AM
Comment: Probably the best series of questions asked of Senator Obama to date. It displays the Senator's naive, let alone lack of, knowledge of a variety of critical issues. For instance, apparently Obama does not realize that America???s pharmaceutical and biotechnology research companies invested a record $58.8 billion last year in the research and development of new life-changing medicines and vaccines ??? an increase of nearly $3 billion from 2006. Where does the Senator think that R&D money will come from if he takes away the pharma companies' profits? Will Uncle Sam pay for that R&D? Guess again.
Obama will lead this country down the drain. Go ahead diehard Republican conservatives, vote for Ron Paul or a 3rd party candidate and put Obama and his racist cronies in the White House.
Posted By: Paul4Justice @ 05/12/2008 8:17:22 PM
Comment: IMr Will At the end of your Questions for Obama article, you wrote, "coming next, questions for John McCain." In keeping with your independent Journalist badge of honor, I would like to suggest a few not-so-soft-ball questions for the Senator from Arizona. 1. Considering you self-alignment with President Reagan, when are you going to ask and answer the question, "are you better off now that you were four years ago? 2. You state that your experience makes you a better Presidential candidate than Senator Obama - does that include your experience as one of the Keating five and being sanctioned by a U.S. legislative body for your involvement in corruption? 3. You were tortured as a prisoner of war in Viet Nam, why then did you condemn and latter recant and condone a U.S. policy authorizing the Army to torture prisoners. 4. In that you want to distance yourself from Bush, why did you oppose tax breaks for the wealthy and latter insist that these same tax breaks become permanant? 5. Considering your hawkish stance on illegal drug use, how do you answer the FACT that you wife was able to walk away from criminal charges for her Illegal drug use? Oh George, don't tell me that wives are off limits since you torched Michelle Obama) 7. You point to Senator ,Obama's relationship with his pastor, why then did you SEEK the endorsement of Pastor Hagee? 8. Why do you support a gas tax holiday when most economist say it's a bad idea? Is this a true testiment, self asserted or otherwise, to lack of understanding of the economy? 9. Your wife stated in an interview with the San Diego magazine, "that her parents brought her there as a child and that she liked it so much she decided to buy a retreat there in Coronado, is this why she can say that she's always been proud to be an American? 10. Barack Obama has been married to same woman, ther is no divorce in his background, does this make him a more appealing candidate to the religious right wing of the Republican Party? Is that enough George, or should I go on.? How about one more 11. In that Rush Limbaugh ( another illegal drug user who got away with it) and Ann Coulter state categorically that you are not a true conservative and that they would vote for Hillary Clinton instead of you, will you consider running as an Independent with you know who in order to get the Jewish voye? One more 12. You claim to be against lobbyists, does that include Steven Betts ($100,000 contribution) who benefitted from legilation that you passed that awarded him 55,000 acres of government land or Donald Diamond whho you helped get Del Webb a land deal.
I think I made my point, George but these Tough questions will never see thelight of Newsweek day, but thanks for the opportunity to vent. Paul
Posted By: O-Dub @ 05/12/2008 7:28:22 PM
Comment: Mr. Will wrote, "You favor eliminating the cap on earnings subject to the 12.4 percent Social Security tax, which now covers only the first $102,000. A Chicago police officer married to a Chicago public-school teacher, each with 20 years on the job, have a household income of $147,501, so you would take another $5,642 from them."
I'm not a fan of Senator Obama, and will not vote for him, but I believe that Mr. Will is incorrect on two points. 1) It is true that the Social Security tax is 12.4%, but unless one is self-employed the employee's share of the tax is 6.2% The other half is paid by the employer. 2) It is true that the SS tax is applied to the first $102,000 in income, but that is on one individual's income. If, in Mr. Will's example, the combined income is earned roughly equally by both the teacher and police officer, then neither income is over $102,000.
The couple in the example would not pay any more in SS tax than under current law, not an additional $5,642 as stated.