2008Central.net Presidential Election Podcast (11/02/08)

In this podcast, we discuss projections for election day and reflect on the campaigns of Barack Obama and John McCain in order to glean insight into how they would serve as president.

[Subscribe to 2008Central.net's Presidential Election Podcast]

Sphere: Related Content

On Redistribution and the Courts

Marc Ambinder explores the Drudgeism of the day:

 ”Socialist” … “redistributive” … These are 20th century words with 20th century connotations; indeed, the point of Obama’s relfection was that the most progressive — most liberal — court of the era could not bring itself to violate a core American principle and could not extend the sphere of justice to the economy.  Obama wasn’t simply making a technical point about jurisprudence and history; he was expressing a liberal positivist’s lament about the court’s reluctance in one specific case – San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez – which dealt with education funding.

And here’s the redistributionist part:

“One of the, I think, the tragedies of the civil rights movement, was because the civil rights movement became so court focused, I think that there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which you bring about redistributive change, and in some ways we still stuffer from that.”

“..so court focused…” is the tragedy, not the court’s refusal to redistribute wealth.

Conservatives find it absurd that Americans are about to elect the most liberal president of the modern era and aren’t terribly upset by it; but in capitalizing on this particular argument of Obama’s, the Republicans are rearguing whether some form of economic redistributions from white people to black people was necessary — even though Obama never really made the point.

I think that says everything to say on Obama, but I can add value by contextualizing Rodriguez a bit more. 

The case was essentially a challenge to unequal education funding across Texas. More money was spent per pupil in some areas, less than others. We see that reflected today with some public schools being really, really good, and others that barely deserve the name “school.” 

If you look this up on Wikipedia, you’ll find that the relative benign finding that “[Justice] Powell led the 5-4 majority in deciding that education was “neither ‘explicitly or implicitly’ protected in the Constitution.” He also found that Texas had not created a suspected class related to poverty. ”

Obama was specifically referring to mostly the inability of the Courts to solve problems like that, and needing social movements and social power to fix those sorts of problem. You need millions of people trying to fix funding problems for inner city schools, not a dozen people in a courtroom. He’s also conceding that the poor should not be a protected class of people, like has been done with race, age, disability, gender, and a number of other classifications, to different extents, of course.

Justice Powell’s argument against redistribution was based on the fact that poor people live everywhere, and redistribution imposed by courts would just move the problem around (citations removed):

The complexity of these problems is demonstrated by the lack of consensus with respect to whether it may be said with any assurance that the poor, the racial minorities, or the children in overburdened core-city school districts would be benefited by abrogation of traditional modes of financing education. Unless there is to be a substantial increase in state expenditures on education across the board - an event the likelihood of which is open to considerable question - these groups stand to realize gains in terms of increased per-pupil expenditures only if they reside in districts that presently spend at relatively low levels, i. e., in those districts that would benefit from the redistribution of existing resources. Yet, recent studies have indicated that the poorest families are not invariably clustered in the most impecunious school districts.

Interestingly, the one person of interest Obama is disagreeing with is Thurgood Marshall, who wrote a very spirited defense in Rodriguez. Marshall argued that the discrimination because of disparities in funding was so vast that that action was required:

The Court seeks solace for its action today in the possibility of legislative reform. The Court’s suggestions of legislative redress and experimentation will doubtless be of great comfort to the schoolchildren of Texas’ disadvantaged districts, but considering the vested interests of wealthy school districts in the preservation of the status quo, they are worth little more. The possibility of legislative action is, in all events, no answer to this Court’s duty under the Constitution to eliminate unjustified state discrimination. In this case we have been presented with an instance of such discrimination, in a particularly invidious form, against an individual interest of large constitutional and practical importance. To support the demonstrated discrimination in the provision of educational opportunity the State has offered a justification which, on analysis, takes on at best an ephemeral character. Thus, I believe that the wide disparities in taxable district property wealth inherent in the local property tax element of the Texas financing scheme render that scheme violative of the Equal Protection Clause.

You can see here how Marshall waves away the possibility of legislative reform as irrelevant. Obama’s point is that there obviously is a problem in the pay, but judges are unwilling to push that far to make changes, as evidenced by Marshall’s argument not attracting a majority vote. 

The reality that people seem to understand is that a broadly-based redistributionist scheme like Drudge et. al are trying to conjure up has zero chance at ever passing. It’s completely unrealistic. 

Also, this blog was totally the only election blog to mention Rodriguez before today. Suck on that, Ambinder!

Cass Sunstein has a great post up on this on TNR.

Also, see more here and here, including some dissenting views from Sunstein.

Sphere: Related Content

More on Divided Government: The Judicial Question

There’s been a lot said about divided government, including by me. But one aspect horribly overlooked is the judicial question. Jeffrey Rosen looked at it, and if you’re a fan of moderate policies, beware:

In each of the past three elections, of course, these hyperbolic predictions have turned out to be wrong. Since 1996, Roe has been supported by a comfortable 6-3 majority, and the Court, controlled by two relatively moderate swing justices, Sandra Day O’Connor and now Anthony Kennedy, has remained fairly centrist. All of this had led some Court-watchers, including me, to conclude that the stakes for the Court in most presidential elections are less dire than many liberals fear.

Not this time. This year, for the first time since the New Deal era, a single election really does have the power to transform the Court–at the very moment that voters, rightly concerned about the tanking economy and the war in Iraq, are looking the other way. Given the fact that the older justices are liberal rather than conservative–and that the oldest, John Paul Stevens, is 88–it’s hard to deny that nominations by John McCain would change the Court far more dramatically than those by Barack Obama. An Obama victory would maintain the current balance of the Court, while a McCain Court could create a solid conservative majority.

What’s at stake is not only Roe v. Wade, but issues directly tied to the current concerns of the public: among them, Congress’s power to regulate the economy as well as limits on the president’s power to act unilaterally in the war on terrorism. Although McCain claims to favor justices who will defer to the political branches, the most likely Republican nominees are hardly consistent advocates of judicial deference. Voters who are hoping McCain will nominate relatively moderate judicial mavericks should think again.

I’ve said before that I don’t think Roe is an issue, so I’ll take it off the table here. The reality is that the court is on the brink of swinging to a near-Lochner court. There’s been strong pushback against federal government related to interstate commerce, and that trickle could become a deluge with the right Court appointees. Given the relative ages of liberals and conservatives on the Court, a Democratic president would be more likely to retain balance on the Court. Where before narrow majorities upheld issues like basic judicial access for detainees, this would change that. There’s far, far more at stake with the Supreme Court than with the actual Presidential election. Campaign finance is another issue that could be gutted.

A simplistic look at divided government always only looks at President and Congress. In all likelihood, the economy will continue to have problems in the next few years, and at some point, Republicans will be able to take advantage of that, at least in the House and possibly Senate elections. But what can’t be undone are Supreme Court appointments.

Divided government reminds me of speed limits on a highway. Yes, it’s safer to have speed limits on the highway, but what really matters is which way you are driving.

Postscript: I think a more interesting case for divided government is made by the NRSC Dole commercial which assumes an Obama victory. If there’s a run off in the Georgia Senate race, you can expect much of the same.

Sphere: Related Content

McCain Criticizes Obama’s Economic Plan As Near Socialism

Sphere: Related Content

VIDEO: Colin Powell Endorses Obama, Discusses It With Press

Sphere: Related Content

2008Central.net Presidential Election Podcast (10/15/08)

This podcast provides post-debate analysis for the final debate between Obama and McCain at Hofstra University…

[Subscribe to 2008Central.net's Presidential Election Podcast]

Feel free to email us questions/suggestions for our next podcast (you can also email an audio file of your question and we’ll include it in the podcast).

Sphere: Related Content

Early Morning Debate Preview

Some early thoughts around the internets of what may happen tonight at Hofstra:

• McCain has put himself into a double bind. His new stump speech is all about ditching the anger and not mentioning William Ayers, but he’s also promised to bring up Ayers in the debate. If he can manage that - and I can’t see how even a highly skilled candidate could, much less someone as blunt as McCain - then he’ll have accomplished something, although his main hurdle will still be connecting on some economic message.
• Famous Hofstra alumni: Avi Arad, chairman of Marvel Studios (Will Terrence Howard be there to kick his ass?); Norm Coleman, current Senator (R) from Minnesota; Mary Matalin, Republican advisor and wife of James Carville, attended but did not graduate; David Paterson, current New York Governor (D); James Caan; Francis Ford Coppola; Christopher Walken attended but did not graduate; Alan Colmes; and lastly let’s go with Joseph Gregory, the former President and COO of some little outfit called Lehman Brothers. He was fired by now disgraced Lehman Brothers head Richard Fuld for … get this .. wearing an ugly suit.
  
• Jonathan Martin seconds David Yepsen’s call for a bold different type of campaign, more or less pulling a Norm Coleman and going all positive and focusing on solutions - sort of taking the Hillary 2.0 approach. I have a feeling that sort of approach feels better here in the upper Midwest than it does in states like Virginia, North Carolina, and Ohio. I also think it’s easier to say things like “break clean with President Bush” than to actually do it, especially once Sarah Palin is on the ticket. The only way to effectively do that is to run to the right of Bush on the bank plan, but that ship has probably long sailed.
• Hewitt wants Obama asked about Patrick Fitzgerald, Defense funding, and missile defense.
• Chris Orr at TNR explains why McCain’s Ayers gambit is doomed to fail (and it’s easy to imagine this scenario happening):
  

  It’s not hard to envision how this may play out: McCain will raise Ayers in that awkward, semi-comic manner of his, as if he’s not really sure it’s something he wants to be bringing up. (Possibly moderator Bob Shieffer will bring it up for him, which would help, but I suspect any comment he makes will still sound uncomfortable.) The real-time viewer response needles will nosedive, as they have almost every time McCain has attacked in the debates so far.

  Obama will very reasonably respond that it’s a distant association, that he was 8 years old when Ayers committed his crimes, that he deplores said crimes, etc., etc. Then he’ll turn it around on McCain, pointing out that it is all very old news, and the McCain campaign didn’t think it was worth discussing until it found itself in a deep electoral hole. He’ll accuse McCain of trying to “change the subject” and will cite the top McCain strategist who idiotically told the Daily News, “If we keep talking about the economic crisis we’ll lose.” Anyone who thinks such an exchange is a win for McCain should contact me immediately, as I have a lucrative opportunity in the housing market I’d like to discuss with you.

• John Dickerson has a typically wonderful column explaining McCain’s two challenges: first, somehow attacking Obama when attacks in a debate historically are received very badly; and second, somehow connecting economically on his new message of being a fighter, when unlike Hillary Clinton he has not shown an ability to connect with the middle class:
  

  McCain’s other challenge is that Obama is not his only target. He’s got to do something to improve his lot with voters who care about the economy. Despite “suspending his campaign” to assist in forming a financial rescue package (or perhaps because of it), McCain continues to trail his opponent badly when voters are asked to evaluate the candidates on the economy.

  As the two candidates head into the debate, both have unveiled new programs aimed at helping regular Americans in a financial pinch. McCain has also offered a new pitch about character: He’s a fighter. The message is actually a cleaner version of his acceptance speech. (Perhaps the editors were barred from the room this time.) It’s also the message Hillary Clinton offered at the end of her campaign—but Clinton was far more effective in explaining how she was going to fight on behalf of the middle class.

  McCain never really explains why his ability to fight, to buck his party, or to do unpopular things is going to improve anyone’s life. Yes, he’s been tested more, and endured more in life, than Barack Obama. But voters want to know: How’s that help me? McCain has got one more night to make the case.

• Nate Silver sets the goalposts for what McCain needs from the debate in terms of polling in order to have a chance to win the election:
  

  McCain now has to go on a run of his own, a large enough run to wipe at least 8 points off of Obama’s lead, and perhaps more like 9 or 10 to cover his inferior position in the Electoral College and the votes that Obama is banking in early and absentee balloting. It is imperative that McCain does not just draw tomorrow night’s debate, does not just win a victory on points, but emerges with a resounding victory, the sort that leaves the spin room gasping for air. Failing that, we are getting into dead girl, live boy territory.

Sphere: Related Content

Obama on Debt and Credit

Angelo made a point of asking in yesterday’s podcast why more candidates have not criticized the culture of credit. I thought it was just that no candidate would dare criticize that during an election. Well, I was wrong.

Obama in his his speech today:

It also means promoting a new ethic of responsibility. Part of the reason this crisis occurred is that everyone was living beyond their means - from Wall Street to Washington to even some on Main Street. CEOs got greedy. Politicians spent money they didn’t have. Lenders tricked people into buying home they couldn’t afford and some folks knew they couldn’t afford them and bought them anyway. 

We’ve lived through an era of easy money, in which we were allowed and even encouraged to spend without limits; to borrow instead of save.

Now, I know that in an age of declining wages and skyrocketing costs, for many folks this was not a choice but a necessity. People have been forced to turn to credit cards and home equity loans to keep up, just like our government has borrowed from China and other creditors to help pay its bills.

But we now know how dangerous that can be. Once we get past the present emergency, which requires immediate new investments, we have to break that cycle of debt. Our long-term future requires that we do what’s necessary to scale down our deficits, grow wages and encourage personal savings again.

This is a message that John McCain should be able to give (and should have the responsibility to give too). But this fiscal conservativism has not come from the sitting Republican president or the Republican candidate - just the Democratic candidate that’s also apparently the biggest liberal in the Senate. Presidents have an obligation to educate the country. It’s high time Republicans took that seriously beyond the message of “less taxes is better.”

How times have changed.

h/t Sullivan

Sphere: Related Content

2008Central.net Presidential Election Podcast (10/12/08)

In this podcast we offer a preview of the third and final presidential debate between Obama and Mccain as well as an overview of the state of the campaign. We also discuss our most recent election projection and the polling trends during the last week. Additionally, we criticize both campaigns on their respective weaknesses and offer some unsolicited advice for improvement. And much more…

[Subscribe to 2008Central.net's Presidential Election Podcast]

Feel free to email us questions/suggestions for our next podcast (you can also email an audio file of your question and we’ll include it in the podcast).

Sphere: Related Content

McCain: “My Fellow Prisoners”

Also, as Christopher Buckley of all people notes, the promise to balance the budget within one term is preposterous.

Sphere: Related Content

The Republican Base Is Costing McCain Any Chance of Being Competitive

Jonathan Martin looked earlier today at the incredible anger, and frankly, mob mentality taking over at GOP rallies. Howard Wolfson gets at the essence of the problem for McCain:

Instead of focusing on Ayers Senator McCain might have chosen to spend a day outlining a comprehensive solution to the mess we are in.  But that would require an understanding of the problem and an idea of how to fix it — which John McCain clearly does not have.

Right now the McCain campaign is having a conversation with itself and the Republican base, while the rest of the country — and Barack Obama — is focused on the greatest economic meltdown since the Depression.  It’s not a good place for John McCain to be less than a month before the election.

There is clearly not enough people angry about Obama to tip the election to McCain. He needs to persuade indepdents and undecideds - people who are overwhelming concerned about the economy. And yet, his base is so completely unreasonable that he can’t do that. Of course, as Wolfson points out, McCain’s messaging on the economy has also been terrible. But determination, or even a halfway decent economic message combined with attack ads might have a chance of succeeding; going all negative with tenuous if any links to the economy will appeal to the base.

This also gets at a bigger problem with McCain. In earlier days, he’d have no problem educating voters at town halls. Now? He’s just swamped by the anger. In New Hampshire, he was Hercules, sending navigable bodies of water wherever he wanted, Now, McCain is just being dragged under by the undertoe. I can’t help but get the impression that McCain is shellshocked and unable to formulate a response of his own.

See Daily Show video on economy here.

Sphere: Related Content

2008Central.net Presidential Election Podcast (10/07/08)

This podcast provides analysis of the second presidential debate between Obama and McCain, which was held at Belmont University in Tennessee.

[Subscribe to 2008Central.net's Presidential Election Podcast]

Feel free to email us questions/suggestions for our next podcast (you can also email an audio file of your question and we’ll include it in the podcast).

Sphere: Related Content

2008Central.net Presidential Election Podcast (10/06/08)

This podcast analyzes the latest polling data, McCain Campaign’s aggressive tactics, Obama’s newest attack video on McCain’s association with the Keating 5, a preview of the second presidential debate in Tennessee.

[Subscribe to 2008Central.net's Presidential Election Podcast]

Feel free to email us questions/suggestions for our next podcast (you can also email an audio file of your question and we’ll include it in the podcast).

Sphere: Related Content

2008Central.net Presidential Election Podcast (10/02/08)

This podcast offers post vice presidential debate commentary and analysis of the debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden.

[Subscribe to 2008Central.net's Presidential Election Podcast]

Feel free to email us questions/suggestions for our next podcast (you can also email an audio file of your question and we’ll include it in the podcast).

Sphere: Related Content

Senate Votes On Financial Bill (AKA Economic Bailout Bill)

Tonight, the U.S. Senate is voting on the financial bill that is intended to address the current economic crisis.  As the speeches wrap up, and the voting begins, I just wanted to note a few pieces of information about the bill that pretty much demonstrate just how botched the legislative process really is…

• The legislation that is being voted on tonight is massive - 451 pages, a significant portion of it has almost nothing to do with the economic crisis.
• It includes a tax exemption “for certain wooden arrows designed for use by children.” (Sec. 503)
• An inexplicable provision that treats settlements from the Exxon Valdez spill as though they were engaged in a fishing business. (Sec. 504)
• An increase in the statutory limit on public debt.  The new limit would be $11,315,000,000,000 ($11.315 trillion).  The previous limit was $9.815 trillion.

There’s more, but you get the point.  There’s an awful lot of silly, unrelated stuff that needed to be tossed into this in order to get enough people to support it.  You can read the full text of the bill here.

UPDATE: The Senate passed the bill with a vote of 74-25.  Obama, Biden, McCain all voted in favor of the bill (as did Hillary Clinton).

Sphere: Related Content

2008Central.net Presidential Election Podcast (09/30/08)

This podcast offers a preview of the upcoming vice presidential debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden.

[Subscribe to 2008Central.net's Presidential Election Podcast]

Feel free to email us questions/suggestions for our next podcast (you can also email an audio file of your question and we’ll include it in the podcast).

Sphere: Related Content

2008Central.net Presidential Election Podcast (09/26/08)

This podcast offers commentary and analysis about the first presidential debate about the economy and foreign policy between Barack Obama and John McCain at the University of Mississippi.

[Subscribe to 2008Central.net's Presidential Election Podcast]

Feel free to email us questions/suggestions for our next podcast (you can also email an audio file of your question and we’ll include it in the podcast).

Sphere: Related Content

First Presidential Election Debate Liveblog: From The University of Mississippi in Oxford

5:15: All times are Central. Deal with it, you coastal elites!

More on the University of Mississippi here. Fun fact: It was used as a hospital during the Civil War for both Union and Confederate soldiers. So there’s some bipartisanship. There’s no truth to the rumor that John McCain was there at that time, however. A must read about the civil rights history of the college is here. There’s no truth to the rumor that Barack Obama was the … uhm, named person in the headline there. Seriously, John McCain’s grandfather is one of the famous alumni of the college.

The moderator tonight is PBS’ Jim Lehrer. This is Lehrer’s record 11th time moderating a presidential debate, and his wiki page describes him as a bus enthusiast. So he’s got that going for him.

The format: two podiums. Sections of the debate will include introductory statements of two minutes, followed by five minutes of debate between the candidates. It’s a really nice format.

5:36: Mississippi is the state where Teddy Roosevelt refused to shoot a captured bear, enraging Stephen Colbert but capturing the heart of a nation. Nowadays, killing a moose is a qualification for national office. How times change!

5:53: Mississippi soda/pop fact: Mississippi is the birthplace of the Barq’s Root Beer. And also apparently the home of some very, very crazy ad wizards.

6:04: Ole Miss is in Oxford, in Lafayette County. In the county, Obama beat Clinton 2,849 to 2,171. John McCain won a virtually uncontested primary in the county with 1,953 votes (Huckabee received about 300 votes and Ron Paul less than 100 votes).

6:48: Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen is so concerned about the financial crisis that she’s talking on the House floor about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his denunciations of Israel. I understand that Presidents have to have multiple things in their crossfire, but you would think that wouldn’t apply to the House. Especially in the middle of a crisis.

7:04: In the audience: a lot of students and the Washington elite.

7:11: Nate Silver has a good debate preview up.

7:14: Matt Yglesias asks if the debate itself will be in HD. It’s a good question. Angelo believes it will be. Confirmation: here.

7:17: A C-Span history of debates.

7:18: C-Span’s debate hub is awesome.

7:19: The largest airport in Mississippi, in Jackson, was renamed the Jackson-Evers International Airport to honor assassinated NAACP leader Medgar Evers.

7:23: Marc Ambinder’s preview is also worth reading.

7:27:This week in 1963: JFK becomes the first president to sleep overnight in Duluth. Thanks, PBS.

7:29: Listening to C-Span calls before a debate is excruciating. Supporters of either side are just grating.

7:31: Janet Brown, Executive Director of the Commission on Presidential Debates, starts off the speeches that are very unimportant, and meant only to stoke the egos of those who give them.

7:37: Frank Fahrenkopf chastises the crowd to not applaud or make any noise.

7:42: Should I be concerned that there’s been multiple listings of corporate sponsors? Or is that too 3rd party-sh of me?

7:43: THe University lost power because of an accident with an immigration line earlier today.

7:50: Michelle Obama is in the house.

7:51: Jim Lehrer is on the stage. He talks down to people who “volunteered or participated” in the primary debates. Let’s hope Hillary isn’t watching. He talks about needing “absolute concentration” and asks Cindy McCain and Michelle Obama to take names of whoever makes sound.

8:00: And away we go! Tom Brokaw says the “Reagan Democrat” is the voter both are courting. Jim Lehrer says he has not cleared his questions with anyone. Both candidates arive to the only applause of the night.

8:03: First question: Eisenhower talks about economic strength being the basis for military strength. Where do you stand on the economic recovery plan? Obama goes first. Talks about Main Street, and how his proposals protect the taxpayer. His four point plan: oversight, the possibility of getting the money back (equity), executive pay, and help to homeowners. Segues into a criticism of Republican financial policy, including deregulation, and including the phrase “trickle down.” McCain references Kennedy (who has since been released from the hospital, per Politico). McCain is talking to Lehrer, while Obama was addressing the American people. Odd distinction. He talks at length about the bipartisanship in Congress, and mentions accountability, options for loans, and “a number of other essential elements.” He then seems to try to side with House Republicans, who want something wholly different. He ends up with a reference to foreign oil. Obama mentions that “we haven’t seen the language yet” which is head scratching. Of course, Lehrer is referring to a plan that is being negotiated as we speak. I think he’s pressing a bit in the wrong direction. The key is what they think should be done, not really what they think about some abstract plan that no longer exists. Obama addressed that answer to Lehrer. McCain tells a story about Eisenhower and Normandy, and his willingness to resign if D-Day failed. He implies that Chris Cox should resign because he failed - but doesn’t say why. Obama says there must responsibility not just when there is a crisis, and talks about the problems before the crisis erupted last week. Funny moment: Obama refers to McCain saying the fundamentals of the economy are strong, and Lehrer makes him say it directly to McCain, who jokes that he could hear Obama the first time. McCain’s response: “We have fundamental problems in the system.” It’s pretty ridiculous, given his comments about the fundamentals of the economy. He finishes with an ode to the American worker that Lenin could have written. Time spent talking on this: directly even. To the second.

8:14: Second question: what differences to you have on the economy: McCain wants spending under control. Talks about earmarking as a gateway drug. The joke about bear DNA doesn’t get any laugh. He holds up a pen to veto and says “this one is kinda old.” He’s making the old person jokes himself. Yeesh. McCain criticizes Obama for making earmarks. Obama agrees that earmarks are abused, and often by lobbyists. Obama says earmarks cost 18 billion, but McCain is proposing 300 billion dollars worth of tax cuts to the rich. Obama is working overload to relate to the common man. McCain goes on again about the earmarks and the 18 billion dollars, and criticizes them for corrupting people. He mentions Obama’s 800 billion of new spending. Obama talks about his plans: closing corporate “loopholes,” health care spending, etc. Obama again says earmarks alone will not get the middle class “back on track.” McCain talks about the business tax being the second highest in the world, to get more businesses in America. He goes back to earmarks AGAIN, and he’s getting a little silly on the point. He talks about the tax cuts he wants to give everyone. Fact check: earmarks are only 0.63% of the federal budget. Obama talks about his tax cuts, and criticizes McCain for making health care benefits taxable. McCain jumps in, and criticizes Obama for … his vote on the Energy Bill. McCain only wants to talk about earmarks. I’m at a bit of a loss. Obama mentions the tax breaks, and criticizes mcCain for opposing the Energy Bill right now for the position on eliminating tax breaks for oil company.

8:26: Third question: what would you give up to pay for this recovery plan: Obama says it’s hard to say, but some things will have to be delayed. Talks about needing to get energy indepdence in ten years. That’s very, very optimistic. Also mentions health care, and deductibles going up 30%. Also mentions competing globally, specifically in education. Also mentions infrastructure, including roads and the energy grid. A certain viewer near Albany, NY likes the road shout out. McCain talks about needing to cut spending, criticizing Obama for having the most liberal record. McCain wants to end ethanol spending, and better bids for contracts for the military. McCain talks about knowing how to get defense spending under control. Lehrer wants to know what will delayed specifically. Obama talks about postponing parts of his energy plan, and 15 billion lost through Medicare. Mentions working with Tom Coburn setting up “Google for Government.” McCain wants a spending freeze on everything but Defense, Veterans, and “other important” areas. Obama says you need a scalpel, not a hatchet, mentioning the 79 billion dollar surplus of the Iraqi government. McCain wants 45 nuclear power plants, and gives an awkward climate change shout out to Sen. Clinton. Lehrer doesn’t like these answers, and tries again. Obama segues into a discussion about values, and talks about corporate tax cuts versus health care. McCain does not want health care handed to the federal government, and gives a variation on the Harry and Louise schtick. McCain goes back to spending, and talks about owing China $500 billion. That’s true, but not really the root of the problem as he implies. Obama refers to the “orgy of spending” under Bush and criticizes McCain for voting for Bush’s budgets.

8:38: What are the lessons of Iraq? McCain: You caannot have a failed strategy that causes you to lose. A little broad to me. Bad strategy is as old as warfare itself. McCain hugs the surge as much as he possibly could. Talks about “winning” in Iraq and “coming home with victory and honor.” This is about 100 degrees difference away from what Petraeus describes. HD update: Apparently they both look weird in HD. Obama talks about opposing the war from the start, and tells the same story about taking an unpopular position as McCain. Obama talks about being distracted from Afghanistan and Al Qaeda being resurgent. McCain talks about Obama saying that the surge failed, not going to Iraq, and not holding hearings on his subcommittee. Obama looks amused, and restates Biden saying that those things are held at full committee. Obama gives his own McCain quotes, including greeted as liberators and history between Shia and Sunni, leading it into a question of judgment. McCain says Obama does not understand the difference between a tactic and a strategy. McCain says Obama refuses to believe we are winning. He describes a strategy that sounds a whole lot like a tactic. It’s a strange distinction. McCain talks about Obama not funding the troops. Obama knocks it down quite easily, actually, saying that McCain and him both voted against bills for other reasons, and talks about at length about Afghanistan. McCain talks more about the surge and Petraeus, and says he knew the surge would succeed this much.

8:50: Should more troops be sent to Afghanistan? Obama: Send more troops ASAP, as per the commanders in the ground. Obama goes back to Afghanistan and says it cannot be separated. No mention of Pakistan thus far, except implicitly mentioning Al Qaeda “crossing the border.” Finally mentions Pakistan. Three points: More troops, deal with the poppy trade, and dealing with Pakistan. McCain talks about the Russians leaving and the rise of Al Qaeda and the Taliban. McCain says he is not prepared to cut off aid to Pakistan, and criticizes Obama for launching strikes, or rather, for saying it out loud - effectively admitting he would do the same thing but not say it out loud. He talks about Waziristan. McCain wants the Iraq strategy. But Iraq is urban warfare; Waziristan is remotte tribes. Building walls is pointless when there’s already mountains in between people. a WSJ article a long while ago made this point. (A GOP one I linked to before). Obama says it’s about having intelligence regarding Al Qaeda, and taking them out, and that McCain has made comments regarding extinghuishing AL Qaeda and singing songs about bombing Iran. Obama says that Musharraf was coddled and the policy was anti-democratic. McCain says there was a failed state when Musharraf came to power. McCain tries to defend his temperament, and defends himself by voting against troops going to Lebanon; supporting the Gulf War and going into Bosnia and Kosovo; he wanted the troops in Somalia to apparently do more “peace making force.” But the criticism was regarding his words, both originally from McCain and rebuttal from Obama. This is just a tangent regarding his record. He says if Iraq does not succeed, then lives are wasted; the logical implication is that the deaths in Vietnam and Somalia were in vain. Obama says no soldiers die in vain, and all service should be honored, but the question is regarding how to keep America safe. He criticizes McCain for saying America could “muddle through” Afghanistan. McCain criticizes Obama for not going to Afghanistan and not holding hearings again.

Discipline: McCain has oddly times smiles, as usual, but is otherwise OK. Obama seems pretty OK. No sighs so far. Lehrer says time is even.

8:50: What is the threat from Iran? McCain says there they propose an existential threat to Israel, and that there can never again be a Holocaust. McCain says a League of Democracies could take effective sanctions, mentioning the Germans, French, and British. He also mentions Iran infiltrating Iraq. Obama says the Republican Guard is a terrorist organization (and says he always said that) and said that the war in Iraq has strengthened Iran’s hand. Agrees that a nuclear Iran cannot be tolerated, both for Israel and to prevent an arms race in the Middle East. Obama says cooperation from states like Russia and China will be needed for sanctions to be effective. He talks about diplomacy. He says that efforts at isolation only accelerate efforts to get nuclear weapons. McCain talks about Ahmadinejad wanting to wipe Israel out, and not wanting to give him a propaganda platform. McCain talks about needing preconditions being necessary, citing Reagan and Nixon. Obama says even Kissinger wants America to meet with Iran. He cites Bush sending Bill Burns to talks with Iran, and admitting it may not work. Obama says that after cutting off talks with North Korea, nuclear work was quadrupled, and nuclear secrets were sent to Syria, and through talks progress was made, even if it is on shaky ground. He even mentions McCain not wanting to meet with the President of Spain. McCain says he will not set a visitor’s schedule. McCain says that without precondition, meeting with Ahmadinejad legitimizes comments about Israel. Obama pushes back on Israel, but McCain interrupts, and makes a joke about Obama not denying the words of Ahmadinejad.

9:16: Russia! What do you do, what -DO- you do? Obama says the relationship needs to be reevaluated, but that the actions in Georgia were unwarrented, and that the six point peace plan needs to be implemented. Talks abot needing to be supportive of fledging democracies, and expanding NATO to countries like Georgia. Also talks about expanding cooperation, specifically with loose nukes. McCain tries to hammer home that Obama doesn’t understand foreign relations, saying Obama’s first statement only called for restraint on both sides. McCain says he looked into Putin’s eyes and saw KGB. Not sure about that one. Talks about concern over resurgence of the Russian Empire. Says that Russia is in violation of the cease fire agreement. Obama tries to give a better framing of his position on Georgia, but widely agrees with McCain. Mentions the Georgian economy. He talks about how he warned about Russian peacekeepers in Georgia in April, but nothing was done. Obama says that an energy strategy is necessary to deal with not only Russia but also Venezuela and Iran. Mentions energy, including nuclear, wind, and clean coal. Talks about McCain voting against renewable energy. McCain also talks about Nunn-Lugar. Obama says that he’s just for storing nuclear waste carefully. He wants to make another point, but McCain talks over him and I can’t tell what either said.

9:25: What is the likelihood of another 9/11? McCain says it is much less than it was on 9/12. He mentions that he and Lieberman wanted to start the 9/11 Commission. He seems to be making the Richardson approach: that he personally knows a lot of things and can get things done because he knows how to do it. It’s not what he did in the primary. Obama says America is safer in some ways. He talks about chemical sites, ports, and transit. He circle back to nuclear proliferation and says it is the biggest threat to the United States. Says missile defense is necessary, but it is not more important than nuclear waste. Says Al Qaeda is operating in 60 countries, and the root cause is in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Says America’s standing in the world has been damaged, and work is needed to restore the standing as a city on a hill. McCain cites Reagan and missile defense, for some reason. He goes back to Obama “not understanding” and says if there is failure in Iraq, Al Qaeda will have a base there. Obama goes back to McCain and Bush focusing on Iraq, while Bin Laden is still out there, while seguing to Chin being involved around the world everywhere where America is not, and the ability to project power of America is hurt. Segues into a discussion of veterans, and that a broader strategic vision is necessary. McCain says that Obama does not have the experience of knowledge necessary to be president. He compares Obama’s stubbornness to that of Bush, and says Obama not admitting the surge succeeded is really bad. Obama mentions his father coming from Kenya, and wanting to come to America because of the standing of America in the world, and that this idea is important, and investing ni how ordinary people live out their dreams is important. McCain one ups that by talking about coming home from prison and normalizing relations with Vietnam.

That ends the debate. I’m going to ponder grades, but Lehrer gets an easy A. Well done.

Sphere: Related Content

Next Page »