Obama Snubs Foreign Press

[Hunt]

<p>I just want to add that I read the editorial cited in the first post, and when I read that most Americans didn’t know about Obama’s “dirty little secret,” I was expecting something a little more hot. I mean, come on.</p>

[tega]

<p>

He doesn’t have a good grasp of the economy, is too old, is just as much a flip-flopper as Obama, and isn’t as smart as Obama.

</p>

<p>If Obama has any grasp of the economy, he wont be talking about raising taxes in the middle of an economic downturn (we are not in a recession, the economy has been growing the last two quarters). </p>

<p>What is the indication that Obama is smarter than McCain? I have been hearing a lot about how smart Obama is , can you name a single significant scholarly article that Obama has written in his entire life? No, I don’t mean his books; they are not scholarly material. </p>

<p>

He has more experience in the Senate, but doesn’t really have much more experience that is relevant to being President.

</p>

<p>He managed a division of the Navy with about 1,000 people.</p>

<p>[PolitiFact</a> | McCain ran a Navy unit of 1,000 people](<a href=“http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/553/]PolitiFact”>http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/553/)</p>

<p>Obama, on the other hand, has never managed anything in his entire life. </p>

<p>

He’s a rich guy, with a rich wife, and comes from a privileged background with family connections.

</p>

<p>Is Obama from a poor family? This is such a funny narrative about Obama’s childhood (the media helped him spread this falsehood). </p>

<p>Obama is perhaps one of the most inexperienced candidate to ever vie for the presidency. This guy is not offering anything new, he is offering the same tax the rich and spend policies which have been championed by the left-wingers for years.</p>

<p>I wont even select him to manage my city council.</p>

[coureur]

<br>

<blockquote>
<p>Are you suggesting that I do not have the perogative of posting anything about the presidential candidates here?<<</p>
</blockquote>

<br>

<p>No, I was disagreeing with your assertion that this forum exists for the purpose of political debates. You (and a few others) seem to use CC primarily as a political blog rather than anything to do with college.</p>

[HisGraceFillsMe]

<p>

I just don’t like “hype”. If something is true as reported, fine. But many people can be mislead when the media “creates” something/someone who turns out to be “just another human”. This big “Euro Extravaganza” is just hype - if Obama were a real statesman, truly concerned about doing the best job possible as Commander-in-Chief, he would’ve done what McCain did - go to Irag, talk to the military & Iraqi leaders and come home.

</p>

<p>Please. You know as well as anyone else that politics is a “Look-at-me” fest. If candidates ONLY talked to the leaders/military, Nader might finally get his chance, because people aren’t going to vote for someone they’ve never heard speak.</p>

<p>

If Obama has any grasp of the economy, he wont be talking about raising taxes in the middle of an economic downturn (we are not in a recession, the economy has been growing the last two quarters).

</p>

<p>Am I the only one that took Econ senior year? Raising taxes takes money out of the hands of the people. Thus, they will spend less, and thus, inflation will decrease. Period. I can’t believe no one raised taxes sooner…probably because all the politicians are too busy trying to make sure everyone loves them to do something good for their country.</p>

[tega]

<p>

Am I the only one that took Econ senior year? Raising taxes takes money out of the hands of the people. Thus, they will spend less, and thus, inflation will decrease. Period. I can’t believe no one raised taxes sooner…probably because all the politicians are too busy trying to make sure everyone loves them to do something good for their country.

</p>

<p>May I ask you where you signed up for the senior year Econ class? I want to contact the person teaching you these things.</p>

<p>Raising taxes will decrease inflation? Taking money out of the hands of the people will decrease inflation? Raising taxes will do good for the country?</p>

[marite]

<p>Tega:</p>

<p>Thanks for raising issues of substance!
On tax policies:</p>

<p>

…When McCain launched his campaign, he opposed the tax cuts because he said they favored the wealthy and reduced the availability of government resources during wartime. Now he says the cuts should remain in place because allowing them to expire would amount to a tax increase at a time when the economy is already weak…</p>

<p>…According to Marston, McCain’s proposal to extend the Bush tax credits amounts to campaign rhetoric in the current climate. “There is no way all of the cuts will be extended now that the political winds have shifted,” he says, adding that McCain has not been able to articulate which of his proposed tax cuts are most important. “Voters need a clearer economic vision.”…</p>

<p>…Janet Rothenberg Pack, Wharton professor of business and public policy, suggests McCain’s support for the Bush tax cuts is a mistake because they will continue to deepen the U.S. budget deficit. “The deficit and the trade deficit–which are related–are hurting us and are going to hurt us a lot more in the future.”…</p>

<p>…According to the Tax Policy Center, a joint venture between the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, the two candidates’ specific non-health tax proposals would reduce tax revenues by $3.6 trillion (McCain) and $2.7 trillion (Obama) over the next 10 years, or approximately 10% and 7% of the revenues scheduled for collection under current law.</p>

<p>“Both sets of policies are bad in that they don’t balance the federal budget and they would each run up deficits,” says Roberton Williams, principal research associate at the Tax Policy Center. “Those are deep holes to fill back in with spending cuts. If we run deficits like that somewhere down the road we will have to worry about paying back those costs.” He says the need to raise taxes in the future may outstrip the gains made by cutting taxes now. “Both plans would impose costs on our children and grandchildren at a time when baby boomers in retirement will be demanding more and more resources as well.”…

</p>

<p>[Obama</a> Vs. McCain On The Economy - Forbes.com](<a href=“http://www.forbes.com/2008/06/28/obama-mccain-economy-ent-law-cx_kw_0627whartonelection.html]Obama”>Obama Vs. McCain On The Economy)
Talking about raising taxes may not be the best campaign tactic, but it’s nothing if not honest.
I was struck, however, by the deficit predicted in the article under both plans. $3.6 trillion under McCain’s vs. $2.7 trillion under Obama. If we want a president who is serious about reducing the deficit, we should choose the one who will cause a smaller deficit.</p>

[HisGraceFillsMe]

<p>Stop and really think about it for a minute.</p>

<p>Inflation occurs when there is too much money floating around, so the worth of the dollar decreases.</p>

<p>If taxes increase a REASONABLE amount, people will still have enough money to live, yet not as much to spend on frivolous things that they don’t need (<em>GASP</em>). Thus, there will be less money floating around the system, and the worth of the dollar will increase. Don’t you ever wonder why things cost so much less 50 years ago? Because people didn’t spend as much. They used most of their money to go on vacation with the family once a year, and didn’t buy things during the year unless they were necessities.</p>

<p>Maybe I’m biased because my parents don’t spend what we don’t have because we don’t want to go into debt. But I would think others would say “hey, we don’t have the money for that right now, we’ll buy it later rather than pay huge interest on it and be paying for it the rest of our lives.”</p>

[ag54]

<p>

Do they think we’re idiots who will never catch on? Do they think most Americans will buy into the dog & pony show long enough for the "bait and switch

</p>

<p>Yes and Yes.</p>

[bz2010]

<p>

He doesn’t have a good grasp of the economy,

</p>

<p>Not true. He just admits that it isn’t his strongest suit. Big difference. His strategies are much more economically sound than the other guy’s. He’s even come up w/ a REAL PLAN to balance the budget by 2010, among other things. He’s already submitting strategies that we can sink out teeth into. </p>

<p>

is too old,

</p>

<p>He’s perfectly capable in mind & body, and to suggest that he isn’t JUST because of the number of years since he was born is “ageism” and just as prejudicial as racism or sexism. Can’t make generalizations based soley on “age”, esp. when he is far more active & sharp than many people far younger.</p>

<p>

is just as much a flip-flopper as Obama,

</p>

<p>McCain’s changes (on offshore drilling for example) are based on changing DATA, not political expediency. Given McCain’s lone stance on various issues, “Political Expediency” is the last thing he can be accused of. Besides, he always explains his reasoning while Obama doesn’t.</p>

<p>

and isn’t as smart as Obama.

</p>

<p>You seen their IQ tests?? Where in the world do you get that idea?</p>

<p>

He has more experience in the Senate, but doesn’t really have much more experience that is relevant to being President.

</p>

<p>Compared to Obama?? Right. :rolleyes:
And just which “relevant” experience would you prefer?

• Leadership Training at The Naval Academy?
• Navy Senate Liason?
• ** Ranking Member ** on the Armed Services Committee?
• Senate Committe on Commerce, Science and Transportation?
• Senate Committee on Indian Affairs?
• Previus ** Commanding Officer** of the largest squadron in the Navy?
• Numerous Trips to Iraq to adequately assess the situation?
• Proven correct in his strategy for Iraq, calling out Bush & Rumsfeld in the process?</p>

<p>

He’s a rich guy, with a rich wife, and comes from a privileged background with family connections.

</p>

<p>Are these * detriments] * to being president?</p>

<p>

He has a bad temper, and is vindictive.

</p>

<p>He’s a passionate guy who really *cares * about what is GOOD & RIGHT for America. “Bad temper” and “vindictive” are just conjectured opinions. Have you witnessed bad behavior? Have you been the “victim” of his “vindictiveness”? Do you know first-hand what you’re talking about? If not, then that really isn’t a mark against JM, is it?</p>

<p>

Plus (in my opinion) he’s on the wrong side of a bunch of important issues.

</p>

<p>THAT is a view that I can respect and would be happy to discuss further with you. I understand if you think women should have the option of aborting their babies, or if you think we should have higher taxes or more government bureaucracy & intervention (all of which McCain opposes). Those are real issues and valid reasons not to support a candidate - not the other stuff mentioned above.</p>

<p>

I mean, he’s an OK guy, and I don’t think he’d be nearly as bad a President as we have now,

</p>

<p>:)

but he’s not that great. After all, he lost the nomination to Bush in 2000–if Republicans back then thought the woefully inexperienced and inept Bush was a better candidate than McCain then, why should the rest of us think McCain’s better than Obama now?

</p>

<p>That would be a valid point if it were not for the underhanded & despicable strategy employed by the Bush operatives in ONE STATE ALONE. After South Carolina, the other states didn’t even get much chance to support McCain. Clearly, he should’ve been elected. From your post, it appears that you’d agree - or would you have supported Gore over McCain??</p>

[bz2010]

<p>

No, I was disagreeing with your assertion that this forum exists for the purpose of political debates.

</p>

<p>That was never my assertion. I was specifially & clearly referrring to DISCUSSION of various topics, which seems to be commonplace in the Parent Cafe, many of which are much farther removed from our children’s future than the destiny of our country.</p>

[Tyler09]

<p>John Mccain plans to balance the budget in 4 years without raising taxes…</p>

<p>Lol, political pandering at its best! </p>

<p>What’s he going to do, completely suspend healthcare and education for 4 years? </p>

<p>Even the economic stimulus checks he supported were a sham. What did America spend $600 on? Middle priced electronic devices manufactured outside the US. GREAT way to put money back into the economy.</p>

<p>And don’t even get started on the gas tax holiday. Congress, credible economists, the white house, even John Mccain acknowledge that it will do NOTHING to stop rising gas prices. It deprives the Interstate Highway trust fund of $9 billion and, if you don’t think the guy is an idiot yet, he plans to PAY FOR IT OUT OF THE FEDERAL TREASURY, ADDING TO THE UMP-TRILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT.</p>

<p>and in doing all this he will still balance the budget in 4 years without raising taxes. </p>

<p>Now we know why John Mccain finished at the bottom of his class at the naval academy while Barack graduated at the top of the Harvard Law Review. If that doesn’t make Mccain less intelligent then it means he’s just lazier. Pick your poison.</p>

[ag54]

<p>

>>Then I can reassess my support or counter their arguments. Isn’t that what this forum is about?<<</p>

<p>No. Actually, CC is about college admissions. Do you have any thoughts on that topic?

</p>

<p>And, that’s just snarky and rude. So coureur, you never post about anything other than college admissions? Should we all review your 3,000+ posts for the truth behind that?</p>

<p>Sorry bz, you’re under the sledgehammer of the liberal-left-college-counseling folks. Good luck;)</p>

<p>

No, I was disagreeing with your assertion that this forum exists for the purpose of political debates. You (and a few others) seem to use CC primarily as a political blog rather than anything to do with college

</p>

<p>Everyone has the choice to open a thread or not, if you choose to open a “political” thread, it will probably be about politics, not college counseling. It’s pretty apparent from the thread title what you’re going to find.</p>

[HisGraceFillsMe]

<p>

Sorry bz, you’re under the sledgehammer of the liberal-left-college-counseling folks. Good luck

</p>

<p>Yeah, because that’s not snarky or rude at all. ;)</p>

[bz2010]

<p>Meant to say 2013 - not 2010.</p>

<p>Here’s the plan:</p>

<p>[The</a> McCain Budget Plan](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/13/AR2008071301643_pf.html]The”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/13/AR2008071301643_pf.html)</p>

[barrons]

<p>BO also barely got into Occidental from HS. Maybe JM was a late bloomer. Classroom smarts often have little to do with running the country well–See Jimmy Carter.</p>

[bz2010]

<p>

Sorry bz, you’re under the sledgehammer of the liberal-left-college-counseling folks.

</p>

<p>Thanks ag. I can handle it, it’s very lightweight.</p>

[HiWei]

<p>

It isn’t JUST that McCain is superior, but BO (sorry if you don’t like using just his initials b/c it has a “bad connotation”, if I use BHO, then someone will accuse me of emphasizing his middle name! )

</p>

<p>bz2010, this is possibly the worst excuse/attempt-at-negativity I have ever read or heard. You use Senator Obama’s initials like you wanted a way to quickly type his name, but the fact that you used Senator McCain’s full last name just 4 words earlier would suggest you were trying for the same “bad connotation” you claim to be avoiding. By the way, Obama is actually shorter than McCain. Then you try to justify your clearly negative use of his initials by bringing up his middle name, which I guarantee nobody was thinking about before you so innocently brought it up. If you want to maintain some level of character, try using the same format for their names and bringing up negative side comments that no substantive argument should ever include. Senators McCain and Obama would be fine… McCain and Obama would be fine. JM and BO would even be fine if you were consistent; we’re not 5 years old, we know what you’re talking about.</p>

<p>Sorry response is delayed. I saw it and felt the impulsive need to say something about it.</p>

[bz2010]

<p>

Now we know why John Mccain finished at the bottom of his class at the naval academy while Barack graduated at the top of the Harvard Law Review. If that doesn’t make Mccain less intelligent then it means he’s just lazier.

</p>

<p>Oh my. that’s the best chuckle I’ve had all day. I’d like to see Obama last ONE DAY at the United States Naval Academy! Oh that’s right, there’s a drug test to get in. :o</p>

[bz2010]

<p>Dude, I had been using JM frequently & even used it right after I used BO. I try to interchange in the most comprehendable way. Sheesh.</p>

[bz2010]

<p>

I despise Cindy McCain.

</p>

<p>You * despise* her?? What has she ever done to you?</p>