Quantcast

The Hole in Their Resumes

Neither Obama nor McCain has business experience

By Evan Thomas | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Updated: 2:15  p.m. ET Jun 24, 2008

« Return to Article

 
Discuss
 
Member Comments
  • Posted By: Nins @ 07/11/2008 11:32:50 PM

    Comment: Know why McCain wants to distance himself from former Senator Phil Gramm? It is not just because of Gramm's recent obnoxious remarks calling Americans "a nation of whiners" and that unemployed Americans are in "a mental recession." In fact, those remarks were so obnoxious that I wonder if they were engineered just to provide McCain an excuse for publicly distancing himself from Gramm. This issue is a lot deeper than it looks on the surface.

    When Gramm was a Senator he was chair of the Committee on Banking, and in that capacity he was able to push through the legislation now known as the "Enron Loophole." This loophole allowed US investment banks to bypass the Federal regulations governing futures trading, and is the reason why the investment banks were able to falsely inflate the prices of oil, wheat, corn and other commodities through massive futures trading, causing your costs of gas, heating oil and food to go through the roof.

    Gramm was a member of McCain's campaign team, but now Gramms' name is turning to mud. In addition to the Enron loophole, Gramm pushed through the Gramm-Leach-Biley Act in 1999, which got rid of the laws that seperate banking, insurance and brokerage activities in America. Essentially, this Act did away with all of the good laws written after the Great Depression to protect us from another Wall Street/Banking Industry collapse. That's right, Gramm stripped the system of it's safe guards nine years ago, and guess what? The value of the dollar has nose-dived, three major economic institutions have failed, Wall Street is highly unstable, and we are in the midst of a worsening recession.

    Now you could say that this is not Gramm's fault, that he didn't know what the outcome of his actions would be. However, it turns out that the same investment banks that benefited from the Enron loophole and from the Gramm Act gave more than a million dollars to Gramm's campaign. Uh oh. A Congressional hearing is going to be convened to investigate this. And McCain wants to have noting to do with Gramm, wants us to forget that Gramm has been a key player on McCain's campaign team. Gramm was McCain's campaign CO-CHAIR and LEADING ECONOMIC ADVISER. Previously, McCain had said that he planned to appoint Gramm as SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY. It looks like McCain is scratching that idea, now that the public is finding out about Gramm. Didn't McCain's team bother to find out about Gramm before publicly considering him as Secretary of the Treasury?

    With Gramm in the driver's seat as McCain's leading economic adviser, now you know why economists and analysts are saying that McCain's economic policy plans are untenable.

  • Posted By: tc125231 @ 07/11/2008 12:40:12 AM

    Comment: Cripes. Reading this drivel, you realize that most people posting here do so to feel good about reinforcing their prejudices.

    The amount of data is miniscule. No wonder we were unable to do anything about a looming oil supply problem for over 30 years.

    Pathetic.

  • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 07/01/2008 8:12:14 PM

    Comment: KOOL-AID??????..From the kitchen of the obama sheeple!! take one heaping spoonful of an inexperienced elitist white male seeking self validation through exploitation of his african-american genetics. Combine two parts black liberation theology clerics spewing intolerance! With two parts of unrepentant intellectuals committed to the destruction of America. Stir in one cup of militant black wife harboring the overwhelming desire to stick it to whitey and one spoonful of typical white person grandmother mix well. Pour a gallon of anti-patriotism into tall glasses and sprinkle with naïve foreign policy ideations. Serve on a platter of meaningless oratorical hyperbole with a generous dollop of wealth re-distribution. Sprinkle liberally with zest of white guilt flip it and flop it till it tastes right. Serve large portions to the undiscerning and spellbound masses convinced that the Second Coming is upon America and now you have a complete recipe for disaster!

  • Posted By: alvinernest @ 06/28/2008 9:51:01 AM

    Comment: The appeal of the Obama campaign is its meekness and humulity.. humble enough to ask all Americans for support, not reliant on old sytems and structures that have failed Amercia... the Appalachian American, the Black American, the Native American have been poor and ignored for 200 years, that is the reality of American political history - that's the common ground bringing Americans together... the well educated and previllaged Americans are also turning away from the status quo, because they too recognise that there is a lot that is wrong with American politics... a lot that has gone astray from the path set out by the founding fathers of America... moreover they understand the increasing importance of real democracy to business and economic prosperity...

    The realisation that the Appalachian Ameican has been poor for 200 years, proves that there is no grand racist conspiracy, it proves that even if you are white, black or blue, if you were not considered economically mobile you were forgotten and left on the scrap heap... I believe that both white and black Americans are now realising this, especially as people from these groups become more educated... Appalachia can no longer be appeased by the notion that they are racially superior, when the reality is that they have been bottom of the economic ladder along with blacks for 200 years; blacks no longer believe that they are inferior, they have seen that power comes from organising and focusing their power of consumption... all Americans realise that history has been all about economics, nobody has really cared untill you showed them your money... a new politics is needed to ensure that everyone is enlightened and empowered to deliver what they can for their country and for their families, no matter who they are... because nothing else matters...

    So, I am convinced that Americans will vote for Obama... that is the map to victory... no one who is honest about modern America will do otherwise... he is the only candidate who has ever presented truth and enlightenment to the people... he has not stood up for race or money, he stands only for principle... and deep down inside we all know this!!!!

  • Posted By: PacAttack @ 06/26/2008 3:26:24 PM

    Comment: Look what an MBA has done for this country over the last 8 years Mr. Thomas. You say our current presidential nominees don't have proper or qualified Business-running experience to be a president? Management skills are not inclusive to business, and a country is not a mechanism for Capitalism, it is the mechanism for controlling your environment in a civilized and social context. And look at what an MBA or business-background offers the wholeness of the President. Our cutt-throat laisse-faire economics do not operate on morals, growth is its goal and to attain that is to succeed. But sometimes a President will have to take a receding failure to push forward and progress. Like a cleansing fire to a dense forest, sometimes losing is for the greater good. In the eyes of our current MBA President, we can see the inherent conflicts between success as a businessman and success as a President. One constantly seeks growth the other development. One seeks personal gain (whether the entity is himself or his business) the other seeks appeasement across the land. It is the difference between competition and unity. If you develop a state of mind hell-bent on besting competitors, within a global spectrum behind the seat of a single country, one isolates not just himself but the entire population of his country. I refuse to compete with other nations simply trying to survive, this life is not about making a buck, this life is about survival, and the game of politics is for the betterment of those lives that occupy this Earth. We gave our President a cabinet of advisors for a reason, we gave Congress the power of the purse for a reason. We need leaders looking out for We The People. Not the Purse. These men have both served time within our Congress, they know a thing or two about how this country operates from a federal governmental perspective, and they both understand to an extent how the government spends its money, that???s all they need to know. Congress is our regulatory body, not the President. Americans today don???t need a buck, they need a better system of civilized operation, the programs and policies to which we govern our domestic lives are breaking down or simply exist in a past that no longer translates to the present, think about FDR and Social Security and why the age requirement was set to 65 years of age (then look at the average lifespan of an American during the Depression). It is social problems like social security, and health care, and welfare, and the subversion of the American working stiff into the Service Industry that need to be fixed by our Oval Office in the next 4 years (at least if not much more). Businessmen won???t solve these problems the way reality needs them to be solved, they will simply set up another system geared towards making a profit, not making progress. These are the problems Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain are vouching for, they don???t need to make a buck for this country, they need to correct it.

  • Posted By: olga c @ 06/26/2008 11:21:56 AM

    Comment: I know it's difficult to run a business. I run a small one. But perhaps government has a more worthy cause. Imagine that. What we need is not a former business owner. We need a leader. We need someone who is practical and smart, someone who has a grasp of economics. Redistribution is exactly what the country needs. I think you need to take a closer look at Sen. Obama's policies because he has never said he intended to be fiscally irresponsible. http://ochairball.blogspot.com

  • Posted By: EffYou @ 06/26/2008 11:05:24 AM

    Comment: Will there be no end to the blisteringly ignorant comments about Hyde Park? First, the Obama family doesn't even live in Hyde Park, they live in Kenwood, which is decidedly less affluent. Second, Hyde Park is not an "upper class" neighborhood to begin with--it's economically mixed. It's also majority black, not majority "upper class academics." This hack punditry is so depressing. Evan Thomas, did you aspire to become an echo chamber?

    • Posted By: mtgmother@comcast.net @ 06/26/2008 15:25:44

      Comment: Hyde Park is SURROUNDED by mixed areas, but Hyde Park itself is a very desirable, affluent neighborhood, and has been for years. As to Kenwood, sorry, the real estate is not as costly as what Sen Obama (w/ Resko's help) paid for his home and additional lot. My basis, I not only live in Chicago, but have been involved with South Chicago Real Estate for over 25 years.

      • Posted By: mtgmother@comcast.net @ 06/26/2008 15:32:08

        Comment: Forgot to add, Hyde Park is NOT predominately black. It is loaded with University of Chicago professors, students etc. The University is centrally located in the middle of Hyde Park, and is not only a highly accredited school, but also one of the most expensive. Hyde Park is a "yuppie" paradise.

        • Posted By: EffYou @ 06/27/2008 08:00:53

          Comment: Christ that was a dumb reply. Hyde Park is absolutely a mixed area. Here are some actual statistics on it (from someone who actually lives in the damn neighborhood btw). If we're to believe Wikipedia, the neighborhood is 43.5% white, 37.7% black with a medium household income of $44,142 (is that how you would define upper class yuppie paradise?). Skip Wikipedia, go straight to the census data by zip code for the two codes in the neighborhood, and you get 60615: 10475 white, 29944 black, $31571 medium household income; 60637: 7293 white, 46902 black: 29944 Household income. Yuppie paradise is the most ignorant description I think I've ever heard of the neighborhood, and I've heard plenty.

          • Posted By: tc125231 @ 07/11/2008 00:35:38

            Comment: Well done. The lies and anecdote get old --on either side.

  • Posted By: Jack999 @ 06/26/2008 10:50:32 AM

    Comment: John McCain can't make up his mind where he sits on this fence. He claims to be a "Mavrick," but the only thing mavrick about John McCain is his inconsistency. Despite McCain's honors as a war verteran, the fact is that he graduated as a flunky (894 of 899) from the Naval Academy. His greatest pre-politics achievement seems to have been as a light weight boxer in his academy days. And while we can honor McCain's perseverance as a war hero, we should not forget he was shot down twice in his career after only his 23 missions over Viet Nam. Experienced fighter pilots in that war flew many hundreds hundreds of missions. Some pilots often flew 3 and 4 sorties a day. By that count, McCain lasted all of a week in Viet Nam. Other than touting his war record - who is John McCain? Does he have the "smarts" and intelligence, and mental capacity to lead as president, or is he likely to be another "Bush" - puppet of the Authoritarian right?

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 06/26/2008 9:15:06 AM

    Comment: The subject of this article harks back to the era preceding the 1929 crash, not totally dissimilar to our situation today, when it was declared by those in power that "the business of America is Business". It is a phenomenon that occurs as wealth gradually works its way up in to fewer and fewer hands and those hands somehow feel a power with the wealth similar to those endowed with the power of the King. "Business" becomes their holy Grail, and vassals, varlets and peasants become their victims as the self image grows, wages fall, retirement plans are discontinued, and the "have nots" have less and less to enjoy. One day, the market experiences an unprecedented dissolution as the inflated values come to reality all at once. Many of those who had worshiped business jumped from the windows of the high rises in The Big City as their money fueled self images disappeared all in one day, before air conditioning had sealed all the windows and you could still open them. I hope that this never happens again, but there are parallels. Delano Roosevelt rescued the country from the folly. Not a businessman. Intelligent, well educated, articulate, capable. I was lucky to hear his fireside chats. Oh well, so much for business experience to run for president.

  • Posted By: Italian Revolutionary @ 06/26/2008 7:56:09 AM

    Comment: I don't understand why it wasn't mentioned that Mr. Thomas gave this speech at the US Chamber of Commerce National Convention. Filled with false dichotomies, flawed logic, and subtle innuendo, it is a stellar example extremely good writing, but certainly not journalism. In short, Mr. Evan's premise that not having capitalist executive experience is makes a person unqualified to be president is specious: being a CEO doesn't make you a doctor; being Zubin Mehta doesn't make you a cabinetmaker. And? George Washington?, Thomas Jefferson?, James Madison?, Andrew Jackson?, Buchanan?, Taylor?, Tyler?, Teddy Roosevelt?, Wilson?, Eisenhower?, Kennedy?, Clinton?, Baby Bush (with an asterisk)?, none capitalists in the conventional sense.

    So? I'd rather have a community organizer as a president than a CEO. Why? What $75 million a year CEO knows a damn thing about the condition of the poor in America; I mean there is the $100 and the ten pounds of pinto beans every Christmas and the "Hola, Hortensia" every three days...As much as people have drunk the kool-aid of Republicans, this is a class-driven country and the top 5% doesn't waste any time worrying about gas a 5 bucks a gallon. Maybe they'll have to put off getting a new suit of sails for their Cal 39 and foregoing the $300,000 of landscaping at the cottage in Blue Hill. Bill Gates ran a very successful Corporation. He has billions up billions of dollars. He is donating a good deal of that money. I often wonder why the workers who wrapped those billions of Windows CDs didn't get more of that $40 Billion? That's capitalism for you.

    My favorite tacticof the Republicans is the absolutely loathsome and snide attitude they tar academic success: name someone in the Bush Administration who wasn't graduated from college? Even Dimbulb could stay sober and out of someone's panties long enough to get a degree from the opium college of New Haven. One of the American dreams is education as a bootstrap endeavor. Few Administration lackeys aren't part of one monied elite in the US or another. These people who use their shared characteristics as wedge issues ("Look at that Ivory Tower Liberal! What the hell does she know about real people?) are shameless.

    Finally, I have to take you to task for your characterization of McCain as "a bit of a hothead." As a person with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, I think I have an edge on noticing signposts of the disease. Senator McCain could be the poster boy of PTSD. Your glib minimization of and ignorance of his (probable) condition reminds me of statements about drunks in the 50s-70s: "Yes, Bill does like to be the life of the party; he must have had an interesting ride home."

  • Posted By: wernet @ 06/26/2008 5:04:10 AM

    Comment: The author writes: "One emphasizes negotiation with enemies, the other believes in the all-or-nothing use of force."

    This is an unfortunate misstatement of McCain's position. It leaves the reader with the impression that John McCain does not support negotiation. He does. What he does not support is presidential level negotiation with sponsors of terrorism where that negotiation will serve to raise the reputation and prospects of that terrorist sponsoring leader.

    • Posted By: metzlerd @ 06/26/2008 11:14:18

      Comment: I would argue that your last statement is an unfortunate misstatement of Obama's position.
      When Obama says he would talk to our "enemies", that does not mean necessarily that it is the President talking directly to the foreign leader. The point is to be talking at all. He does not rule that out the President talking directly, but this a repeated misconception that Republicans like to push. Instead his position is in contrast to the policies of the current administration where there is a shoot first and ask later type of mentality. The reason that McCain is so frequently connected to it is because he has supported that type of foreign policy. Again the notion of whether it is direct communication or phone or a representative is nit picking to avoid dealing with the real question.

      All of that said, the other part that needs addressing is that the President has a job to do. Sometimes that involves talking to foreign leaders. It isn't a social status. It isn't something you lord over people to imply that they aren't good enough. It is just a job, but one that we expect to be done well. We elect a President to put in the best and the brightest, not to as an award, some kind of inheritance, or to bestow a status symbol.

      The notion that a you are giving some special status to a foreign leader by granting them an audience because its the "President of the United States", is a symptom of somebody who is just too full of himself to do the job well. As I said part of a President's job is to talk to foreign leaders. You may not even like them, but if you run for President you better expect that you're going to have to do the job!

      If you don't like it, don't run for office, but don't use some flimsey excuse about this leader or that leader not deserving an audience. If a candidate wants to play Aristocrat or social games, we have Country Clubs for that..

  • Posted By: eddiewhere @ 06/26/2008 1:34:16 AM

    Comment: LACK OF BUSINESS EXPERIENCE. THIS IS AN ASSET.
    McCain is a good guy however he promotes misguided policies. THE BIGGEST BEING THE IRAQ WAR.
    JUST LIKE HILLARY HE JUST DOESN"T GET IT. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WANT OUT OF IRAQ. THE IRAQ WAR IS WHAT GAVE OBAMA A VICTORY IN IOWA. McCAIN is going to get SMOKED in this election unless he changes his stance on IRAQ.

    "NO AMERICAN LIFE IS WORTH IRAQI FREEDOM.
    ANYONE WHO DISAGREES IS NOT A REAL AMERICAN" eddiewhere 2008

    There is this argument out there that I hear our troops repeating over and over agian. WE CANNOT LEAVE UNTIL THE JOB IS DONE WE CANNOT LET OUR BROTHERS DIE IN VAIN.

    NOW THAT IS REAL BUL****. THAT STATEMENT IS GOVERNMENT IDEOLOGY AND NOT MILITARY IDEOLOGY.

    COLIN POWELL SAID IT BEST. DEFINE YOUR MISSION CLEARLY SET YOUR OBJECTIVES AND USE OVERWHELMING FORCE AKA SHOCK AND AWE to accomplish your mission.

    WE HAVE NO CLEAR AGENDA and NO CLEAR OBJECTIVES. WE ARE NOT SURE. SO HOW ON EARTH CAN WE JUSTIFY THE LOSS OF MORE AMERICAN LIVES. AS LONG AS WE STAY IN IRAQ YOUNG AMERICANS WILL CONTINUE TO DIE IN VAIN. WE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE MADE OUR POINT VERY CLEAR. WE ARE SICK OF IRAQ AND WE ARE SICK OF OUR DEPENDENCY ON MIDDLE EASTERN OIL.

    OBAMA WILL BE THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

    THE LAST FALLACY I WANT TO ADDRESS IS THAT THE SURGE IS WORKING.

    THIS ARGUMENT IS SO CRAZY THAT IT IS HARD TO EXPLAIN.

    SURGE means temporary. OUR TROOPS PRESENCE IN THAT COUNTRY OF IRAQ IS THE MAIN REASON FUNDAMENTALIST HAVE FOR ATTACKING US.

    WE NEED A PRESIDENT THAT WILL DO WHAT IS BEST FOR AMERICA NOT WHAT IS BEST FOR IRAQ.

    THE LATEST FALLACY IS THAT WE SHOULD STAY UNTIL WE WIN. WE HAVE ALREADY LOST.ESPECIALLY THE AMERICAN TAX PAYER and those poor AMERICAN SOLDIERS WHO LOST THEIR LIFE FOR NO LEGITIMATE REASON. THE BLIND JUST CANNOT SEE THAT.

    THERE IS ONE CLEAR WINNER IN THIS WAR, HALLIBURTON AND OTHER PRIVATE CONTRACT FIRMS WHO FUNNELED BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, WITH THE HELP OF DICK CHENEY, FROM THE AMERICAN TAX PAYER.
    LAUTENBERG REPORT CHECK IT OUT.

    YES OBAMA DOES HAVE BIG LEAD AND IT WILL GET EVEN BIGGER BECAUSE McCAIN WANTS TO STAY IN IRAQ.

  • Posted By: AmeriKhan Lobo @ 06/26/2008 1:30:55 AM

    Comment: If you look at GW Bush's resume, he has failed everytime he has ran a business. His biggest failure: running the country. I blame Bush for listening to Cheney once too often.

  • Posted By: counsellorben @ 06/26/2008 1:23:13 AM

    Comment: I for one am not as concerned about neither having run a business. Harry Truman, now regarded as one of our better presidents, failed in his business. Business acumen would appear to be antithetical to presidential skills.

  • Posted By: bill_in_NH @ 06/26/2008 12:12:45 AM

    Comment: You're right. Problem is, how many presidents in modern history have ever run a business? I can think of three: Jimmy Carter, and the two Bushes.-- and they are by consensus 3 of our greatest, right?

  • Posted By: spencerg @ 06/25/2008 11:50:52 PM

    Comment: Neither man has any experience running a business? How exactly does that differ from all of the "journalists" out there who will spend the next four months (followed by four years) criticizing them?

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 06/25/2008 10:16:05 PM

    Comment: Mc Cain is a vulgar old man who calls his fellow senator four letter words if they dare to disagree with him. He is in the early stages of Alzheimer's disease. Look it up. That's what they do as the cells lose their synapses. Grouch, gripe and curse. I'm older than he is and I grouch, gripe and cuss, but I know better than to run for an office where the whole populace would suffer from it. Shame on him for talking to his wife that way.

    • Posted By: sharenews @ 06/25/2008 23:37:13

      Comment: Believe it or not, people get elected as President of the U.S. even if they get outhy and hot under the collar with their wife, aides, or whomever. Here is a look at past Presidents and their temperments (and yes, at least a couple of them took our their temper on their wife).

      Article by Kevin Baker:
      Writer and Editor out of NYC
      More info about Mr. Baker: http://www.kevinbaker.info/about.html

      I found this to be a great read if you are interested in learning more about the temperaments of our past Presidents. Temper can be a bad thing depending on which type of temper is displayed. It also can be a very good thing in a President. Worth reading.

      EXCERPT from his article: THE TEMPER THING

      Is it really such a bad thing to have a temper when you are president? To judge from our history, the answer to the latter question seems to be NO as long as it is the right kind of temper.

      Most presidents and nearly all successful presidents have had displayed some kind of temper at some time in their tenure. It is simply too difficult to get so far in politics without so invaluable a tool. Sooner or later, its going to behoove any president to get tough with truculent senators, evil foreign dictators, willful special interests, corrupt criminal syndicates, recalcitrant state governors, shilly-shallying bureaucrats, and feckless relations. And then there is the rest of us. Any man who could get to be president without becoming at least occasionally fed-up with all the silly, self-serving demands we make of him would have to be possessed of an almost unnatural serenity.

      Full story: http://www.kevinbaker.info/c_ttt.html
      ,

      • Posted By: Italian Revolutionary @ 06/26/2008 08:09:39

        Comment: There are orders of magnitude of difference between getting your knickers in a twist and being abusive. The story in Congress is that McCain is an abusive bully; same for Bush the lesser. The two waddle and quack, and no amount of denial and wishful thinking is going to make that go away, short of clicking the heels of your ruby red Mary Janes.

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 06/25/2008 10:12:19 PM

    Comment: Well, zombiehero, Mc Cain referred to his wife as a c*nt. Her name is Mrs. Mc Cain, and she has a first name which he forgot to use, choosing to denigrate her in a public place by calling her an unforgivably vulgar name under the circumstances. I thought that conjugating his name might be appropriate under those circumstances. Let's just use Mc Cain, Mc Anus, Mc Cain't.

    • Posted By: spencerg @ 06/25/2008 23:54:13

      Comment: The allegation that McCain called his wife that name was made by a Democratic smear artist. It has been disproven more ways than has Obama's attendance at a Madrassa (which I also do not believe).

  • Posted By: Jack999 @ 06/25/2008 9:13:58 PM

    Comment: Its sad day for America if Americans still votes for the Candidates that persists of carry on meaningless expensive War,by borrowing money from other country just stay in IRAQ,even at the expense of own people miseries at home with many uncertainty,This really makes me wonder, are these prejudice conservative white americans happy going to help and join forces with BIN LADEN to make it happened "America going burst and bankrupt."?

    • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 21:29:47

      Comment: I'd be ok with your disparaging remarks about McCain, that can be debated. Why do you have to try and play the "prejudice conservative white American" card? Why doesn't anyone that votes for McCain automatically have to be prejudiced? Trying to play the victim will only get you as far as the Primaries....now we are in the GE. We should be discussing policy not your race baiting drivel.

      • Posted By: metzlerd @ 06/25/2008 21:41:42

        Comment: The part of this that might be debated is that we are borrowing money to finance the War in Iraq. Unfortunately it's true. As soon as Bill Clinton was out of office, the once balance budget was immediately undone, and we went back to deficit spending. That means spending more than we take in; otherwise known as borrowing.

        You're right it isn't debatable. It's verifiable fact. But it is a valid issue.

        • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/26/2008 06:28:41

          Comment: What's a fact? That all McCain supporters are racist? Your pathetic. No better than the GOP smear artists that you hate.

          • Posted By: metzlerd @ 06/26/2008 15:26:51

            Comment: Racism doesn't enter into it. It's a fact that we our government is not balancing the buget; that we are spending more than we take in; that we are borrowing money to fight the war in Iraq. What does that have to do with racism? It's about fiscal irresponsibility.

            And I don't hate you.

  • Posted By: anotherview @ 06/25/2008 9:02:10 PM

    Comment: Don't have to go far with this one to see where the bias lies. The opinion about Newsweek unbalanced coverage and opinions that favor Obama is definetly spot on. Must be favorite reading for Obama supporters.

    • Posted By: Italian Revolutionary @ 06/26/2008 08:28:24

      Comment: Well, duh! My apologies for the single, esoteric reply:

      First of all, it is a known fact that the general public tends to read or watch only those news outlets which confirm their own prejudice and bias. The corollary to that fact is that people consider outlets that don't reinforce their opinions as biased against their convinctions. Interestingly with Newsweek, both progressives and conservatives (to provide shorthand that's meaningless) despise Newsweek. I, for instance will read Anna Quinlain [sic] all day long, but I use George Will's essay to line my trash can. Maybe the magazine which causes the greatest amount of distemper in readers of a cross section of political views is the least biased.

    • Posted By: Italian Revolutionary @ 06/26/2008 08:22:00

      Comment: corrolary

  • Posted By: metzlerd @ 06/25/2008 8:47:50 PM

    Comment: I hope that we have learned that the President may know about business, but it doesn't help him do a good job as President. A President has to understand that the economy if left to lawlessness and the whims of business will decay into a set of monopolies. The government is there to preserve the freeness of the market for all citizens. The business is there to make a profit pure and simple. A good business man knows how to play the system, again, to make a profit, but doesn't necessarily know how or want to preserve fairness.

    A good President is somebody who is a leader, who will solve problems, who believes in a fair economy and society, and who will do the RIGHT thing when it comes time to do so.
    A good President is someone who beleives in the Constitution, not because it's our constitution, but for the same reasons stated in the Declaration of Independence, before there was a United States of America.
    Not that we as Americans are created equal, but that all people are created equal.

    If nothing else good comes out of the last 8 years, Bush and Cheney should have tought us that much.

  • Posted By: MoLarryCurley @ 06/25/2008 5:47:28 PM

    Comment: So what? No business experience? Hello! They're politicians. George Bush had business experience. He was the leading dry-hole oil man in the history of Texas oil. How's the economy doing under his guidence? Come on. A president must be a CEO-type leader. Period. That means someone capable of surrounding themselves and their "business" (the U.S. economy) with the best minds they can find. It's not their mind. They must only be capable of hiring the right people, inspiring them, providing direction and LISTENING to them. Then have the decision making skill to set course. It's the same thing with "military experience". Is the presidency reserved only for retired generals? No. There's State Department and the Defense Department and the Joint Chiefs and the NSA and the CIA and all the branches of the military. Do you expect a president to have all their knowledge? NO. The CEO brings in all the advisors and experts and build a consensus of action whatever it is and then communicates the decisions and actions to the American people. That's it. You're setting rediculous criteria for presidential candidates to have "experience". They are politicaians. Legislators. It's only one branch of the governent. That's like examing Obama's few years as a Seneator and ask "what bills has he authored?" Who cares? Is that the mark of a good Senator? Writing more friggin' laws through legislation. We just want a "leader". We've got all the experts we need. We need someone to organize, set direction, set priorities and motivate people into action. Obama '08.

  • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 5:14:32 PM

    Comment: Oh look in the new Gallup Poll; McCain and Obama are tied....in what was supposed to be a no contest year for the Dems... ha ha

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 06/25/2008 4:47:01 PM

    Comment: That word that he used for Mrs. Mc Cain.
    Let's conjugate Mc Cain, a new verb. He earned it.

    Mc Cain
    Mc Cain't
    Mc C*nt.

    Mc Anus
    Mc Never
    Mc Canned

    • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 16:56:25

      Comment: That all you got? Maybe you instead of making fun of his name you can argue why Obama's so called experience trumps McCain's?

      • Posted By: metzlerd @ 06/25/2008 20:50:29

        Comment: I agree, but howabout we have somebody who isn't running around making fun of Obama's name, make that point. That way you don't sound like such a hypocrit.

        • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 21:31:29

          Comment: Coming from you.... HA! Hey I have never used Barry's middle name.. I'll leave that to Holy.

          • Posted By: metzlerd @ 06/25/2008 21:36:45

            Comment: My apologies. I mistook you for someone else.

            • Posted By: sharenews @ 06/25/2008 23:44:16

              Comment: You are right, there are a select group of bloggers who never fail to insert Obama's middle name to rile the Obama supporters a bit and it definitely does. But I can vouch for Zombie, I have never seen him use BOs middle name. : - D

              • Posted By: Pia1981 @ 06/26/2008 11:36:27

                Comment: I can vouch for Zombie too on this.

              • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/26/2008 06:33:01

                Comment: Thanks sharenews.

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 06/25/2008 4:38:40 PM

    Comment: Mc Cain't. Way too old. His eyes are already starting to freeze up trying to remember what he was going to say. Watch him next time.

  • Posted By: lamm01 @ 06/25/2008 4:04:14 PM

    Comment: Obama has so many wholes in his resume you could drive a mack truck through it.

    • Posted By: metzlerd @ 06/25/2008 21:48:41

      Comment: Not if you look at the one he wrote
      The resume that has all the holes in it is the one written by the Republican spin machine. On the other hand if it isn't based on fact what good is it.

      If you say Obama has done nothing, and then you turn around distort a bunch of bills that he "voted on" or "authored", are you not contradicting yourself. Furthermore if you can't present them accurately and truthfully, why should anyone believe what you say?

      But hey it worked when Bush ran against Kerry. Maybe America is not wise to it yet... We'll see

  • Posted By: normankelley @ 06/25/2008 3:36:24 PM

    Comment: Excuse me, but the present occupant of 1600 Penn. Ave. has a MBA from Harvard Business School.
    His stewarship of the economy has not being sterling. The economy is a shambles. So, while I do agree that having run a business or having an economic background would be helpful, it may not be that important if either one hires someone who knows more about that than McCain or Obama.

  • Posted By: golfballs03 @ 06/25/2008 3:30:29 PM

    Comment: At least McCain has something other than "politician" on his resume. For all the talk Obama spews about "politicians and the old Washington establishment" he himself is a career politician that is too young to have spent much time above the state level. John McCain was a career "soldier" if you will. And in that capacity he can bring more to the table than anything Obama can even talk about.

    • Posted By: metzlerd @ 06/25/2008 22:14:50

      Comment: The problem is your assumption that experience at the state level is somehow less valuable than in the Senate at the federal level. That is a flawed assumption.

  • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 2:41:38 PM

    Comment: We need a new Ross Perot. I miss those charts.

    • Posted By: metzlerd @ 06/25/2008 22:16:44

      Comment: How about a Dick Cheney?

      • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/26/2008 06:33:45

        Comment: Screw him, he can go back to whatever rock he crawled out of.

  • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 2:34:38 PM

    Comment: From the WSJ...doing a little analysis on Obama's Tax Hikes...
    --http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121435112024101581.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries--
    According to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, Mr. Obama's new tax would siphon off 0.4% of gross domestic product annually. Combined with Mr. Obama's other tax-hike initiatives, "the total tax on labor would be close to 60 percent. In high-tax states like California and New York, the top rate would be even higher."

    Would it help Social Security's financing problems? Mr. Obama has no idea. One of his senior economic advisers admitted to me that no one on the campaign has run any detailed models or performed any rigorous analysis. When one proposes an enormous tax increase, shouldn't there at least be a spreadsheet somewhere?

    But the most alarming thing about Mr. Obama's proposal is that the $250,000 threshold, above which the payroll tax would be applied, refers to household income, not individual income. So it's quite deceptive when he claims that the $250,000 threshold will "ensure that lifting the payroll tax cap does not ensnare any middle class Americans."
    And neither has Mr. Obama said whether the rich ??? and, truth be told, the middle class ??? paying his new higher taxes will get correspondingly higher Social Security benefits when they retire. Throughout the history of the Social Security program, there has always been a connection between what you contribute in taxes and what you get back in benefits. If Mr. Obama uncaps the wages subject to tax, but doesn't uncap benefits, then he has severed the link between them. Social Security would stand revealed not as a work-related contributory retirement system, but simply as a tax-funded welfare and income-redistribution program.

    Obama is doing his best to try and turn this country into Socialism. Go Dems...

    • Posted By: metzlerd @ 06/25/2008 21:35:15

      Comment: The problem with that article is that it uses double talk which suggests that it isn't as "non-Partisan" as one would think. Probably similar to the swift-boating attacks that gave Republicans "plausable deniability" because nobody could prove that Karl Rove was the one who paid them to lie.

      Anyway: Regarding social security, what the article calls an additional tax is not really an additional tax.
      Currently social security totals a little over 15% if you count the employer portion and the employee portion, and you are under the cap. If you make over the cap you don't pay the approx 7% on what you make. The more you make the less the resulting percentage is.

      Obama's plan for social security simply says that portion over the cap that you weren't being taxed on is now still going to be taxed AT THE SAME RATE AS EVERYBODY ELSE. Any talk of a 60% tax for Social Security is a load of garbage.

      I don't know about you, but I don't make 6 figure salaries, and I don't know alot of "middle class" people who do. But if you find some, they are going to have to foot some of the bill.

      The reason this is a GOOD idea is just to make sure that cap stays comparitively the same given the cost of living.

      All of this makes good economic sense from an economic standpoint unless your ultimate goal is to phase out social security.

      Also keep in mind that social security is essentially not a retirement savings plan. (It has never been.) You don't get out what you put in. You get out what the current workers of today put in. You benefits although loosely based on what you put in, actually come from what workers of today put in. And your benefits can not keep pace with inflation unless the Cap is also adjusted according to inflation.

      As far as your article goes, I don't know how it translated a 7% tax or possibly a 15% tax into 60%, but it clearly is a distortion of the facts. Perhaps it is trying to include a captial gains tax, which is something enttirely different, since it isn't a tax on income. In other words I make a salary, but I don't pay capital gains tax plus social security plus income tax, and neither does any fire fighters, policeman.

      Unfortunately WSJ rights political opinion articles too, and evidently they don't always get the facts right.

      • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/26/2008 06:38:15

        Comment: All news outlets have some bias, but I've seen this analysis on more than one different news outlet. The numbers a bit different but basically the same. Obama's tax plan will over tax everyone but the poor. Even Bush's current tax plan doesn't tax the poor.
        You also have to recognize that calling for massive taxation of whatever demographic to pay for entitlement programs while in an economic slowdown is not conducive to growth.
        Both parties are trying to use Fear that SS will go bankrupt tomorrow to try and get votes. The fact is SS trust is solvent for then next 20 plus years. We need to focus on getting the economy back on track first before doing anything about SS.

    • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/25/2008 14:41:29

      Comment: Of course you're unbiased and have Mc's info at the ready huh bigot?

      • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 14:51:21

        Comment: Do you read what I post or just assume...its from the WALL STREET JOURNAL. If you have a problem with the article you should take it out on them. I never see you post anything with any credible source. Why don't you try that once and a while. Or do I need to smack you around like yesterday.

        • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/25/2008 15:23:56

          Comment: You? Smack me? Hahahaha!
          C'mon N-word lover. You cried like a baby, got mad, ran, almost apologized - then cried some more.
          My mom always said stay away from, be weary of, or laugh at:

          Political obsessives
          Religious fanatics
          People who can't make up their own minds.
          Bigots who lie for PC.

          Now blogging: Alvy, sniff, you're just lying about my being a bigot and everyone, sniff reading it, sniff boo-hoo. I only said it once, sniff, boo-hoo. You and Hottie, sniff, wimper, just made it up.

          God! I love you PC bigots

          Hahahaha! Slap me around some more idiot.
          Hahahahaha!

          • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 15:27:21

            Comment: Aww just a good momma's boy aren't you... my momma....my momma....sounds like your the waterboy.

            Why yes you are lying. Keep on lying, lilke a good Obamaboy. He must really be your role model, all you do is lie and race bait.

            I bet you love it when guys slap you around ha ha.

            • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/25/2008 15:36:12

              Comment: Hey! What's wrong with being close to moms?

              • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 15:44:01

                Comment: Hey if that's how you role.... to each his own.

                • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/25/2008 15:52:50

                  Comment: You hate your mom too? That explains it.
                  Never trust a person who hates their mom.

                  • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 16:12:11

                    Comment: Hey just because I don't "love" my mom like you do, doesn't mean we don't get along great. Where you from Kentucky?

                    • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/25/2008 17:19:59

                      Comment: Downtown Boston bred, born and educated.
                      Go Sox!
                      Celtics pride.
                      Tom Brady will not have a bum ankle next year (as good an excuse as any).
                      Bruins took Montreal to 7.

                      The sports Mecca.
                      But there is big hair on the outskirts, and Connecticut.

                      • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 17:33:05

                        Comment: No wonder you hate me so much. Your still mad cause the Pats lost. Ha ha ha ha GO BIG BLUE!!!
                        Your just a sore loser.

                        • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/25/2008 17:48:21

                          Comment: That's not nice zero. That hurt.
                          I didn't go there with you man. That's way below the belt. Sniff. Snoooooooort!
                          Give me a tissue, sniff.

                          • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 18:06:01

                            Comment: It's ok there is always next year for the Pats to lose again.

                            • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/25/2008 18:53:06

                              Comment: The G-Men beat a injured team zero.
                              They fell into a superbowl - they didn't win. They'll be lucky to be 500 next year.

                              • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 21:31:51

                                Comment: Yeah use whatever excuse you want... your team lost

            • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/25/2008 15:34:57

              Comment: I bet you going to post you didn't call me boy too hey Mr. Bigot.
              Maybe it was a slip. A mis-blog.
              Hahahaha.
              What an idiot.

              • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 15:43:28

                Comment: You are a boy trying to act like a man. Trying to act all tough.
                Why where you going to try and call it racist too? Always the race baiter....

                • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/25/2008 15:55:00

                  Comment: Actually, I'm a black man that you are calling boy. And instead of apologizing for it, you plant your tongue firmly in your cheek - and do it again. Kinda Imus-eque isn't it nazi?

                  Is it the metal music?



                  • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 16:15:32

                    Comment: I don't care what you are, your a race baiter. Yes you are a boy because you act like your 13 years old. Have to go back to your momma jokes huh? Go ahead try and twist it to your liking. It will never change that fact that you are a hater and race baiter.
                    Lol Calling me a Nazi? Couldn't think of anything better than that? That's so 9th grade....fits cause your only 13.
                    Yes love the Metal, but right now I'm listening to Tori Amos....so go ahead say something derogatory about that too.

                    • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/25/2008 17:21:07

                      Comment: Tori Amos is probably your biggest sin.

                      • Posted By: Zombiehero @ 06/25/2008 18:06:39

                        Comment: So you hate women now too? Why?

                        • Posted By: Alvy @ 06/25/2008 18:53:54

                          Comment: Tori Amos?
                          Hey she's no Hillary Clinton.
                          Now there's a fine woman.

  • Posted By: Hope Hill @ 06/25/2008 1:43:31 PM

    Comment: I know barack obama has no experience on anything, specially comparing him with Hillary Clinton, but who is mcCain to talk or bush; bush is the "0" president on everything!!! Homen land security? You mean imposing fear on the USA people? Fighting terrorisim? You mean creating a "self interest" war, invading a country that did not have anything to do with 09/11, killing millions of children, women, civilians Iraquis &
    thousands of US soldiers? Republicans should not open their mouths.

    Hope Hill

    • Posted By: metzlerd @ 06/25/2008 22:08:28

      Comment: Obama has experience. It's just that people are ignorant.

      If you want something funny to show the idiocy of that comment, here it is.
      McCain that guy with all the "experience"... came up with an idea that we'll give consumers a break by telling the GAS COMPANIES that they won't have to pay their fuel tax for the summer. Hillary bought into the same thing.

      Obama did not. Why? Because of the experience he allegedly doesn't have, he knew that GAS COMPANIES pocket that as profit. He knew that Gas Tax Holiday sounds great to everybody until they find out that the Holiday is for Gas Companies.

      The guy who they say has no experience apparently had enough to know better!

  • Posted By: C. MacLean @ 06/25/2008 1:41:27 PM

    Comment: "Neither Obama nor McCain has business experience."

    Good. Big Business is not exactly doing a good job for the average American, and hasn't for some time.

    But should either candidate feel a need to learn more about business, commerce, economics, etc. they can do what most LEADERS do - employee someone with the expertise they lack.

    Or as my father would say, you either are an accountant, or you have the number of one.

    Mr. Evans points out Johnson's awe at the Kennedy cabinet. Kennedy's genius was not that he was brilliant, it was that he sought out people who were, and for the most part, actually listened to what they had to say.

    The true test of a LEADER is not what they know, it's who they go to for advice. (Hence our present president's disasters - he instinctively sought out the worst possible advisers, for everything, and on the few occasions he was presented with decent advice - Colin Powell, his father, even, surprise, surprise, John McCain - he ignored it).

    Which candidate strikes you as the most likely to pick brilliant advisers and listen to them? Or more important, which candidate strike you as least likely?

    The inability to choose wisely and listen would be much more of hole in their resumes than any business experience could ever be.

  • Posted By: jericho4119 @ 06/25/2008 12:52:53 PM

    Comment: This strikes me as a reasoned assessment of the backgrounds of both the Republican and Democratic Party candidates. Where I believe Obama has the edge is that he strikes me as more open to ideas - instead of professing that he has all of the ideas already. His experience in running this presidential campaign shows that he can run an organization smoothly - although he admittedly has not had to overcome a financial squeeze.

    With respect to John McCain, Is it too simple to talk about teaching an old dog new tricks?

  • Posted By: neophyte @ 06/25/2008 11:41:31 AM

    Comment: They both have other grave shortcomings that seperate them from vast numbers of americans. Neither has been to prison or had police kick down their doors. Neither one has ever been to seminary. Neither one has confessed to significant substance abuse histories or is a victim of sexual abuse. Evary voter has some experience in their lives that they feel is seminal, to Hillary it was her gender. This article implies that it is impossible to govern without having hung out at boardrooms. Maybe so but it sounds to me like Mr. Thomas' version of gender qualification.

  • Posted By: peteracevedo @ 06/25/2008 11:39:51 AM

    Comment: Guys check out these great article:

    "The Country I Lie To"
    Obama LIES on his first general election ad! Also, a short background check on Obama's VP adviser; Eric Holder.

    http://savagepolitics.com/?p=800


    "Tyrants or Children"
    Kim Jong Il and his North Korean murderers endorse Barack Obama. Also, a short profile of Cindy McCain and her charity work.

    http://savagepolitics.com/?p=805

  • Posted By: childomine @ 06/25/2008 11:24:04 AM

    Comment: Amen!

  • Posted By: just jerry @ 06/25/2008 10:17:57 AM

    Comment: The experience needed economically is the ability to connect with those Americans who don't have lobbyists and aren't major contributors. They don't have Preidents, Congressmen and Senators beholden to them.
    We need the kind of leader who actually cares enough about the people as a whole to work in the common interest of all not just the special interests of the rich, and a leader that doesn't look down on the poor as weak-minded people who need their religion and guns.
    Both candidates obviously have huge weaknesses much deeper and more important than business experience.
    The economy that looks to Wall Street for its indicators is much different than the economy that looks into the people's homes for indicators. Business has become synonomous with Wall Street, the business expereince that is needed ,and that has been neglected, is the business of the people.

  • Posted By: misterjrthed @ 06/25/2008 9:04:21 AM

    Comment: Here are the presidents of the past century with significant business experience: Harding, Hoover, Carter, G.H.W. Bush, G.W. Bush.

    Not exactly the honor roll, even in economic matters.

    Oh, and Truman was in business briefly and catastrophically.

    The idea that business experience is desirable in a president is a shibboleth for Republicans and morons.

    Mr. Thomas should go back to writing boys' books about naval heroes.

  • Posted By: Jack999 @ 06/25/2008 8:39:46 AM

    Comment: BEWARE !!!!!! ALL GOP MACHINE LOBBYIST COMMING TO ROOSTS VERY SOON WITH NOW AND 5 MONTHS AHEAD TILL FALL.......AS USUAL ..WITH ALL LIES,BS,PROPA-GANDA VIDEOS,RELIGION,SEX,BIBLE,RACE,WAR,TERRORIST,FEAR,SMEAR. ...USING GOP JOURNALIST,GOP PRIEST,.MANY MORE.....AMERCIANS ALREADY KNOWS THIS TACTICS AND ANTICS ......."NOT THIS TIME"

  • Posted By: Jack999 @ 06/25/2008 1:58:05 AM

    Comment: U.S. Funding to Pakistan Plagued With Problems, GAO Report Says
    The Bush administration has paid Pakistan more than $2 billion without adequate proof that the Pakistani government used the funds for their intended purpose of supporting U.S. counterterrorism efforts, congressional auditors reported yesterday. Their report concluded that more than a third of U.S....
    - By Robin Wright

  • Posted By: Jack999 @ 06/25/2008 1:40:01 AM

    Comment: BEWARE !!!!!! ALL GOP MACHINE LOBBYIST COMMING TO ROOSTS VERY SOON WITH NOW AND 5 MONTHS AHEAD TILL FALL.......AS USUAL ..WITH ALL LIES,BS,PROPA-GANDA VIDEOS,RELIGION,SEX,BIBLE,RACE,WAR,TERRORIST,FEAR,SMEAR. .....AMERCIANS ALREADY KNOWS THIS TACTICS AND ANTICS ......."NOT THIS TIME"

    GOP LOBBYIST MACHINE POSTERS SAVE YOUR ENERGY AND TIME,WE KNOW YOU'RE WASTING YOUR POWERFUL ENERGY WRITING TO THIS BLOG,IF YOU CAN HARNESS THEM WELL SAVE TO THE PEOPLE INSTEAD,IT CAN BE USE TO LIGHT UP AMERICA FOR ANOTHER 100YEARS.

  • Posted By: Nins @ 06/24/2008 11:27:53 PM

    Comment: Some of you who read my posts about investment banks driving up the price of oil through commodities futures trading did not believe me that this was a real issue, despite the fact that the Senate is investigating it. Well, it really is an issue and an important one, so important that the Department of Justice is going to investigate.

    Senator Obama announced a plan to crack down on excessive energy speculation and fully close the loophole in the CFTC regulations that I referred to in my blog. This loophole is also called the "Enron Loophole" because it was created by McCain campaign co-chair Phil Gramm at the behest of Enron lobbyists, and exempts most trading on energy commodities from regulation. As a result, the CFTC is unable to oversee the oil futures market or investigate cases where excessive speculation is driving up oil prices. Just last month, John Hofmesiter, President of Shell Oil Company, says that the proper, uninflated production price of a barrel of crude oil is no more than $65.

    http://www.financialpost.com/reports/oil-watch/story.html?id=532747

    Clarence Cazalot, CEO of Marathon Oil, stated in November of 2007 that "$100 oil just isn't justified by the physical demand on the market - it is speculation on the futures market that is driving this."

    http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/12/markets/oil_hundred/index.htm?postversion=2007111216

    Larry Chom, Chief Economist of Platt's, states in a recent Businessweek article that speculation is adding at least $50 to the price of every barrel of oil. You can read this article in the May 13, 2008 edition of Businessweek, but it is no longer available on their website unless you are a member.

    http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/may2008/

    To see what Senator Obama is doing to correct this serious problem and lower the price of gas and oil, go to his website:

    http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gG5Rzb

    Now THAT is my kind of President! Sees the problem, and moves to fix it, while Bush and McCain are sitting on their hands.