Obama's Celebrity Cred

Guess you can not tell the difference between satire and fact. The point of the ad was that like other celebrities (Spears/Hilton) Obama is also one. And as we know, celebrities do not have a lot of depth or credibility for comanding the world's largest power.
By the way, where has Obama shown any leadership? He has only been in the Senate for 3 years, passed no bills and never initiated one of his own. He was not in the military, has never held a private job, never led a company, a unti or anything. He flips/flops on his patriotism: "shall I wear this pin or not", he disrespects his troops: "guess I'll go to the gym instead of going to see the injured troops", he votes to not fund the military, he denies that the surge worked, etc, But he wants to raise captial gains, increase the SS limit, tax energy companies, denies the value of NAFTA, etc. Sure seems like the "leader" we do not need! In my opinion he is scary!

Whiterock, you assert that Obama "says what people want to hear?" Where have you been? Your words more accurately describe McCain's attempts to win this election. First, ignorning McCain's financial ties to oil companies, he now supports ANWAR drilling, when he rightfully voted against in Bush's first term. He asserts Obama's refusal to endorse drilling is the cause of our oil prices when ANWAR resources would take years to affect those numbers on gas station signs, and minimally at that. Secondly, the federal gas tax "holiday," which would save you and I about $30-40 this summer does nil to alter people's perception of the sustainability of our current oil dependence. It sounds like McCain is trying to buy your presidential vote with a tank of gas and you are sold. Obama stands by his convictions and has emphatically said "no" when it has been unpopular to do so. This is the same Senator who voiced a lonely "no" on the Iraq War decision. I take offense to your ill-informed assertion. I recommend a visit to your "spiritual leader" as you could benefit from a little guidance.

No one but true die-hard republicans are backing McCain???s latest ads. Not even Tucker Carlson. McCain???s old campaign manager from the 2000 race is embarrassed to watch what is happening to McCain. Trickle down economics has done what for the average individual over the last 8 years? One percent of US population makes 26% of the money. This is the highest by far for any modern society. The rate of wealth growth for the riches one percent has been amplified significantly over the last 8 years. The average CEO of a fortune 500 company makes nearly 400 times that of his average employee. This is many times that of what any CEO in another country receives (Germany and Britain had the next highest payouts 22 times and 26 times their average employee). Warren Buffet (worlds riches man) pays on average less in percentage terms in taxes than his secretary does. As for your very laughable oil production remark, you do realize that oil is a world commodity? You also realize that China and India, 2/3 of the world's population, are coming out of the dark ages. They are adding thousands a cars a week to their roadways. The point is drilling for 5% more capacity in the United States is not an answer for what is coming our way. We must reduce our reliance on oil, period. As for healthcare, there are 47 million people in the US without health insurance. Who do you think pays for these people when they get sick? WE DO! Unfortunately, many of these people will not seek out medical help until the physical problems they are having get much worst, hence, costing all of us more in the long run not to mention prolonging the suffering of the person seeking help. Taxes, inflations, additional user fees, loss dollar power, etc., in the end we are still paying out one way or another. The better question to ask, is not necessarily who is taxing more but what is my total cost under each candidate. For example, Bush 43 lowered the taxes for the rich. As for the middle glass they caught a little break as well but not much of a break. That said, look what happen to the US dollar? Economist estimate that 60% of the current rise in oil prices are directly related to the weakness of the US dollar. This is not a tax but it sure feels like one and it certainly costing me more than the savings I received so far from the Bush 43 tax cuts. Why am I blaming Bush? No energy plan, and no oversight in the home mortgage industry.

People like you tried to justify running a campaign based on lies in 2000 and 2004. People need to be able to vote intelligently; not based on who tells the biggest whoppers, and who sucks it up.

I can't believe people are just accepting lies as a strategic way of getting elected. You people complain that we don't know enough about Obama. Well, if you spend all your time telling lies, you're never going to know the truth. The worlds problems can't be solved by refusing to face reality.

I'd say McCain should stand up and tell people that, but frankly I don't think he's capable of that.

Strategists may say that he has to do this, but I say if you don't have anything but lies and slander, then maybe you just aren't the best candidate and should bow out.

Actually, no, I don't think that failing to renew the Bush tax cuts for the rich will affect the middle class adversely. In fact, since the highest earners will be paying closer to their fair share of the tax burden, I expect that the burden on the middle class will be lightened a little. After all, the middle class was not adversely affected prior to the Bush tax cuts. Why would failing to renew them cause any "trickle down" disaster?

As for oil production, what good will it do to grant oil companies offshore oil leases when they are NOT USING the leases they already have in Montana, Wyoming, New Mexico, Nevada and Colorado? What good will producing more oil do when there is no refinery capacity in the United States to process crude? By design, oil companies have refused to build more refineries because by keeping production low, they can keep profits high. Why does McCain shrink from taxing the obscene windfall profits that oil companies are racking up? That money could be used to invest in clean energy sources and clean industry job training -- as the Obama plan proposes. What plan does McCain have to regulate the trading of oil futures, since the manipulation of the futures market has been shown to be one of the causes of high oil prices? McCain does not address this; Obama does. There is nothing mature about favoring big business over the American consumer -- and this is what McCain's plan does.

Tricare may have its faults -- but Medicare is running pretty smoothly -- most seniors seem to like it. And the congressional health insurance plan -- the one that Obama actually wants the US health care system to emulate -- is wonderful with lots of choices and comprehensive coverage. Anyway, whatever the plan, I'm sure that the growing number of uninsured people, including children, who can't get ANY health care, except in the case of dire emergency, would welcome any comprehensive coverage -- even Tricare. It's the people with good jobs and good coverage that grouse about losing choices. But, if you love the coverage you have, you can keep it under the Obama plan. So, you don't have to deny the millions of people who are uninsured and under-insured the coverage they need because you're afraid you might have to change doctors. You won't.

Finally, knowing that my taxes are covering health care would be an improvement over today when they seem to be slated for the national debt and more war. Europeans pay more in taxes but they get health care, child care, quality education through college, public transportation, four weeks annual vacation, retirement income, disability insurance, maternity and paternity benefits. And in the United States -- we pay for debt service and war.

McCain is so 2004.

I'm not sure how taxing individuals who are millionaires will raise prices on commodities. I must have missed that part of economics 101. In any case how can you say that oil companies will raise gas prices if they are taxed as if it would be the government's fault? Why are they already making record billions every quarter while the price of gas continues to climb? If the price of crude were so high that they just had no choice but to pass it on to their downstream buyers, then why do their profit margins keep increasing? The oil companies are inflating the price of petroleum products above what they should be - that is the only logical answer. They need to know that this fleecing of America has consequences, so I say hell yeah, tax the motha f'ers!

As for taxing millionaires - the proposed tax increase would only undo Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy. Are you a millionaire? Then why do you cry for them? They pay the same rate as we lower classes do, but have a much bigger profit margin than us even after taxes. Oh yeah that's fair! Under Reagan and Bush Sr. millionaires paid a higher percentage than lower classes because these presidents understood that working class families need money in their own pockets and the government needs money in theirs as well. Clinton reduced this tax on millionaires and now W has done it again. Have we seen lower prices from this? No! But what we do have is a higher federal deficit, much of which we sell to China. So lower taxes for the rich and lower taxes for the oil companies has resulted in higher prices for commodities and petroleum products, more of our debt owned by foreign governments including China, all of this while waging a two front war which is soon slated to outpace the cost of Vietnam.

If not for the American families, and if not for the troops who need money to fight, then support an increase in taxes of the millionaires and record breaking oil giants simply to buy back some of our debt from China for national security.

Both Obam and McCain support cap-and-trade on oil and coal. So this means that they would both raise taxes on these, although this is technichally not a tax. In any case Obama only said this as part of a hypothetical answer to a question of whether or not he would tax clean energy. He said he would rather tax dirty energy, but (and here's the part that makes McCain's ad a moot point) neither of these scenarios should be applied to fix the issue the interveiwer brought up in the first place. But I guess if headlines are as far as you're willing to read then I can understand your rush to judgement on this. But next time do us all a favor and get the whole story. Also when you get the whole story be brave enough to admit your first conclusion was wrong and save us all from a lot of unneccessary typing.

The one big difference is that McCain has a record that can be researched to find out his views, including where he has broken away from the Bush camp (on several issues). He's already been through a presidential primary where his views became well known. Obama is new and different, but we don't know much about him, except for his rehearsed motivational speeches and past affiliations. Voting for change, simply to have change, doesn't make sense if you don't know what that change will bring.

By the way, the McCain camp tried to get Obama to agree to a series of town hall meetings to debate issues, but Obama has only agreed to two,

He ACCOMPLISHED beating Clinton in the democratic primaries.

If you'd actually read something besides FOX news, then you'd have more than 1 thing.
If you even looked in posts on some of these blogs, you'd know. If you're just going to sit there and make excuses for why this legislation didn't count or that one didn't count, then it's kind of pointless because you don't really want the answer anyway.