The Candidate We Still Don’t Know
So why isn’t Obama romping? The obvious answer — and both the excessively genteel Obama campaign and a too-compliant press bear responsibility for it — is that the public doesn’t know who on earth John McCain is. The most revealing poll this month by far is the Pew Research Center survey finding that 48 percent of Americans feel they’re “hearing too much” about Obama. Pew found that only 26 percent feel that way about McCain, and that nearly 4 in 10 Americans feel they hear too little about him. It’s past time for that pressing educational need to be met.
What is widely known is the skin-deep, out-of-date McCain image. As this fairy tale has it, the hero who survived the Hanoi Hilton has stood up as rebelliously in Washington as he did to his Vietnamese captors. He strenuously opposed the execution of the Iraq war; he slammed the president’s response to Katrina; he fought the “agents of intolerance” of the religious right; he crusaded against the G.O.P. House leader Tom DeLay, the criminal lobbyist Jack Abramoff and their coterie of influence-peddlers.
With the exception of McCain’s imprisonment in Vietnam, every aspect of this profile in courage is inaccurate or defunct.
While we’re at it, what did all of you think of that odd Q & A with McCain and Obama at Rick Warren’s Faith Forum? Odd because who is Warren that he gets this kind of power on national TV to make or break the candidates with a particular group of voters? And should religion play that big a role in a Presidential election?
#56, “So, you don’t like the tax hike even though it doesn’t affect you? It’s good to be concerned about your fellow man. However, there is no causal relation between higher taxes and poor economic performance, some of this nation’s greatest economic times were during high rates of taxation.”
Are you referring to periods of time when American’s didn’t face any significant external competition in the market? Sure, when most of your production and consumption occurs within a self-contained bubble, you can tax at will. But when you move more to globalized economies, your tax policies have direct effects on where things are get manufactured, where companies locate their headquarters, etc.
#61–geof==all coveted things are rationed, including healthcare today in the USA. Just a matter of who benefits more, and who benefits less. Keep licking your master’s boots and voting repuglican.
The word now coming down from the pulpits is God has said there will always be war, and Obama is going against God’s will by saying he will bring the troops home from Iraq. We need McCain so he can carry on God’s war. .. When you are dealing with ignorant superstitious people logic and reason has no place in the argument.
“The word now coming down from the pulpits is God has said there will always be war”
Call it God, Gaia, whatever you want. Conflict is inherent in human nature. We can rise above, but we can’t change what we are.
#63 – You can’t seriously say that politicians can allocate limited resources better than the market? Well, you might say that, but you’d be hard pressed to provide an actual example of such in practice.
The Cult of Obama the Messiah is at once humorous and sad. Unless you come from a Libertarian perspective, in which case you would never support Socialized medicine.
Bobbo, you act as if the level of government spending is fixed. Spending has increased every year for about 40 out of the last 41 years.
Not only that, some tax cuts actually earn more money.
#65 -Jeffie
>>Well, you might say that, but you’d be hard pressed
>>to provide an actual example of such in practice.
VA System during the Clinton Administration. I know, Dumbya’s bungling ruined it, but the VA system used to be the envy of the civilized world.
#65–Geof==of course I do say that. People like to say the Government can’t deliver mail in the wonderful way that Fed Ex does.
Well, the government gets your letter across the USA in 5 days for 42 cents while providing all kinds of free and reduced bulk mailing. The alternative is Fed Ex, overnight for whatever.
Now, some high rollers will swear Fed Ex is the best and the Gov sucks, but I say I only use the government and I find it quite acceptable.
In healthcare, all we have is the Fed Ex program, and I’m not happy.
#66–Mike==I don’t know why you think I’m assuming fixed spending. Let X equal the budget for any given year?
Certainly reduced taxes have resulted in higher revenue==hooray!! Everybody wins. But lower taxes don’t always do that, there is a “curvilinear function” that takes into account many many different variable. Advocates usually take in no more than 2 variables to make whatever assinine statements they do.
On of the chief failings in a democracy is to overspend==whether or not taxes go along with it, all for the ultimate destruction of the society. USUALLY==it is overspending on the military that does it. We all bitch about social spending but it is foreign wars that destroy empire.
“On(e) of the chief failings in a democracy is to overspend==whether or not taxes go along with it, all for the ultimate destruction of the society. USUALLY==it is overspending on the military that does it. We all bitch about social spending but it is foreign wars that destroy empire.”
Overspending is always the culprit. However, military overspending? DOD=$500B. Off budget and on budget social spending=$1.2 Trillion!! I’ll take the military any day.
Oh, and that $.42 first class mail is subsidized by the taxpayer. Postal Service hasn’t pulled it’s own weight in a long, long time.
#66 Is that amount spending with inflation and tax base factored in? Or is that a percentage of GDP?
Not a flame, just curious.
#69–geof==spending on social programs stimulates the economy much more than military spending. My statement stands.
I’ll accept your quibbling over the cost of stamps as your admission that indeed the government can provide workable services. Not those services wanted by the top 3%==but rather those service reasonably required by the rest of us.
#71 – I may not be understanding the context of your statement, but when has any society been able to spend its way into prosperity?
Social spending is and always has been a net drain on society. The people have always been better at allocating their energy and resources than government. All government is capable of doing is shifting wealth from those it doesn’t like to those it likes, determined by a privileged few. That’s Communism and has no place in a free society.
Freedom means you can succeed or fail according to your own designs. As soon as the State interferes to “correct” this natural order, you are walking away from freedom and towards Despotism.
Some may find this acceptable. I do not.
#72–geof==everything is a mix. We should be talking about the proper mix of contesting ideas/interests. Going to one far extreme or the other puts you in an idealogue’s role==not a pragmatic role that the world actually lives in.
No society can spend itself into prosperity. The context you are missing is rational thought.
#61, geofgibson
As far as health care, when all countries with government run health care are rationing the care and harming their citizens by making them wait longer than necessary for care, as well as bankrupting their health care systems, how can one say socialized medicine ‘guarantees’ care for anyone other than the privileged politicians in charge?
This is another piece of the right wing nut bullshit we have come to expect.
Which country is rationing its health care?
What is the difference in wait times between Canadian and American patients?
Of all industrialized countries, which has almost 50 million people that won’t see a physician until the last minute because they don’t have health care?
Of all industrialized nations, which has the highest percentage of people unable to get rudimentary health care without going to a hospital emergency room?
Of all industrialized nations, which spends the most per capita and receives the least in benefits?
In America, what is the leading cause of bankruptcy?
How much would America save if they went to a similar, single payer system, such as Canada’s? Remember, premiums that are now paid to private insurance companies, would end up funding the single payer system.
Also, empirically, why would everyone who can afford it come to the US for care?
Those with more money than brains. Currently, many times more Americans are fleeing to other countries for less expensive treatment than are coming to the US.
OK, bobbo, you have a budget for a given year, and you want to adjust the tax levels to meet that budget. It isn’t quite that simple, because there is a maximum amount that can be collected from taxation, so you can’t spend more than that.
For deficits versus tax cuts, you have to consider that some tax cuts can produce economic growth. So if you have a hundred billion dollar deficit,, but the tax cuts produce enough growth to give you an extra ten billion dollars a year in revenue, then you have at least paid the interest on your extra debt, and I would say that’s a good deal.
“Which country is rationing its health care?”
UK, Canada, Cuba, I could go on. You want care, you go take a number and get in line until the government decides they’ll see you because there ain’t enough to go around.
“What is the difference in wait times between Canadian and American patients?”
Huge. You need major, serious surgery in Canada and you may die waiting to be treated, or, you would cross the border to the US where you can get treatment before you die.
“Of all industrialized countries, which has almost 50 million people that won’t see a physician until the last minute because they don’t have health care?”
In the US, you can go into any emergency room, even if you have no intention of paying, and be treated. The decision to wait is entirely up to the individual. The “don’t have health care” line is a ruse used by people who think they should get professional services for free.
“Of all industrialized nations, which has the highest percentage of people unable to get rudimentary health care without going to a hospital emergency room?”
There are any number of ways to get health care without dropping into an ER for less than emergency treatment. The problem is that people want something for nothing so instead of going to a clinic or something and paying for what they use, they slide into the ER and complain while they steal professional services with no intention of paying.
“Of all industrialized nations, which spends the most per capita and receives the least in benefits?”
Where is the best treatment you can get? USA. If I have cancer, or need major treatment, I’m getting it here. Actually, I’ll also look into India since my dollar goes a lot farther there and I may be able to get the same treatment with 5 star service. It is unfair to the Indians to take advantage of the economic circumstances, but I’m looking out for myself and so many of those doctors trained here.
“In America, what is the leading cause of bankruptcy?”
Bad choices.
“How much would America save if they went to a similar, single payer system, such as Canada’s? Remember, premiums that are now paid to private insurance companies, would end up funding the single payer system.”
This would make the unfunded liability of Social Security look like pocket change, cause enormous tax increases, destroy the American economy, and result in unGodly unacceptable wait times and lack of quality of care when people used even more services when they become “free.”
“You think healthcare is expensive now? Just wait till it’s free.”
– P.J. O’Rourke
I should have said “this last century” there, but given the lack of advancement and self awareness evident in the human race, perhaps we can beat out our ancestors in that dubious honor in this one.
You’re an idiot Dvorak. Plain and simple . . .
““What is the difference in wait times between Canadian and American patients?”
Huge. You need major, serious surgery in Canada and you may die waiting to be treated, or, you would cross the border to the US where you can get treatment before you die.”
Where are you getting your facts? That has never, ever happened, even once, even while they were starting up the system a few years back. No one dies while waiting for surgery in Canada, but plenty of people die because they can’t afford surgery in the US.
““In America, what is the leading cause of bankruptcy?”
Bad choices.”
I think that says everything that needs to be said about this man. He thinks that people loosing their coverage because the insurance company doesn’t care to cover sick people, or because their job moved to Canada where the employer doesn’t have to pay for coverage, is going bankrupt because of their bad choices. Their bad choice of being born in a country full of heartless people like you, I guess.
#82
Krupps, Farben, Mercedes, VW and Bayer.
We might throw Ford and IBM in there too.
For someone so against corporations, Hitler sure had a lot of them working to empower him.
#60 “You should lobby for a constitutional amendment allowing Bill Clinton to run for a 4th (and 5th and 6th etc.) term.”
Actually, the spending was controlled by the House. The restraint didn’t happen until Newt made it an issue. Now, I do agree with the line item veto as a Constitutional amend…
#82 And I missed that you called Sweden a failure back there. That’s rich, it seems to me that the mercantilist governments of the world (there are no capitalist governments at the moment) are in the middle of a great economic collapse due to their stupid credit binge. I haven’t heard a word about that hitting Sweden or Norway, likely because of all of that messy regulation that kept people from the derivation of securities until they were worth ten times more than the collateral. You know, printing money out of thin air.
#72, geof,
… when has any society been able to spend its way into prosperity?
How about the US during the Great Depression and Canada in the early/mid ’70s for two. Then there is Bush’s two money give aways that were to stimulate the economy.
Social spending is and always has been a net drain on society.
Wrong !!! Social spending is a redistribution of wealth. That means the wealth stays here. Military spending is just throwing wealth away as there is no return.
The people have always been better at allocating their energy and resources than government.
What?? Do you have a gr. 2 education? WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT !!! We vote them into office and we can vote them out.
All government is capable of doing is shifting wealth from those it doesn’t like to those it likes, determined by a privileged few. That’s Communism and has no place in a free society.
Oopps, the old buggaboo, “Communism”. Maybe you didn’t finish gr. 2.
Freedom means you can succeed or fail according to your own designs.
Gee, and all this time I thought Freedom was just another word for nothin’ left to lose. Cause nothin’ ain’t worth nothin’ if it’s free.
Or, we can put it down that freedom is the absence of government tyranny. The right to chose where you go, what you worship, what you read, what you say, what you think, where you live, …
As soon as the State interferes to “correct” this natural order, you are walking away from freedom and towards Despotism.
Without the “State” (which is really us) making the rules, it isn’t freedom. It is anarchy. Depotism is where one person steals the government to rule as he alone sees fit. Similar to what we have seen for the past 7 ½ years.
Speaking as a Canadian. 😉
People die on both sides of the border from lack of health care. Wait times are high in Canada for major joint surgery and heart surgery. I waited about 3 months for major ankle surgery a couple of years back, I could get it next day in the US.
The US spends more on health care (% of GDP) than any other country in the world (US ~16%, CAN ~10%) and has some remarkable services. However, if you’re poor, you know the problem. Also, I think it is crippling US competitiveness since the burden has fallen to employers.
The Canadian isn’t “socialized” – in fact, most people don’t understand the term. But the management is severely strained. Changes are happening but not fast enough.
Overall, I think the biggest difference right now is that Canada can still afford it’s health care system even with the major problems it has. I don’t think the US can even afford Medicare.
#59
Actually, spending IS the crux of the issue. IMO, the government has plenty of revenue. When the government can prove it is able to balance its budget with what it has and recognize that it does not have infinite funds, then and only then will I be willing to accept that an increase its revenue via additional tax is a reasonable policy.
#60
Do not forget the Congress that actually forced Clinton to sign that balanced budget so I’m assuming you would also like to return that Republican Congress?
Geof,
Obviously you are spouting the Rush Limbaugh / O’Reilly talking points.
While some procedures in Canada do take longer, most do not. Some are even faster than American care. Ten years ago some Canadian patients were being sent to the US for cancer treatments because a right wing nut political party tried to bankrupt the health-care system in order to privatize it. They were unceremoniously tossed out.
Your point about people not paying for “professional services” is just bullshit. How often do you expect some minimum wage person to serve you? These are the people that don’t have insurance. Or the person the insurance company decided to cancel after the procedure on some bull-shit excuse. Or the person in between jobs.
Emergency Rooms are a poor substitute for health care. They don’t provide follow-up care, they won’t dispense drugs, and they only put a band-aid on you when you need surgery. Only in a true emergency will you actually be treated.
Half of Americans forced into personal bankruptcies are because of health problems when there was insurance coverage. They are called co-pays.
The point you don’t understand is that America has fallen far down the list of good health care. It is expensive, uneven, and generally poor. The system is run by the doctors for their benefit, by the insurance for their benefit, and the hospitals for their benefit.
My father lives in Canada. At 85 he had a total knee replacement. I don’t think Medicare would have done that. At 87 he had cancer surgery and chemo. The next year there was no hesitation of putting him back on chemo when the cancer was not totally cleared. Again, that would not have happened in the US. The total cost to him was $2.00 for the knee and nothing for the cancer. The $2.00 was for using the hospital room phone.
I sure hope you won’t disparage my father as some freeloader. He worked hard all his life to build a stronger country and better society. He fought against the Nazis. We owe him and others.
#89 Thanks for speaking up. That’s more or less what I’ve heard from my Canadian friends; non-essential surgery, or surgery for chronic conditions that isn’t critical, can take a long time.
I rather like the Swiss system as a positive example, because they have had more time to iron out the bugs, and their model is more charity insurance based than government insurance based. But Canada, even with the bugs, has longer lifespans and no health related bankruptcies. That is a vast improvement over our current “soak the customer and soak the taxpayers” system.
#89, QB,
I waited about 3 months for major ankle surgery a couple of years back, I could get it next day in the US.
I was injured at work. Here, workers comp is private. I had to wait three weeks for surgery on my ankle/foot. Then because of the wait I had to have several further surgeries, each took from three to five weeks from when the doctor determined it was needed to when the insurance company authorized it. Sure I could have had the surgery within a couple of days, if I paid up front.
Most of the difference in % GNP is due to doctors charging exorbitant fees, insurance companies being profit based, and hospitals being extremely inefficient. The average person receives better care in Canada.
#90, Thomas,
#60
Do not forget the Congress that actually forced Clinton to sign that balanced budget so I’m assuming you would also like to return that Republican Congress?
Wrong. Clinton refused to sign the budget until Congress made changes. I guess you forget the Government shut down? When Congress saw that Clinton had public opinion on his side, they caved.
If the 27%ers memory keeps getting shorter and shorter like this, we’re all going to have to lock ourselves in malls someday as they shuffle around saying, “Muuuuslim’s, Commmieees, Braiiiiiins!”
#94
Why do you think Clinton wouldn’t sign the budget? It was because Congress, not Clinton, had included numerous budget cuts to balance the budget that Clinton found unacceptable. Right up until Gingrich stuck his foot in his mouth, public opinion was on the side of Congress. Those balanced budgets of the 1990’s never happen without that Republican Congress.