We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

The debate between Senator John McCain and Senator Barack Obama

Both candidates supported the contemptible bailout. Indeed Senator McCain made a special point of supporting a Federal buy up of mortgages so that “people could pay at the new values and stay in their homes”. As the securities which the United States government is buying up are based on mortgages this is at least “logical” I suppose.

However, there were economic policy differences:

Senator Obama told some truly absurd lies, for example he claimed he would cut more spending than he would increase (in reality he would increase Federal government spending by close to a trillion Dollars on top of the various bailouts), and Senator Obama also repeated his lie about cutting taxes for 95% of the population – a lie because he treats welfare payments as ‘tax cuts’.

But I found the differences on health care policy most interesting.

Senator Obama denounced the very idea of buying health cover over State lines – competition is evil and would allow wicked places to attract business by having less regulation “as Delaware does with insurance and credit cards” perhaps Senator Obama should tell Senator Biden how evil the State of Delaware is.

Clearly the chance of competition being allowed to reduced health costs under a President Obama is zero.

Instead there are to be mandates and regulations. given the absurd notion that lack of regulation, rather than credit bubble finance and the government backing of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and ACORN, is the source of all of America’s problems… with fines to make small business enterprises give health cover to their employees. Senator Obama refused to say what size these fines on individuals and business enterprises would be.

22 comments to The debate between Senator John McCain and Senator Barack Obama

  • Sunfish

    The debate inspired me…to invent a drinking game.

    Every time McCain says “My friends…” take a drink.

    Every time Obama sidesteps a question in order to work Iraq into a question which was not asked…take a drink.

    I do think it fair to ask the two of them one question: As Prez, they’ll have access to sensitive information. Could they even qualify for a security clearance if they were being hired through OPM? (And when you apply for a clearance, how forthcoming you are and who you associate with is relevant. And telling some BS fairy tale about not knowing the confessed terrorist whose apartment you borrowed to kick off a state senate campaign will not endear you to your background investigator.)

    Sen. McCain: in your own words, explain McCain-Feingold in terms of what the **** you were thinking.

    Sen. Obama: in your own words, get out in front of what Tony Rezko’s going to say.

    Sen. McCain: explain your relationship with Charles Keating.

    Sen. Obama: explain how sending US troops into Pakistan with orders to capture or kill people who are there with the tacit permissing of the Pakistani gov’t, is not an invasion.

    Sen McCain: do you have any principles that you wouldn’t sacrifice in the name of bipartisanship?

    Sen Obama: do you have any principles beyond simply gathering power to yourself?

    I’m at the point I was at a month ago: the two tickets consist one one old guy who frankly should have been put to pasture, two leftist asshats who belong in prison, and a lady who’s the only one of the four who’s worth a damn.

  • John K

    Sen Obama: do you have any principles beyond simply gathering power to yourself?

    Is he actually planning to gather power for himself though? That would be bad enough, but who is behind him? Is he just an empty suit with George Soros’s hand up his backside working him?

    I’m at the point I was at a month ago: the two tickets consist one one old guy who frankly should have been put to pasture, two leftist asshats who belong in prison, and a lady who’s the only one of the four who’s worth a damn.

    Can’t argue with that.

  • Shane

    It’s annoying that nobody thought to ask you guys what to do before the bailout, since apparently all the experts in the field were overwhelmingly wrong in supporting it, and you guys have already worked out solutions to all the problems. Not just bailout-related problems, but _all_ of them.

    Any possibility of you, like, writing a letter to the US Government or something? Seems a pity to let three hundred million people bumble along so ineffectually. Oh wait though: freedom! markets! and just wait for the Utopia to roll in. I get it now.

  • Midwesterner

    Wow, Sunfish! You must have an incredible hang over plus some serious liver damage.

    And yeah, what John K said. It’s what’s behind the curtain that worries me.

    As for health care, as a chronically uninsured, I think that in a sane world, what Barack said should totally lose him the election by a landslide. What McCain proposes to do is a giant step in the right direction, namely, putting individuals and companies on almost the same terms and allowing insurance to be written across state lines.

    If things look bad enough for this campaign (they do) they should just turn Palin loose and follow her.

  • Sam Duncan

    So tell us, Shane: which experts should we listen to? The ones who supported the bailout because they stand to gain from it, or the ones who didn’t because they don’t?

  • llamas

    I’m mostly with Sunfish here. Quelle fromage . . .

    I actually think somewhat-better of McCain now than I did before.

    McCain-Feingold is still a very sore & tender spot, but neither one seems to be having any trouble getting his message out.

    I think he landed some body-blows on Obama last evening – made him look like a clueless idiot who wants to sit down and talk with Ahmedwhogivesash*t, while simultaneously talking about invading Pakistan if they don’t play nice. The healthcare exchanges were also a winning round for McCain.

    I wish McCain would really take the gloves off – at least as far as Palin does, if not more. He just doesn’t seem to be able to speak to that thread of truth that most Americans understand, namely, that government does what it does very badly. He should have the stones to say to the voters ‘Look, healthcare funding is a mess, we all know it. But who do you trust to fix it? The government – that just regulated us into a $48-sisquillion market mess? Or you? Obama wants to “solve” the funding crisis by more government control, and promises of healthcare as a ‘right’ and guaranteed insurance no-matter-what. You’re smarter than that! You know that any government entitlement program inevitably turns into a corrupt, pork-laden disaster! I know it, too! That’s why I want to return control of healthcare to you, by a tax credit that lets you decide what’s best for you and your family. Senator Obama wants to take your money and spend it as he thinks is best for you. My plan is to not take your money from you in the first place, but instead let you and your family decide and negotiate for yourselves! You don’t need Senator Obama’s help to choose what car to buy, or what school to send your kids to, or what life-insurance you should buy – why would you want him to decide for you what health insurance is right for you?’

    He just doesn’t seem to be able to do that. To paraphrase a movie version of Wyatt Earp, he’s just not a deliberate man. I don’t sense that about him. He’s just too affable – too steeped in DC, even for a Republican.

    Palin would do it – hell, she has. She’s already talked about how she and her husband had to make hard choices about healthcare for her family.

    Obama also came across as a petulant schoolgirl – always trying to get the last word, always with the ‘Iwant to respond to that, Tom . . . . ‘ and using each answer to steer the discussion back to what he wanted to talk about. But his mumbling, bumbling hesitations and empty rhetoric reflected poorly on him – very poorly. He looked quite lost, several times.

    But I wish McCain would quit with the ‘my friends . . .’. It’s irritating in a TV setting.

    llater,

    llamas

  • Rex

    The most important point you all seem to have missed is that George Bush was ruling the whole world the past 8 years. Acoording to Obama, it is the 8 years of Bush’s policies that caused this global financial mess!

    I would like to see the “statement” obama said he released in April warning about Russia-Georgia conflict! This guys is either a fricking liar or a Nostradomus or something – after the fact he claims he had warned us about everything from Russia-Georgia to the Economy.

  • There hasn’t been a whole lot written about the question posed during the debate last night about the “Obama Doctrine” vs. the “McCain Doctrine”. Both candidates had a chance to detail what their foreign policy goals were in terms of the use of military force and this was a subject where Obama exposed himself as the hypocritical windbag that he is.

    Obama made the case that the US “has a moral responsibility to use force to save innocent people from genocide”. But this apparently doesn’t count if the people who need saving are in Iraq. Saddam Hussein’s Iraq was by any standard measure a regime that was comitting genocide against its own citizens on a daily basis. But since it would impede the Obama talking point that “Bush is dumb for going in to Iraq” then it doesn’t count under the Obama Doctrine.

    I can’t believe the nerve of this guy. What’s worse is no one ever seems to call him out, or his running mate either.

    Bidens bit about the US “chasing Hezbollah out of Lebanon” was probably the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard a candidate say about foreign policy in some time yet he got a free pass as well.

    The depressing part about all of this is that the media in the US has basically given the Obama/Biden ticket a free pass to bullshit their way through the campaign and stroll unimpeded to the white house.

  • Laird

    We are so screwed, whichever of these dolts wins.

  • Titor

    Its time to FIGHT! Strike back against these media weapons of mass distortion!

    THIS IS THE VIDEO THEY DONT WANT YOU TO SEE!

  • Paul Marks

    We are now told that the 300 billion Dollars to buy up mortgages will come from the 700 billion Dollars that is pledged to buy up the securities the mortgages were mutated into – oh well at least it might win a few votes.

    Actually the British plan announced today is even more insane the American one – one third of the entire economy (not of the budget – of the entire economy) is being pledged to back of the banks.

    I was going to write an attempt at humour – as sadly normal with me it was going to be in “poor taste” and “way over the top”, but then I found that what I was planning to write (as insane ravings) was more moderate than what the major governments of the world had decided to do.

    Shane.

    If you can refute such works as de Soto’s “Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles” please do so.

    But if you can not refute such Austrian School works then please shove your establishment “experts” where the sun does not shine.

    Leaving banking (with some relief).

    On wild spending generally it is clear that it is Senator Obama who is “more of the same” in relation to President Bush.

    It is forgotten that even ignoring defence spending, President Bush has increased government spending more than any President since Richard Price Controls Nixon (of course counting the bailout he is now worse than Nixon – but I want to forget about the banks).

    And the reaction of Obama/Biden?

    “Not enough – more spending on health, education,……..” everything.

    Almost a trillion Dollars of new spending.

    About the same amount of debt as Senator Obama’s friends at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pushed (partly at the request of such Obama groups as ACORN).

    On no I have remembered the banks again.

  • Paul Marks

    We are now told that the 300 billion Dollars to buy up mortgages will come from the 700 billion Dollars that is pledged to buy up the securities the mortgages were mutated into – oh well at least it might win a few votes.

    Actually the British plan announced today is even more insane the American one – one third of the entire economy (not of the budget – of the entire economy) is being pledged to back of the banks.

    I was going to write an attempt at humour – as sadly normal with me it was going to be in “poor taste” and “way over the top”, but then I found that what I was planning to write (as insane ravings) was more moderate than what the major governments of the world had decided to do.

    Shane.

    If you can refute such works as de Soto’s “Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles” please do so.

    But if you can not refute such Austrian School works then please shove your establishment “experts” where the sun does not shine.

    Leaving banking (with some relief).

    On wild spending generally it is clear that it is Senator Obama who is “more of the same” in relation to President Bush.

    It is forgotten that even ignoring defence spending, President Bush has increased government spending more than any President since Richard Price Controls Nixon (of course counting the bailout he is now worse than Nixon – but I want to forget about the banks).

    And the reaction of Obama/Biden?

    “Not enough – more spending on health, education,……..” everything.

    Almost a trillion Dollars of new spending.

    About the same amount of debt as Senator Obama’s friends at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pushed (partly at the request of such Obama groups as ACORN).

    On no I have remembered the banks again.

  • If things look bad enough for this campaign (they do) they should just turn Palin loose and follow her.

    McCain should declare he will step down after being elected president, so that Sarah Palin can replace him.
    Seems at this point to be the only strategy that might produce some chance of stopping Obama.

  • tdh

    Soros wrote an amusing little book in which he introduced his broken concept reflexivity, by which he meant more than that people influence the market by their expectations, practically claiming that people create their own reality (at least for a time?). This led him to believe that the market is broken, and regulators are broken, therefore you need regulators to keep the market in check. In closing he went out of his way to say that only a Democrat could fix things. His arguments were rambling, and a high point occurred when he proved that he knew Hayek’s name. His son had a clue, essentially characterizing his father as using attempts at reason to justify a visceral apprehension of reality. (This reminds me of a Ben Franklin quote on what a wonderful thing reason is. Sorry, Ben.)

    I, for one, would like to know what, um, reality it is that Obama has created. Maybe McCain, too, yawn.

    Looks like last night’s format was back to that of a joint press conference, with much less interaction, let alone deep interaction, than even their first event.

  • It’s annoying that nobody thought to ask you guys what to do before the bailout, since apparently all the experts in the field were overwhelmingly wrong in supporting it, and you guys have already worked out solutions to all the problems. Not just bailout-related problems, but _all_ of them.

    Most of the experts failed to predict the crash. Experts like Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke didn’t see it coming. Watch this video for example:

    http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=eMN5POiY0Ec

    There were plenty of libertarians who understood that the global economy was on an unsustainable trend. That video shows Peter Schiff. Others include people like Jim Rogers, Ron Paul, etc. If people had listened to these guys before now, we wouldn’t be in this mess. And now that they’ve been proven right, they are still having zero influence on policy. Being ignored by the authorities and the “experts” is something that libertarians get used to.

  • Alasdair

    Rex @ 06:25 PM

    The MSM and many other keep saying that Bush and the Republicans owned White House, House, and Senate for the first 6 years … they seem to have forgotten that the GOP didn’t own the Senate during the 1st 2 years of George W’s first term …

    And they are being *very* careful trying not to remind anyone that the Democrats have owned House and Senate since the end of January, 2007 …

    Obama last night talked repeatedly about “on the failed economic policies of the last eight years” , “over the last eight years”, “if we reverse the policies of the last eight years that got us into this fix in the first place”

    He also said “And Senator McCain voted for four out of five of those George Bush budgets.” – so, gentlebeings, just what happened with the other 3 Budgets during those magical 8 years ?

    I’m really curious to see who else, if anyone, picks up on the “4 out of 5″ during the 8 years …

  • It’s annoying that nobody thought to ask you guys what to do before the bailout, since apparently all the experts in the field were overwhelmingly wrong in supporting it,

    Really??? All the experts? You don’t actually read much I am guessing.

    Any possibility of you, like, writing a letter to the US Government or something? Seems a pity to let three hundred million people bumble along so ineffectually.

    Huh? The US government is 300 million people? Even including the large political class with their snouts in the trough, that seems a rather large number of people ‘bumbling along’.

    Oh wait though: freedom! markets! and just wait for the Utopia to roll in. I get it now.

    So I guess there is no crisis of regulatory statism then? The regulated markets are just fine?

  • Space Nerd

    USA UK EU ESA UN AU ASEAN AEBIOM CECED EIB EHA EHP EWEA OCP OPEC UITP

    Crying over spilt subsidised corn-milk-substitutes totalling 8.73637373% of production.

    Where are you all at?

  • Sunfish

    Llamas,

    To paraphrase a movie version of Wyatt Earp, he’s just not a deliberate man.

    You’re too quick to bash a man.

    Seriously, though, Rachel Lucas had the same idea I did. She’s brilliant, I tells ya.

    John K asked, about Dear Leader,

    Is he actually planning to gather power for himself though?

    I wish I knew. Although I’m slowly drifting around to Paul Marks’ idea that Obama hasn’t abandoned his Marxist upbringing.

    Mid,

    Wow, Sunfish! You must have an incredible hang over plus some serious liver damage.

    I didn’t come up with the game until after the debate. But I’m taping the one next week. Unfortunately, I don’t have the disposable income to come up with the roughly nineteen gallons of Woodford Reserve that it would take to play.

    As for health care, as a chronically uninsured, I think that in a sane world, what Barack said should totally lose him the election by a landslide.

    What was that about mandatory cancer screening? (And insert the obligatory prostate exam/IRS-BATFE jokes here)

    BTW: heard on morning talk radio out of Denver: Ayres can’t be that bad for Barry to associate with, because Richard M. Daley thinks he’s all right. Yep, there’s a real ringing endorsement.

  • Your Doctor

    Space Nerd, I think you forgot to take your medicine again.

  • owinok

    “Being ignored by the authorities and the “experts” is something that libertarians get used to”. Graham

    I agree entirely with this. What it tells me is in spite of my gripes (objective or mostly subjective) with one, the other, both candidates or Palin, one must not attribute to them the ability to decimate the US and certainly the world. After all, they do not get it. Or is there a conspiracy that I do not see?

  • Paul Marks

    My guess is that supporting the bailout (on the advice of the “great and the good”) has destroyed the John McCain campaign, but the claim that he supported the wild spending of George Walker Bush over the last eight years is a lie.

    Even on defence spending, John McCain attacked and attacked over the last eight years.

    And, of course, both Senator Biden and Senator Obama have long claimed that President Bush has not spent enough (on everything).

    Biden and Obama are two of the biggest tax-and-spend people in the Senate.

    It is terrible at a time when almost 80% of the voters think government is too big, these two big government fanatics are about to be elected.

    As for the neocons who are attacking the McCain campaign – these are the same neocons (Fred Barnes and so on) that advised him to accept the bailout (the real cause of McCain’s problems in the polls).

    It is fine for Obama to support the bailout – his campaign was not built on opposing wild government spending and politically connected special interests (quite the contrary).

    But it was death for McCain to support the bailout – and it was the neocons who screamed that the sky would fall in if he did not support it.

    Note to all Republicans – keep well clear of the neocons, they are poison.