(no subject)

[usernamenumber]

In response to my last post (an update on which I'll put up later-- short version: I'm thinking 10/11 or 10/18 weekends), a friend commented that she has several relatives who are usually democrat-leaning but are "buying every bit of the smear campaign against Obama" and could I suggest some websites for counter-arguments that aren't just McCain-bashing, or post some of my thoughts on why the common arguments don't hold water for me. Well, my ego has officially been appealed to and I've written on this below, but I thought I'd do it in a separate post so that others who are interested can make their own suggestions. Ego aside, I really only know as much as I have time to research, and I don't have that much time. =;) Feel free to correct or expand upon any of the points below, I ask only that the conversation be kept constructive and that sources be cited wherever possible.



As far as online resources are concerned, in addition to the candidates' own websites, I use factcheck.org and their related site, the FactCheck Wire a lot. They have a mailing list that sends out analyses as they are posted and they always cite their sources so you can check their facts if you're so inclined. I've been generally impressed (with the caveat that I'm an amateur and am arguably easy to impress). They also call both sides on it when they get their facts wrong, so it's far from a McCain-bashing site. But while Obama's campaign gets nailed there more often that I'd like, from my reading it seems obvious that McCain's campaign is outright smearing in a way that Obama's just isn't. To me this says a lot about, if not McCain's character personally, the character of the people he is willing to listen to in order to win this election.

lediva also recommends the Obama campaign's own anti-smear site, though I haven't personally done much reading there.

edit I also just noticed a couple of places on factcheck where they recommend other sites, specifically politifact.com and, of course, snopes.com. I haven't that much experience with either, so I'll just put the links out there for folks to look at for themselves.

Aside from that, here at least are my personal ideas about a few of the common criticisms of Obama and why they don't hold water for me:

• Obama is all talk, empty words, etc etc I'll address this first since it's a personal pet peeve of mine. I encourage anyone who believes this to first listen to his DNC speech, in which lays out the basics of his most important plans and how he intends to accomplish them in at least as much detail as McCain did in his RNC speech. Then, go to the Obama campaign's Issues page, find an issue that's important to you, click "read more" and read. At the end of the major plans, like healthcare, are links to even more in-depth documents. If you'll allow me a brief cheap-shot, that's more detail than I notice looking at the corresponding issues page on McCain's site.
  
  In short, disagree with Obama's positions if you will, but what he wants to do and how he plans to do it is all out there for everyone to see in as much detail as with any other candidate. The "all talk" thing is, in my opinion, just a baseless attack the opposition has been parroting in the hope that no one will actually check. And don't even get me started on their attempts to make being articulate and positive a liability.
  


• Obama will raise taxes Listening to the RNC speeches I was absolutely seething at how often this kept getting repeated as a rallying cry. Obama is on record with a plan to lower taxes for anyone making less that $250k/yr. To quote an independant analysis by the Urban-Brookings tax policy center (which is actually skeptical about both candidate's plans):
  
  

  
  The Obama plan would reduce taxes for low- and moderate-income families, but raise them significantly for high-bracket taxpayers... By 2012, middle-income taxpayers would see their after-tax income rise by about 5 percent... McCain would lift after-tax incomes an average of about 3 percent, or $1,400 annually, for middle-income taxpayers by 2012. But, in sharp contrast to Obama, he would cut taxes for those in the top 1% by more than $125,000, raising their after-tax income an average 9.5 percent.
  

  
  
  In short, the "Obama's going to raise your taxes!" hubub is highly dependent upon who you are. Middle-income families can actually expect to be taxed 2% less under Obama's plan than McCain's. Conversely, the ones who gain the most from McCain's tax plan are the top 1%, and that's in addition to making Bush's cuts permanent. It basically all comes down to whether or not you believe in the efficacy of "trickle down" economics, but the bottom line is that "Obama's going to tax ordinary people into oblivion!" is simply not true, at least according to each candidate's stated plans.
  


• Experience: Whether in the case of Obama or Palin, I actually think experience is a lot less important than it's being made out to be for a few reasons:
  
  1. The president of the United States, probably more than anyone else in the world, has access to the best experts and advisers around. These resources collectively provide a far greater depth and breadth of expertise than any one person could hope to have. What we need is a president who is willing to ask and listen, and who is intelligent enough to synthesize that advice into wise plans of action. For that reason, who the president is becomes of much greater importance to me than the length of his/her resume if the job is being done right. Everything I have read about Obama and everything I've heard him say and seen him do, like going from Hardvard law directly into community service, leads me to believe that he is a person of character, integrity and intelligence, which is what I think we need far more than "experience", leading me to...
  
  
  2. Consider: George W. Bush was the governor of Texas before becoming president and was a private-sector business owner before that. By most measures he was experienced and by most measures he's not exactly been a spectacular success. Hence my position that who the person is is much more important than what lesser offices they've held before.
  
  
  3. Consider: One thing that is often overlooked in the discussion of experience is the fact that Obama is a bona-fide constitutional scholar. Wouldn't it be nice to have one of those in the white house for a change?
  
  
  
  
  I would also add that I think the Republicans lost the right to criticize Obama's experience when they took Palin on as VP. As I've said, her lack of experience isn't a major issue for me, but the fact that the same Republicans who have been trashing Obama over experience from the beginning are now proclaiming that Palin is "ready from day one" only exposes their hipocrisy; another thing that would make me think twice about voting for them.
  


• Jeremiah Wright: I hope this isn't still an issue but, just in case, I'll touch on it briefly. Yes, Obama's pastor has said some pretty wacky things (for the record, so has Palin's). To me, the really telling thing in this issue was how Obama handled it. If you haven't listened to his "A More Perfect Union" speech, which he gave in response to the media furor, it is highly worth 45 minutes of your time. In my opinion, he handled it with class, intelligence and integrity, both disputing in no uncertain terms the offensive things that Rev. Wright has said and refusing to condemn him as a whole person, but rather asking "why does this man say these things?" and using it as a springboard for a very insightful speech on race in America.
  


• McCain as a viable choice for liberals and moderates John McCain has been talking a lot about his "Maverick" title, but the fact is that in order to become palatable to his own party he's had to come much more into step with the Republican party line. You mentioned that your relatives are usually democratic-leaning. I remember a time when I, too, thought to myself that if McCain ever ran for president he's about the only republican I could see myself voting for. But that was then and now's a very different time. On abortion, the Bush tax cuts, and a number of other issues, he's completely reversed his positions. I realize that The Daily Show isn't exactly Real News, but this clip is worth watching for the bit starting at 3:22 that compares some of his statements several years ago to those made more recently. McCain is obviously entitled to change his mind, but any democrat considering voting for him should be sure they're aware of what his stances are now, not just what they used to be, and that's not even touching on Sarah Palin who is even more conservative. In my opinion there would have to be something seriously wrong with Obama to make me consider siding with McCain/Palin, and I'm just not seeing it.

That's all I've got for now. I hope it helps!

Comments

You're preaching to the choir over here so I'll just say...

[slyviolet.livejournal.com]

WOO HOO SOUL CALIBER IV!

Re: You're preaching to the choir over here so I'll just say...

[usernamenumber.livejournal.com]

Custom characters ftw. =:)

Re: You're preaching to the choir over here so I'll just say...

[heiligekuh.livejournal.com]

oh! Please add HeiligekuhAC to whatever Xbox you're playing on, so I can deliver Lizardman beatdown form a distance.

Re: You're preaching to the choir over here so I'll just say...

[usernamenumber.livejournal.com]

Aw man, I'm already getting schooled locally by my housemate's Sophitia. But yes, I'll add you the next time I'm on.

[truthspeaker.livejournal.com]

"John McCain has been talking a lot about his "Maverick" title, but the fact is that in order to become palatable to his own party he's had to come much more into step with the Republican party line."

Oh, but he more or less has been a maverick in the past. It's just recently that he did a complete 180 on a lot of issues just to toe the Republican party line. He was even asked by the Democratic Party to campaign on their side (with rumors that they wanted him as a VP nominee) -- but this was well before the Hillary/Obama standoff. [But google stymies me to find it due to drowning in McCain links.] However, with the selling out that McCain has done, the whole "Maverick" thing is very ironic.

Personally, I blame not McCain, but his campaign strategist. I am sad that McCain is desperate enough to listen.