These three issues are so interrelated that they must be tackled at the same time. Unintended consequences of taking them one at a time will yield the others more problematic.

Pat in NC

Talk about unintended consequences. The Federal government has been using the social security trust fund money since the 1960′s. President Johnson started taking it to pay for his “Great Society” and the Vietman war. It has been a truly bi-partisan effort ever since with each President and congress dipping in. You, would trust the Feds to “solve” the social security issue. They created it in the first place.

Almost all nations that offer socialized health care are being bankrupted by the high costs. Not to mention the quality of that socialized health care may be less than needed. Do you seriously believe that a $5000 tax credit or direct government payments will be of any help when health insurance for a family costs upwards of $1200-$1500 a month? Wait until you see the size of the new Govement agency to “oversee” that. Does anyone believe that ANY corporation will contine to offer any healthcare benefits once the goverment offers healthcare or subsidizes it with tax credits? Not very likely. Government intervention other than overseeing and controlling corruption in the existing health care system will destroy our existing healthcare system.

The economy is a great example of the lack of “Government Oversight”. You see how well that is working. Truly another bi-partisan effort over many decades has resulted in this worldwide calamity. Please note that financial systems all over the world including here are being socialized to “fix” them. This is happening under the Republicans in the US now but it will accelerate if the Democrats have any say in it.

Truth is the financial implications of government actions have been ignored for almost 50 years by our politicians. Problems they helped create are now coming together on Social Security, Healthcare, and finally the economy. You see the result. This is the result of government meddling in all three areas over the last 50 years.

We already face the “unintended consequences” as you point out. (At least we hope they were unintended.) The solution is clear. Make the governemt return the money to social security that they squandered. It is Trillions of dollars. Get them out of the healthcare business except for oversight. Re-regulate the economy like it was before. Then punish the crooks on wall street and in government who fell asleep at the wheel. Finally, let the econonic engine fix itself under oversight but without goverment forcing low credit standards on it. There is no free ride.

“What don’t you know and how would you learn it?”

What the hell kind of question is THAT? Was the person who wrote it some kind of HR genius? Why didn’t they just ask “Where do you see yourself in 5 years?” It would have been just as relevant.

What a joke.

kanda
There is no way the US can afford to tackle the Economy, Healthcare, and Entitlements at the same time

These three issues are so interrelated that they must be tackled at the same time. Unintended consequences of taking them one at a time will yield the others more problematic.
Three groups can study, come up with potential actions and then the three groups meet to determine how one acttion affects the others. The president and congress could establish bipartisan work groups for each issue. Preliminary reports given to president/congress and citizens to invite suggestions/critiques and eventually two members of the work groups could meet to develop a harmonious strategy/bills to be presented to Senate and House with sufficient time for citizens to again weigh in on the issues. The groups may have congressional leaders and citizens with expertise in the various issues.

To think that the president alone, or congress alone has the expertise in all areas is unrealistic. Let the executive and legislative branches continue with their daily business while these groups work to finally help solve the problems facing us. This could be done with other issues as well.

I think Brokaw did a really good job at being fair and unbiased. The questions were boring, that’s all.

apacalyps on October 8, 2008 at 1:02 PM

Hmm. Just reminded myself that questions more suited to one candidate instead of the other is bias incognito.

Here I think Rush Limbaugh can help. I believe him to be an avid HA reader, and with his phone lines so tied up, this is often an alternative.

JiangxiDad on October 8, 2008 at 10:48 AM

Did you hear him open his show today with Ed’s points about the debate?

As Joe Six-pack posting here, I think my chances of being read are better by commenting at HA than in an email, or even in a personal blog.

AP, Ed, Michelle… thanks for the voice!

Ed, hammering Obama on abortion would have done nothing to attract independents and moderates. And the Republican base isn’t enough to elect McCain.

But I did think that many of the questions were skewed to Obama’s strengths.

Meryl Yourish on October 8, 2008 at 8:13 AM

Wrong Meryl.

McCain would NOT have attacked him on abortion. He would have attacked him for being for infanticide, and Obama would have been exposed completely on that issue in front of tens of millions.

Brokaw knows that and of course does not want Obama to be accountable for that.

Americans are AGAINST infanticide overwhelmingly.

Good work, Ed! Good work, Rush!

And bias, soft and hard, is going to affect every debate until Republicans who negotiate debate terms as well as prominent conservative media figures step forward and demand a seat at the debate table.

As long as we accept the premise that only liberal media figures are qualified to moderate debates, we are going to continue to be plagued with this problem. It’s time for Republicans and conservative media figures to step up to the plate and demand a seat for one of ours at the moderators podium. Stop complaining and start doing.

First, was his framing of questions. I am too lazy right now to look up the precise quotes, but several questions were framed to around left leaning policies and, on one or two, Tom stated something to the effect of, “The question is this, but I am going to put my own spin on it”. This often forced McCain to debate the policy that Tom offered as “indisputable”, reframe the question then respond with his own view.

One of the most glaring examples was the ‘priorities’ question, where McCain answered that all the priorities Tom mentioned not only could be managed simultaneously but must be managed simultaneously. When going to Obama, Brokaw editorialized that there were “questions” about if each could be equally and simultaneously managed (completely discrediting McCain’s answer and explanation) and set the ball for Obama. McCain had to interrupt later and restate the he firmly believed that all 3 areas could be addressed and refute Tom.

Then, the next to the last question, Tom started addressing Obama as the green light still was visible over his shoulder, forcing McCain to talk over him and finish his statement. By contrast, despite overrunning his time constantly, Obama was never interrupted and Tom’s time criticism was always directed at both candidates.

At the start of the debate, it seemed like McCain was trying to keep to his allotted time until it became clear that he was getting half the blame for Obama’s overruns and Tom was doing nothing of substance to keep Obama in check(at least early on). Brokaw’s later refusal to allow Obama’s rebuttal (which he simply did anyway by ignoring the next question) seemed to be more and attempt by Brokaw to escape criticism of his bias and pathetic moderation than to actually order anything.

McCain and Obama had already addressed. Palin is pro-life with a Down Syndrome child, and Biden has every archbishop breathing down his neck.

Ifill enabled Obama-Biden to dodge an enormous bullet.

I had a sinking feeling that this was a Bob Dole performance by someone who needs to WANT the presidency more than he showed me last night. The stakes are too high to let Obama’s lies pass unchallenged. He once was a fighter pilot, I thought McCain would understand the need to get on Obama’s Six and stay there until he shoots the guy down in flames come November 4 at the polls.