Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Who Won in the Last Debate?

I fell asleep for about the first half hour of the debate, in which I hear McCain shined. The sound bites I'm hearing is that McCain won the first half hour but then didn't distinguish himself as much in the last hour.

What did you think?

By the way, this old Batman episode is getting a lot of travel tonight. Ha!

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

How could I not say that Obama won when McCain looked like a wind up doll which irritated me every time it said anything and even rolled it's eyes. This campaign has run it's distance surely. Roll on election day!

Keith Drury said...

I love this "Joe the plumber" guy who supposedly an average middle class guy just trying to make ends meet..... who earns more than a quarter million dollars a year...

Ken Schenck said...

People kept telling me I was way below average. I just didn't want to believe them.

It's hard starting out as a college professor getting less than 20% the wage of your "average American"...

:-)

What scared me is when NBC said he already had his own Wikipedia page. Turns out he's just mentioned in a Wikipedia page :-)

Mr. Guthrie said...

Joe the plummer does not make a quarter of a million dollars; he wants to purchase a plumbing business that already makes that much. A small business that made only $250,000 a year could not even pay for employee wages and health benefits. I heard one businessman on the radio state that each employee in his small business costs the business around $50,000 in wages and health benefits. To run a small business takes more money than many people think.

Ken Schenck said...

I think the only way the tax would apply to this Joe guy is if he were the sole proprietor of the business. If he has others working for him, even a secretary, then Obama's tax wouldn't apply to him, as I understand it. Further, the old health care thing wouldn't apply to him either.

Of course, if that's the case, then I don't know why Obama didn't say that...

Anonymous said...

I can't believe you guys really think that Obama is going to lower taxes for anyone. He is a Democrat, they do not lower taxes. I assure you, if he is elected president with a Democrat congress, he will raise taxes. Remember you heard it here first. I thought you guys were smarter than that!

Mr. Guthrie said...

Dr. Schenck, am I to understand that Obama's tax on those who make more than $250,000 only applies to those who are the sole proprieters of busnesses? If that is the case, how would he raise the revenue Obama thinks is necessary to run the government?

Mr. Guthrie said...

I just ran into a story on the Internet on Joe the Plumber. The story described part of the conversion he had with Obama when they met at an Obama campaign rally. Joe told when he wanted to buy a plumbing business that makes between $270,000-$280,000 a year and asked if he would have to pay icreased taxes under Obama's plan. Obama said yes, anyone making over $250,000 would see their marginal rate increase from 36-39%, what people were paying before the Bush tax cuts. The link to the story: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/10/16/tax_questions_in_hand_ohioan_becomes_campaigns_everyman

Angie Van De Merwe said...

How can anyone think that the redistribution of wealth by a beaucrat running a beauracracy (hear political pay-backs, and just as many good ole boy networks as are in big business now) would be any more fair than the free market...The difference would be in WHO gets to make the money, people who work, invest and innovate, or people who run government at tax-payers expense and pad their pockets to do so...
Have any of you worked for the government?

Anonymous said...

McCain is proposing that the government borrow hundreds of billions of dollars for tax cuts. Wealthy people would benefit more, both in terms of gross numbers and proportionally. That is also redistribution of wealth.

As for our plumber friend, Ken you are right that the proposed Obama tax plan would increase Joe's taxes ONLY IF his income is over $250,000 a year. Remember that the important figure is Joe's net income, not revenue or the total payroll of the business. Income. And even then, assuming that Joe's net income is $280,000, then his additional income tax is less than $1000. (That's 3% higher tax rate on $30,000 above the threshold.) We can argue whether or not the plan is fair, but wouldn't you expect that anyone making more than a quarter of a million bucks a year should be able to find another grand?

Anonymous said...

Jose..that is if Obama does what he says, which I guarentee he will not. He and the Democratic congress will pass the largest tax increase in history, let the Bush tax cuts expire and tell us it is our patriotic duty. Tell me, do you know any nation that has taxed it's way to prosperity? Can you name one?

Ken Schenck said...

You're right, Craig, that an awful lot of this comes down to trust. I would not entertain voting for Obama if he were saying the kinds of things that Michael Dukakis or Walter Mondale said when they were running for president. Obama sounds moderate, like middle ground between the parties, and that's why so many evangelicals and middle of the roaders like me are considering him.

Whether they are being genuine or not, McCain's camp's most effective campaign tactic is to question whether or not Obama really will do the things he is saying he will do.

Anonymous said...

Ken..you are not considering his core philosophy. What is known about him is that his background indicates that he is philosophically a socialist. His skimpy voting record in the US Senate is far to the left. He has done a great job hiding these facts from the general public and or course the MSM is not going to expose it. Guys like you have been conned. You will see when he is elected, he is not moderate in any way. Remember you heard it here first.

Anonymous said...

I'll have to ask again, when did it become disreputable or unpatriotic to pay one's bills? Honestly! Some folks think the answer to everything is to cut taxes, period, end of argument. Taken to its logical extreme we should eliminate all taxes completely and run the government entirely by deficit spending. So are they completely nuts, or do they have a slightly more realistic position which involves some level of taxation? In which case the questions becomes, what level of taxation, structured in what way, and what government programs do you suggest that we eliminate? It's foolish to chant "tax cuts, tax cuts!" without offering a serious solution. Anyone can be a critic, but being a real problem solver takes work and sometimes a little courage.

The founders who established our republic thought that government had a noble purpose and they were willing to make sacrifices for it. They were true patriots. It's offensive to denigrate their work with selfish nonsense about receiving the benefits of government without fair payment in return.

Anonymous said...

Hey Jose...I have no problem with paying a reasonable amount of taxes and trust me pal I have paid more than you can imagine. The basic issue that many like me have is the REDISTRIBUTION of wealth. If you are on the receiving end I am sure that sounds great, but when you penalize success and productivity with confiscation of a large portion of the wealth someone produces, you take away incentive to produce. Oh, that is unchristian you say, sure, this is an unchristian world. I think Christians sould tithe, few do and do not give God his share of their wealth. So gladly work for the masses and smile when each according to their ability has their hard earned cash redistributed to each according their need simply will not work until Jesus comes and establishes a new heaven and new earth. Show me a successful socialist paradise Jose?

This is what Obama is all about. Do you never consider that maybe government spending should be decreased? When did the role of government become taking care of people from the womb to the tomb? I think that was Karl Marx's idea, not the founding fathers of our nation.