Service is Different than Judgment

Here in Pennsylvanians, we have seen more of our neighbors, children, spouses, and relatives killed in Iraq than any other state save the much larger states of California and Texas. With that as a backdrop I find unsettling the uproar in the media over General Wesley Clark’s comments about John McCain, especially in light of comments made by McCain right here in Pennsylvania the very next day.

In an interview with a newspaper in Bucks County, PA (near Philadelphia) following a campaign stop, McCain reiterated his support for the war and said, even knowing what we know today, he would still vote to authorize war! Even knowing that Iraq had no connection to 9/11; even knowing that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction; and even knowing that five years would pass and more than 4000 lives would be lost (186 from Pennsylvania), McCain would still authorize war. No matter how honorable John McCain’s past service, this position reflects poor judgment.

It is this type of decision that General Clark was referring to when he suggested that McCain lacked the judgment needed to be President. Yes, McCain served honorably and is a hero. Watch the video yourself – Clark acknowledges this. But, past service is irrelevant if you are still willing to commit to war in Iraq knowing what we know today. We have had eight years of a president unwilling to learn from or admit past mistakes -- we don’t need another four. Barack Obama was against the war from the start and is committed to bringing our troops home. That is the kind of judgment we need back in the Whitehouse.

The video is below the fold.



-----------------------------------------
Do you agree? Please consider helping me reach my fund-raising goal by clicking on the thermometer image to the right. If you can't donate, please consider leaving a comment below to show your support.



More...

McCain, Barack, Iraq and Foreign Policy Experience

Today comes news that Barack Obama is considering a trip to Iraq after turning down an invitation from McCain to do a joint visit. John McCain believes we should stay in Iraq while Obama believes it is time to pull the troops out. He has committed to doing just this within 16-months of taking office. On that topic John McCain is quoted this week as saying:

"Obama was driven to his position by ideology and not by the facts on the ground. And he does not have the knowledge or the experience to make the judgments. Presidents have to listen and learn. Presidents have to make judgments no matter how popular or unpopular they may be."

John McCain claims he has visited Iraq several times and thus "knows what is happening on the ground". If that is the case, then why was it he had such a skewed view of the security situation in this interview last year when he suggested some neighborhoods were safe enough for Americans to walk around without maximum security?

In the interview McCain scolded Wolf Blitzer to "catch up" and for "giving the old line". Following this interview John McCain was shown to be wrong on this fact (see second video below) and insisted he didn't say what he had said. So, either McCain was not telling the truth or HE doesn't know what is happening on the ground in Iraq.





There have been other McCain Iraq and foreign policy mistakes. See below for a few examples. In the mean time, what does Barack Obama have to say about his plan for Iraq? In short, he believes we need to give the military a new mission of removing our troops, in a safe way, in 16-months. He is willing to listen to the military experts on how to do this, but he believes the president, as commander in chief, sets the mission and the military is to execute.

The commander in chief sets the mission. That's not the role of the
generals. The president's approach lately has been to say, well, I'm just taking
cues from General Petraeus. Well, the president sets the mission. The general
and our troops carry out that mission. And unfortunately we have had a bad
mission. Once I've given them a new mission, that we are going to proceed
deliberately in an orderly fashion out of Iraq, if they come to me and want to
adjust tactics, then I will certainly take their recommendations into
consideration. And I have to look at not just the situation in Iraq, but the
fact that we continue to see al Qaeda getting stronger in Afghanistan and in
Pakistan, we continue to see anti-American sentiment fanned all cross the Middle
East, and we are overstretched in a way that we do not have a strategic reserve
at this point.

For a video of this response, visit this link and forward ahead to about 5:30.

John McCain Examples:

Mistaking Sunni and Shia:


Not knowing where the power lies in Iran:



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you agree? Please consider helping me reach my fund-raising goal by clicking here or on the thermometer image to the right. If you can't donate, please consider leaving a comment below to show your support.


More...

A new kind of politics: What does that mean?

A key message of the Barack Obama campaign is "Change". This has a number of meanings in the campaign but a primary one, in my opinion, is the need to change our politics. Senator Obama often talks about the need to rise above petty politics and divisiveness and instead focus on issues and honest dialogue in search of solutions. But what does all that mean? How is Barack Obama different than the other candidates still in the race? I believe a key example is the negative attacks that are so common in old style politics.

As I was thinking about this post, another Blogger did a nice analysis that clearly demonstrates the issue. Rather than come up with my own measure, I'll refer to that analysis. The chart below graphs the number of press releases from each campaign and respective parties (Republican National Committee and Democratic National Committee) that mention other candidates. The assumption here, which seems obvious, is that a campaign only mentions the competitor when they are throwing mud.

If we focus just on stuff from candidates, you need to look at the lighter blue, the dark blue, and the bright red. These are attacks coming from Clinton, Obama, and McCain respectively. As can be clearly seen, the bars representing "from McCain" and "from Clinton" are much larger than the minuscule bars representing "from Obama."

To me, this provides a nice picture into the true commitment Obama has made to "a new kind of politics." Again, check it out for yourself. Visit the press release page for each campaign and decide which "tone" represents what you want leading our country.

Links to campaign press releases:

Obama

Clinton

McCain

-----------------------------------------
Do you agree? Please consider helping me reach my fund-raising goal by clicking here or on the thermometer image to the right. If you can't donate, please consider leaving a comment below to show your support.


More...

What topics can a president joke about?

Leader of the free world.
Most powerful person in the world.
Commander in chief.

These are all terms used to describe the president of the United States. It's an awesome position and we need to think long and hard about to whom we should give the job.

So here's an odd question: Given the position, what topics should be off limits to the president (or presidential candidate) when cracking jokes?

A few weeks ago I suggested that we should never call a kid a "little jerk." Maybe you don't agree. Maybe you view it as a harmless joke or a just response to a kid speaking out of line. OK, I stand by my original post but let's kick it up a notch.





How can the leader of the United States look another leader in the eye and be taken seriously when they openly joke about the most important responsibility of the president? Going to war should be the last option. Putting troops in harms way should be done only with great trepidation. Yet, John McCain feels that it is OK to joke about such a thing. I believe this is fine material for the late night comics but not for the future occupant of the oval office.

-----------------------------------------
Do you agree? Please consider helping me reach my fund-raising goal by clicking on the thermometer image to the right. If you can't donate, please consider leaving a comment below to show your support.

More...

Gas Tax Holiday: Further Evidence of Independent Thinking

A few weeks ago I wrote about Barack Obama's demonstration of independent thinking. In that post I suggested that his decision to forgo a flag pin on his lapel was evidence of his willingness to make decisions that might be unpopular. If you haven't read that post, have a look.

This week we have another example. Earlier in the week McCain proposed a gas tax holiday which would drop the price of gas by about 18 cents a gallon. Hillary Clinton quickly voiced her support of the plan. The best experts in the nation have looked at this and concluded it would save the average family less than $30 over the course of the summer. They also suggest it could be much less because the base price of gas could go up as a result of the reduced tax.



Think about the decision Barack Obama had to make when this came out. He could jump on the bandwagon and trumpet his support for this plan. Without further scrutiny, everyone would be happy to hear about a tax cut of any kind. Or, he could speak his belief and oppose this plan. Doing so would require an explanation to the American public about the full impact of this tax cut and the likelihood that prices could go UP as a result.

Picking the latter route, and criticizing this plan, on the heels of a difficult week caused by his former pastor, highlights Obama's commitment to making the decisions that are right for Americans rather than those decisions that are right just for himself. It showed his belief that, when presented with unvarnished facts, Americans can understand nuanced political decisions.

Hillary Clinton faced the same decision. She has advisors who have admitted the shortcomings of this plan. Yet, being the calculator she is, she chose the easy option. She chose the option that would be popular at first glance if not best for America.

If Barack Obama was an ordinary politician he would have taken the safe route too. He didn't and this is further evidence of his independent thinking that will help move our country forward.

-----------------------------------------
Do you agree? Please consider helping me reach my fund-raising goal by clicking here or on the thermometer image to the right. If you can't donate, please consider leaving a comment below to show your support.

More...

The Gas Holiday? Another silly idea!

It sounds like a great plan. With the high cost of gas, let's roll back the federal gas tax for everyone over the summer to give drivers a break during the busiest travel season. McCain first proposed this plan and suggests that "Hard-working American families are suffering from higher gasoline prices. John McCain calls on Congress to suspend the 18.4 cent federal gas tax and 24.4 cent diesel tax from Memorial Day to Labor Day." After Obama came out against the plan, Hillary Clinton NOW supports it.

This is another example of silly election year politics. On the surface, it (maybe) seems like a reasonable way to give Americans a break. But, with some scrutiny, I believe it is a failed plan.


First, lets look at the math. The rollback in the tax will last about 14 weeks. In 2001 the average American traveled about 14,500 miles a year in a vehicle. Lets bump that to 20,000 for increases since then and to make the math easier. The average new car in the US gets about 25 miles to the gallon. I think we can all agree that the folks most likely to benefit from a reduction in the gas tax may drive older cars that get less mileage. Then again, those driving Hummer's help drag down the overall average. But, just to be conservative and to again used round numbers, let's assume the average car gets 20 miles per gallon.

If we work out the numbers this amounts to about 1000 gallons of gas per year. Now, if we multiply that by the federal tax, the average American would save $184. Ah, but wait. This program would only run for 14 weeks, not an entire year. That means the average savings to the typical American would be just about $50 over the summer.

All of this, of course, is based on same pretty conservative assumptions. I would argue that those needing help the most because of increased costs (food is up as well you know) are really feeling it in the supermarket. On top of that, many of the most needy don't have cars (thus get no help with this plan), only drive for work (thus far under the typical average miles driven), may rely mostly on public transportation (again, get no help), or can find other ways to reduce fuel related costs (like car pooling).

But there's an even bigger problem with this tax rollback. It is a tax holiday for ALL Americans regardless of income, regardless of the purpose of a trip, and regardless if you are driving a Hummer H2 when you could probably get by with something more efficient. Why should someone who drives and can afford a Hummer get the same break as the average Joe who is just trying to get by?

On top of that, reducing the cost of gas will likely increase demand. Increasing demand will likely tighten supply. Tightening the supply will cause the price to increase somewhat thus taking back some of the $50 in tax benefits and giving them to big oil.

Finally, doing this also will cost the US treasury about $10billion dollars in money that is badly needed to maintain our highway system (remember that bridge that collapsed?).

Americans are suffering due to high costs. But, a 14-week band-aid that will save, at best, a typical American about $50 is not the way to fix this problem. The way to fix this problem is to address the root cause: we have to increase minimum efficiency for automobiles, we have to find alternative sources, we have to find ways to stabilize the regions where oil comes from, and we have to find ways to strengthen the dollar (because oil is priced world wide in dollars and the dollar has lost a great deal of value in recent months).

Now, if we want to help out Americans that are hurting, let's focus a plan on them. How about a tax credit for the those with the lowest incomes? Obama has proposed such a plan. How about a rebate on the gas tax for the first 500 gallons you buy each year rather than every single gallon? Or maybe a tax credit for gas for those under a certain income level?

There's hundreds of ways to address this issue, but a blanket rebate for every gallon of gas sold is the wrong way to go. It is nothing more than pandering for votes while ignoring the real issues. Once again Obama shows that he is the only candidate willing to speak the truth to voters rather than pander for votes!
--------------------------------
Do you agree? Please consider helping me reach my fund-raising goal by clicking here or on the thermometer image to the right. More...

Obama the most liberal senator? Not so fast!

It seems the latest talking point is that "Obama is the most liberal member of the US Senate." But, what do the facts say? Well, one place to look is in a compilation of data from the good folks over at Electoral-Vote.com. I like this site because it is a 100% data driven and non-spin site.

They did two sets of analysis. In the first one, they compiled rankings on each senator by liberal interest groups (e.g. ACLU ADA, NARAL, etc). They then took the average rating for each senator and compiled an overall ranking list. Where does Obama rank? Right smack in the middle just two spots away from a centrist like as Joe Lieberman. And where is John McCain? He's fifth from the bottom and about as far from the center as you can get! See for yourself.



Ah, but you suggest this is just some manufactured list made up by a bunch of liberals? OK, well then look at the second list compiled by Electoral-Vote.com. This one is a compilation of rankings by conservative interest groups (like Traditional Value Coalition and Family Research Council). In this list, McCain is in the lower third of the republicans while Obama in in the top third or so of Democrats again just two spots from Lieberman.

So, Obama is the most liberal senator? I don't think so.

This is the silliness that has to stop in US politics. When a campaign rep does an interview and lies, the reporter has an obligation to his or her profession to call the lie into question. But, that rarely happens. The lesson? Don't take these claims at face value. Do your research and make your own decision.

More...

Experience

I was listening to the news earlier and heard a lot of talk about Hillary Clinton's experience. I began to wonder, what experience, exactly, does she have? Two-and-a-half terms as a senator. The rest of her experience comes as the spouse of the former president and a former governor.

What about Obama? He served in the state house of Illinois for 8-years and has spent two in the US Senate. I don't see much of a difference here. If anything, at least Obama was the person elected in the cases of his "experience". But lets look beyond that.

Obama comes from a tough upbringing, having been raised by a single mom. He knows what it is like to be raised in an environment were money was scarce, health care was an issue, and advantages few. Despite this difficult upbringing, he worked his way to Columbia and then Harvard Law School. He has worked with the poor in Chicago and served on the boards of non-profits. He has lived internationally thus bringing a unique perspective to our international relations, something we sorely need today and, most important, he brings an optimism that things can change in Washington.

If you think Barack Obama lacks experience, I urge you to reconsider what you define as experience.
--------------------------------
Do you agree? Please consider helping me reach my fund-raising goal by clicking here or on the thermometer image to the right.
More...

35,000 in Philly and Why Change Can Happen

For those who think we need the more political savvy candidate in Washington, or those who think the one with more Washington experience is the better candidate, have a look at these videos.

First, Barack spoke in Philadelphia, at the location of our nations founding and talked about how those patriots, against the longest odds, forced change by taking on the mighty British empire. Think about it...if there were political pundits around at the time, what would they have said? They would have said "they will never succeed" or "you can't change England" while today people say "Washington won't change" and "you've got to know how to play the game." Well, I don't think so and that crows of 35,0000+ in Philly seems to agree! Obama's basic argument is that the poeple must stand up and demand that their government take notice of the people. This is what this election as all about. Have a look at the videos below, keep an open mind, and decide for yourself.



And, if you agree, please consider helping me reach my fund-raising goal by clicking here or on the thermometer image to the right.





For a shorter version, have a look at Obama's speech the next day:



More...

Endorsement from Robert Reich

Here in Pennsylvania we are gearing up for the primary on Tuesday. With Democrats still debating who should be the candidate, you have to take notice when a former Clinton administration official comes out in support of Barack Obama. However, I believe the words he used to explain his choice really underscore why Barack Obama is the best candidate. Below are some excerpts along with the link to the full posting.

The formal act of endorsing a candidate is generally (and properly)limited to editorial pages and elected officials whose constituents might be influenced by their choice. The rest of us shouldn't assume anyone cares. My avoidance of offering a formal endorsement until now has also been affected by the pull of old friendships and my reluctance as a teacher and commentator to be openly partisan. But my conscience won't let me be silent any longer.
...
Although Hillary Clinton has offered solid and sensible policy proposals, Obama's strike me as even more so.
...
He also presents the best chance of creating a new politics in which citizens become active participants rather than cynical spectators. He has energized many who had given up on politics. He has engaged young people to an extent not seen in decades.

You can read the full post here.

-----------------------------------------
Are you on board? Please consider helping me reach my fund-raising goal by clicking here or on the thermometer image to the right.

More...