The not-quite-in-the-grave-yet Robert Novak does his part today to try and deflect the onrushing Obamanation express by picking up one of the avalanche of golden opportunities that John McCain is ignoring: How would Barack Obama pay for the $800 billio…

Oh no no, you’ll still make enough to pay your taxes.

So you’re not really working for “free”, in that you are going to fulfill your debt to the Democrat Party.

If you’re lucky, they’ll occasionally parcel out a bowl of gruel and give you a shelter you can huddle in, while being harranged by Red Guard re-education specialists.

Brave New World, brought to you by the absolutely worthless, corrupt, traitorous and incomptetent, Democrat Party.

NoDonkey on October 2, 2008 at 10:54 AM

we rally in Texas…

Vote Communist!
Vote Obama 08′!

The coffers of HOPE offer a neverending source of revenue.

America needs to close the loopholes in HOPE!! CHANGE is leaking out of the HOPE loopholes and spilling on to rich, hopeless people.

29Victor on October 2, 2008 at 1:56 PM

With amnesty and increased welfare here, the government wants to grow the deadhead sheeple into a majority so they can take over the US first, and then the world.

Thinking people just get in the way.

Novak: Ask Obama to define “loophole”

Robert Novak makes a mockery of his retirement — thankfully — with an observation
about Barack Obama and his populist rhetoric on tax policy. When John
McCain pressed Obama to explain how he…..

America needs to close the loopholes in HOPE!! CHANGE is leaking out of the HOPE loopholes and spilling on to rich, hopeless people.

The easiest way for McCain to score points is simply to press Obama to backup some of his statements with specific details. The worst questions to ask Obama are “What do you plan to do about X?” because he’s got a laundry list of things he wants to do and knows it like the back of his hand. What McCain needs to do is dig a little deeper and challenge Obama on the assumptions that form the basis of Obama’s policy prescriptions. If McCain can successfully attack the foundation, then he can spend less time comparing what he and Obama will do, which is likely a losing proposition, since Obama’s programs just come across as sounding more “kind” and “fair” to anyone who doesn’t give them much thought.

As Novak points out, ask questions like, “Can you explain which loopholes you would close?” or “Explain how the deregulation passed in 1999 and signed off on by Schumer, Biden and signed by President Clinton cause the financial crisis?” All McCain needs to do is ask for specific details and I think we’d see a very different Obama on stage. The media is not asking (and probably won’t before the election) him these questions so it’s up to McCain to do it in the debates.

McCain needs a new phrase. I’ve gotten tired of “my friends”. I think the new phrase for McCain to over-use should be “Senator Obama, can you explain specifically…”.

justincase on October 2, 2008 at 11:10 AM

I agree 100%. We should never have gotten to this point. I suppose that becuase Obama is a Senator already people think this process has been completed. I have followed the birth certificate thing, and it is entertaining. I really don’t see why Obama did not just kill that rumor with the truth at the beginning instead of letting it get this far- unless he has something to hide. I don’t know what that would be though.

I did read most all of the filings avaliable in the Berg v. Obama case, and Mr. Berg’s case does not really stand upon the fact or fiction of the birth certificate itself, but upon the law about people becoming citizens of other countries and what that does to their US citizen status. Berg makes a darn good argument in his filing about Obama’s move to Indonesia and the trip to Pakistan, and the effect that has, and I have to agree that at this point his request for discovery is reasonable. Obama should be forced to provide the documents requested. As for Mr. Berg’s standing to file this complaint, that part is airtight in my opinion. Read his support for his standing and see if you disagree…

Considering that this is a lawyer who would be in big trouble for falsifying the legal facts, I would think this HAS to be investigated.

If it turns out to be nothing, what is lost for having investigated? If anything that would help build confidence in our elections. But to not even investigate….how are we supposed to know that due process is being used in the nominating procedure?

If a citizen doesn’t have standing to find out whether elections officers registering candidates for nomination are following the Constituton, then how is ANYTHING in government accountable to its citizens?

Wonder how soon it will be decided if an investigation will be launched.

NoDonkey on October 2, 2008 at 10:54 AM

Don’t forget the 6 month wait for shoddy “universal” “free” health care.

Damn, sounds like I’ll be working for free.

Oh no no, you’ll still make enough to pay your taxes.

So you’re not really working for “free”, in that you are going to fulfill your debt to the Democrat Party.

If you’re lucky, they’ll occasionally parcel out a bowl of gruel and give you a shelter you can huddle in, while being harranged by Red Guard re-education specialists.

Brave New World, brought to you by the absolutely worthless, corrupt, traitorous and incomptetent, Democrat Party.

An interesting example of insufficient greed. Clearly problematic.

Count to 10 on October 2, 2008 at 10:45 AM

Biden would call her very “patriotic”. I think she’s deranged.

***

And what really gets me is that they’re passing it off as “closing loopholes on corporations” to make it sound like only big “evil” companies like Exxon will be affected.

And then all these Obama surrogates and pudits keep saying I’m going to get a tax cut, when I know I’m very likely to get a big increase. If one more person tries tell me I’m going to get a tax cut under the Democrats, I’m liable to start throwing punches.

forest on October 2, 2008 at 10:28 AM

I agree completely. One huge big lie is the “tax cut for big oil.” In truth, it’s an across-the-board reduction in the top tax rate for all large corporations. Period. But McCain’s campaign is not making the point that reducing that top rate from 35% to 25% will keep large companies from sending operations overseas. What does Obama expect that corporations will do with the extra 10%? Pay more in salaries (which generates tax revenue), increase benefits (maybe), increase domestic investment, employ more people, increase dividends (which generates tax revenue). Corporations will do something productive with it, not use it to finance poverty merchants.

McCain’s campaign is either sleepwalking or on life support. It’s in a horrible position of having to look to Palin to try to resurrect the campaign. But she doesn’t have ER paddles big enough to revive McCain. He’s doing horribly in swing-states, and he shows no signs of an improved message.