-Sean Stevens
Sunday, September 7, 2008
Presidential Debate 2008: John McCain
In this YouTube video, John McCain discusses his views on taxes and what "being rich" actually means. He also speaks of privacy vs. security and the war in Iraq. However, I'm mostly going to focus on what he talked about taxes and riches because it is something I can relate to a lot better than the other two issues. McCain's argument is that in tough economic times, taxes should not be raised, that that is not the solution to the problem. He also doesn't believe that taxing the "rich" more heavily would solve the problem either. When asked to define "rich," McCain starts off by saying that some of the richest ($$$) people he's known have been some of the most unhappy people he's known, that being rich is not everything in life. He feels that "rich" is defined by a home, a good job, an education, and the ability to hand your children a better world than the one you lived in. I agree with his definition. Although having a lot of money is great, it can't buy you happiness, and in that sense, it cannot be the stat that defines you. As far as taxes go, McCain doesn't want to take money from the rich, or start a class war with wealth redistribution, that won't solve anything. Money is not the focus in life, it is simply a trade tool. Peace of mind and who you are are what's important. McCain wants everyone to be rich, and although $$$ it will probably never happen, the definition he gave for "rich" is reachable. Let's give tax credits for n-number of children and health care. Let's not classify this family as rich or that family as poor. The point is, let's keep taxes low and increase revenue, because that is what people need, what our country needs. I couldn't agree more with what John McCain wants to do regarding this subject and I believe that he has all the experience to be our next President.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
33 comments:
not gonna lie, i thought the point of this site was to create section UNITY, not drive us apart. in my experience creating rifts is all politics is good for.
but if it suits you, flame away!
Well the blog is open for any discussion really, so if Sean wants to express his political views, I guess that's fine by me. I support McCain myself, so I've got no qualms about this.
On a side note, I think it's interesting that both parties are forcing the U.S. to go against convention... a black candidate for the Democratic Party, and a female V.P. candidate for the Republican party.
Lord forbid Sean have his own political views...I personally don't support McCain (though it's cool someone from my state is in the race), but if Sean wants to let everyone know how he feels about it, why shouldn't he? We're all reasonable and mature people (kinda), we should be able to respect that we don't always agree on shit. Shape up Chrissy. Worst 10 ever. :-)
yeesh, pretty rough Glenn...
At first I thought we were going to discuss presidential candidates but I guess this is the post for discussing the discussion of presidential candidates...?
My opinion: I vote individuality cause it leads to closer friendships and fun conversations follow suit. Attack politics, not the person who posts it. Unless the person who posts it is politics them self then by all means attack. OH, people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones... unless if you're trapped in a glass house then by all means throw the stone. Dimitri Martin stand up, go watch it.
In Conclusion: I guess Sean 3, Chrissy 1, and 1 vote green party so far on the whole. Oh Ralph-a-Nater... you silly man.
hehehe i love poking hornets nests :)
glen, you shut the hell up and guide right :P
you all shouldve gone to see lewis black tonight, hes great because hes neither democrat nor republican, so he makes fun of them both hahaha
i personally think that the republicans are morons for putting up someone whose plan is "do the same thing as g.w."
at this point i have less to bitch about obama than mccain, but i dont support either one. one major problem with politics today is its usually a choice between the lesser of two evils, and if you deny that they you are a blind fool.
its funny how i used to think republicans and democrats were or are very different from each other. they really have the same policies, just different methods to reach them.
which is why politics, particularly american politics, fails.
colin, i think that was the most intelligent thing ive EVER heard you say. i mean... i disagree with it, but its still the most intelligent thing youve ever said.
i just really want to see some educational reform, this NCLB plan sucks
So to actually respond to the first post, we (people who don't have money dripping out from our ears) are supposed to feel bad for the rich people? Feel so bad that we grant them huge tax breaks? Ahem? What?
First of all, rich people deserve to be taxed much harsher than us. Not because they're bastards, but because richer people take more from the government. Sure, the poor end of the spectrum is propped up with welfare, medicaid and the like, but that money is piss in the ocean compared to government funded highway and infrastructure and government contracts.
Think about Airports. Do poor people make much use of them? Do middle class people (besides the occasional holiday) make use of air travel much with the exception of business travel (for a rich person)? Do you have any idea how much money it costs to run an airport?
Secondly, I have a home, a good job (school/internship, same thing), an education, and hopefully an ability to hand my children a better future. I'm by no means rich. Not at all. If my bank account suddenly lost a couple grand, I'd be screwed. If I made 2 million dollars a year, and I suddenly lost $700k, I'd probably think 'darn' and go back to driving my Porsche. Money is VERY IMPORTANT for happiness, especially when you don't have a whole lot of it.
Finally, we can't keep lowering taxes. Our government keeps spending ridiculous amounts of money that it doesn't have. Unless you propose we immediately leave Iraq, Afghanistan, close down schools, and stop fixing roads, I just don't see how giving more tax breaks to everyone will work. Eventually we'll have to answer for the debt our government has created (and continues to create) and we can't do that by cutting taxes even more. It'll be really fun when China decides to take Taiwan and we can't do anything about it because we owe China half our country. SOMEONE has to pay up, and I'd rather it be the "rich" people running the country who are largely responsible for this mess in the first place.
Whew, that was fun. And I think I even got through without a swear or petty insult!
although i agree with those statements, they are unrealistic. by the nature of our capitalistic society we will never manage to convince the rich to give up some of their money. the real solution to a lot of problems in this country is "cut profits" or take more from the rich, but i doubt it will happen without a serious change in thought. capitalism may have gotten us to where we are today, but in order to improve upon our society we need to stop thinking money = good.
Firstly, I agree overall that the blog is for the general posting of whats on your mind.
Secondly, I agree with expression of political views so long as 'politics' are being debated and not personal attack.
Thirdly, I'm neither Republican nor Democrat. I agree with Socialism and the idea of 'social democracy'.
Lastly, I miss you all. :(
But Chrissy, we do have a choice. Last I checked, America was something that resembled a democracy. We can vote for our leaders. And one of our presidential candidates is for raising the taxes for the top income brackets and closing corporate loopholes.
1. i was just joking when i said that talking about politics was a bad idea... tho, it achieved the goal of stirring up conversation hahaha
2. we miss you too jersey :(
3. yes kyle we do have a "choice" however it is limited to a "lesser of 2 evils" situation. we may be able to choose who runs the country but we actually have very little choice on the issues themselves.
besides, what politicians say they will do and what they actually do tend to be 2 completely different things :)
Most interesting thing posted on the trumpet blog to date? Definitely. Good work Sean.
I gotta agree with Chrissy almost 100%. My only major complaint is that Obama represents a lot of good...will he be able to undo all the damage of our current administration? No. But he will be able to make things A LOT better. Besides, I defy anyone to find a person capable of cleaning up the shit Bush has stepped us in.
If nothing else, can we all agree that Bush leaving the White House is a very, very good thing?
Hmmm...I think I'll do a write-in: Stephen T. Colbert ;-)
By the way, ditto to what Glen says: most interesting thing by far. This is quite entertaining to read =)
i knew glen would agree with me, hes a good 9 spot :)
i thought it wouldve been hilarious if colbert ran for pres. i prolly wouldnt vote for him, but it wouldve been interesting to watch [he may play dumb on tv, but hes actually quite knowledgeable. him and john stewart are 2 of the smartest political minds of today (look up interviews theyve given outside of their shows, they usually dominate the interviewer in debates)]
anyone see that movie where robin williams runs for president? if not you should. unfortunately it focuses more on the faults of the election process rather than the race itself. it still poses interesting points about the faults of the bipartisan system and the value of an independent mind stepping up, being honest about their stances and goals, and proposing real solutions to the problems of the country rather than just throwing money away.
sorry that rant went on longer than i thought it would...
to conclude: yes i think that anyone besides g.w. is good, but i (being an idealist) will probably not be satisfied with anyone. realistically tho, if obama can hold to what he talks about, and restore hope to this country and get us started in the right direction again, i think i can be happy with that.
ps- i thought this was hilarious and had to share:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TiQCJXpbKg
yes im a bit of a dork, but comeon... wouldnt it be awesome if obama really rickrolled mccain?!
Stephen Colbert "running" was one of the best things anybody has done for politics in a long time. He totally completed his goal: to get young people involved it the election. You know what age group has the highest turnout? Old people. You know who old people usually vote for? Republicans. You know who Colbert and Stewart think are destroying America? Republicans. The two of them are, as noted by the esteemed Chrissy White, extremely smart; it's easy to glean that much without even watching off-show interviews. They know their shit. Although they probably couldn't win a presidential election, I could easily see one of the two of them winning a position somewhere in Congress. How much good could they actually do? Probably not much. The system is too corrupt at this point to be fixed by anything that we can throw at it. But hopefully Obama can at least help. All I know for sure is that McCain almost certainly will not.
whatever happened to sean and all the other mccain supporters? this is turning into an obama rally...
well i hate politics, but im voting for obama because i already know he's going to win *shrugs*
Colin, if you vote not your opinion i'll punch you. Like one or the other, can't... dislike one less than the other, can't... then don't vote
Thats all I've got to say,
Bill
my only comment, at the moment, on this blog, and about this subject goes towards Kyle's comment that money is VERY IMPORTANT for happiness. I can't agree in total... but I can say that money leads to OPTIONS and OPPORTUNITY. The more of both someone has, I believe, leads to happiness. (If you want me to explain, I will in person.)
id say that all depends on how you define happiness. ive met some pretty happy homeless people (100% serious) and they didnt have more than $5. i think we see money as a tool for progressing our society, which we assume will make us happy. the problem is that progress does not equate happiness, nor does it necessarily promote it. to be happy, one must not look at what they will have, or who they will become, but rather one must be truly satisfied with what they have, and who they are in the present tense. people dont change, someone who looks to the future now will always look to the future, and thus will never be happy.
holy crap, my English 106 blog got a heck of a lot of discussion...man. I'm really surprised, and didn't intend on any of that actually happening. Like I said in my newly posted blog, this is for my English 106 class which uses this site for publishing blogs and opinions. The only problem is that my account is set up through only PURDUE TRUMPETS, so I have no idea what I'm gonna do because I don't want to bombard you all with random blog topics that may rub someone the wrong way. On that note, I hope I didn't offend anyone with the McCain blog I wrote, I didn't count on anyone but my English teacher reading it, so my apologies if I did. See you at band tomorrow and BOILER UP!
haha, taking from the rich and giving to the poor is what? communism... which doesn't work because the guy digging the ditch gets paid the same as the engineer or doctor.
lowering taxes helps because usually it lets people spend more and then the gdp goes up, the economy does better and the government makes more earnings. The government doesn't get that much from taxes, it takes a lot more. So, if you were to raise taxes it wouldn't help really although there are times when you should raise taxes. Now isn't the time.
and i like Bush Glenn. He's not perfect but who is? Plus, would we really be better off with Al Gore????? or a rookie senator?... so guide right...
John McCain 2008
Firstly, it's Glen...only one n.
But more importantly...
You...you what Bush? I mean, I guess I can see it; he's done so much good for the country. Nobody has died needlessly over a pointless war, and look at how well the economy's doing! Best president since Lincoln? Maybe so. (Note for the slow: read the above sentences with a sarcastic tone.) Do you like how long it took him to even acknowledge that there may be something wrong with the environment, and that global warming is not only real, but a major threat? Or maybe it's the joy he takes in the death penalty (and, for the record, I'm all for the death penalty, but have you seen the Tucker Carlson interview he did? It's sickening.), or how he won't fund stem cell research, despite the overwhelming good it would do. Maybe it's the way he lets his religion dictate nearly all of his decisions, and, furthermore, how he believes he was personally appointed by God to the presidency. If nothing else, the ego it must take to believe that God (if He exists) thinks that he's good enough to lead an entire nation is astounding. Ben, I gotta tell ya man, I cannot follow any logic for any person who enjoys freedom, honesty, and the position America used to hold in the world to still support George W. Bush. Bear in mind, I supported him in the beginning; the world is certainly a better place without Saddam Hussein. But yes, we probably would have been better off with Al Gore (and I REALLY dislike Al Gore). John Kerry even would probably have been an improvement. The sad fact of the matter is, in both elections, we had to chose from the lesser of two evils...and on both occasions, we undoubtedly picked the greater.
Phew. That felt good.
Hope I didn't offend anyone, and if so, these are just my opinions, and they shouldn't piss anybody off, no matter how much you disagree. That's the glory of our country, that I can disagree wholeheartedly with all of you and not get stoned to death.
Also, I did my best not to go on a religion tangent...and frankly, the blog was practically begging me to.
Later guys, I live in Cary Southwest, room 129 if any Bush supporters feel the need to go a-lynching.
Glen Glen Glen,
We agree on-a-many issues, but Obama isn't one of the them. And I find myself feeling bad for you because I can't understand where you strayed off growing up. I'm gonna use a bible reference (yes, you read that right): Glen, you've strayed from the flock. Let's start the discussion...
I think Bush did the best with what he was given. Really, he was dealt a s**t load of bad luck in his first term with 9/11 and how to respond. What would you have done? Try to negotiate? Talk to Al-Qaeda? Tell them "you can't do that anymore."??? We had to go back into the middle east to show that we as americans aren't going to take their BS anymore. Believe me, I feel bad for the men and women who've died, their bravery is unmatched, but it HAD to be done. 9/11 was a domino effect onto the rest of Bush's presidency, and I think he did a very good job handling it. Now, you're pry saying we should've gotten out of Iraq a while ago, and in hindsight, this maybe true, but at the time it was very, very necessary to stay in order to establish that we meant what we were doing. It's not Bush's fault middle eastern countries aren't fans of the human friendly governments.
Now that was Bush, let's move to the upcoming election. I believe experience is essential when it comes to leadership because it creates presence and respect; a leader has nothing except a title if he doesn't have those two components. Obama may have won over Europe, but he is running for the President of the United States, so who gives a hoot about how much france loves Obama. His experience in our country's government is incredibly little, and by that I mean, less than 1 year in the senate. When Obama has a set speech that he's been able to practice, he sounds great. But he cannot think on the go. He has said some of the dumbest stuff when he didn't have a rehearsed answer. "Um, ameri...um, um, McCain's old...um, oh shit, taxes?"
I will have to continue later because seriously, this was only the tip of the ice berg. Glen really, do you see other countries actually respecting/fearing Obama. McCain's not even a hardcore republican, he swings somewhere in the middle, but he'll be respected. Obama doesn't even seem to truly love this country, but look at the loyalty McCain has lived out.
That's all I have to say for now, I'm hungry, so I'm off for a quick bit to eat. But until next time, peace out y'all.
Oh, Sean Sean Sean. You know I love you (in a strictly heterosexual kind of way), but I'm sorry to see that your parents lead you so astray in your upbringing.
I will agree on a few points.
1) I hate when people rip on Bush for his immediate reaction to the news of the 9/11 attacks (how he continued reading to the class he was visiting); what the fuck was he supposed to do?
2) I have no issue with our going into Iraq.
Sadly, that's where our agreements end.
How is a Bush supporter going to say ANYTHING about bumbling during a speech? Have you ever heard that guy fucking talk? And I'm not conceding that Obama bumbles, by the way; he's a great speaker, thinks on his feet extremely well, and, yes, demands respect. When has Obama ever said anything about McCain's age? You seem to have confused him with Jon Stewart. And further, it's gonna be hard for McCain to win anybody's respect when he's the oldest man ever to hold office; Obama is the face of change, of youth, and of power. Experience is NOT everything; how much experience did Washington have? Lincoln? Granted, it is a stretch to compare the two, obviously times are exceedingly different, but the point is reasonably valid nonetheless.
If for no other reason (and for the record, there are PLENTY of other reasons), I can't bring myself to vote for McCain simply because he supports continuing the campaign in Iraq. We are doing nobody any good being in the country; indeed, we haven't been since we found Hussein. Further, we were deceived as to why we even went to Iraq in the first place. Bush looked at the facts he wanted, and conveniently ignored those that very clearly said there were NEVER AND WMDS IN IRAQ.
Now, on to Bush, one of the worst leaders this country has seen.
I notice you didn't even bother trying to defend what he's done to our economy, I commend you for admitting defeat in that arena. But you also didn't give a reason to think he was a good president, you merely said that you thought he did the best he could with the pile of shit he was given. I agree that he was given a pile of shit. I do not agree he did the best that he could. Bush fucked up. And then continued to fuck up. And is currently still fucking up. Other than eliminating Saddam, he has done nothing right that I can see. If you care to be more specific with what you like about him, I'd be happy to discuss it further.
Same goes for McCain, whose policies I could, in general, not disagree with more...though he could be worse.
Now, if you prefer, we could always just settle this mano y mano...steel cage match. Bare-knuckle brawl. Fight to the death. Sounds like fun to me...maybe we could even talk to our rank leaders, make it a rank activity or something. ...and I call Tony and Pam Nave for my team.
So, to sum up...
McCain-Not all that bad, but not very good either.
Obama-Inexperienced, but ultimately, has all the makings of a great leader.
Bush-Fucking idiot.
Iraq-Quagmire that is doing nothing but wasting lives and money.
Jessica Alba-Hottest chick EVER.
Again, these are just my opinions (with the exception of Jessica being the hottest woman ever...that's verifiable fact), and I hope nobody took offense to any of them. Again, I refrained from going down the road of religion, where I would surely offend somebody, if not nearly everybody. See you guys at rehearsal tomorrow!
ben it was really a bad idea for you to try sounding smart. you should stick with what youre good at. nobody ever said anything about communism. i never said that everyone should make the same amount of money. people should get what they deserve, and what they worked for, but at some point you make more money a year then you can spend... i just ask for everyone get what they need for the necessities of life: a roof over your head, food on the table, and maybe a deck of cards for the boring nights.
i dont know enough econ to give an educated response on taxes, but i can see both sides of the argument. then again, its my perspective that the government thinks its ok to create money out of nowhere (hence the massive national debt) so why would they need taxes? if theyre just going to put everything on a giant credit card, then i see no reason why we should support their irresponsible spending. theres a reason banks wont give loans to people with bad credit. if an alcoholic bum on the street asked you for 10 bucks would you give it to him? HELL NO (unless hes buyin for the whole party...) likewise, someone needs to take control of the governments crazy spending problem.
for the record: yes i did just compare our government to an alcoholic bum. thank you, i will be signing autographs after practice tomorrow.
moving right along :)
glen may have responded sufficiently to sean's post, but i felt my opinions MUST BE HEARD! and since were on a blog, you cant stop me :P
"Really, he was dealt a s**t load of bad luck in his first term with 9/11 and how to respond. What would you have done?"
i have no idea what i would have done, but i will tell you what obama said he would do. he was asked this same question in an interview and (in summary) this was his response:
there was a time after 9/11 that this country was so united, so banded together behind the president that we would have agreed to anything. if he said that to ensure our safety, we would have to not watch TV for a whole day, it wouldve happened. and so yes, everyone was behind him when he went into afganistan, i would have done the same thing, al-qaeda was and still is a very real and serious threat. but what he failed to do was make something positive out of the situation. he took that faith and told us that the iraqis are evil and need to be usurped (Q point for a big word?). but what i would have done, was take that situation of unity and tell them the truth, that the cause for the entire struggle was due to our ties to foreign oil (dont even try to deny it, because it is indisputably true), and that if we want to stick it to these guys we need to break said ties, specifically by finding a new, cleaner source of fuel. that would have been the one time that such a statement would have made the american people say "hes right, lets stop using oil and find a cleaner fuel."
this response would have not only saved thousands of american lives but it would have shifted our focus from the destructive foreign policy of war to a productive, independent, economic BUILDING, world SAVING train of thought. now, americans will not stop their dependency on oil until a cheaper solution; such is the truth of a capitalistic society. but at this one time in history there was a chance to change that, a time when we were so united that we would have done ANYTHING george bush said, and he passed that opportunity up.
"But he cannot think on the go. He has said some of the dumbest stuff when he didn't have a rehearsed answer"
OH MY GOD are you kidding me?! one of the reasons obama is around is because he kicks the shit out of ANYONE as a public speaker. mccain on the other hand... "mumble mumble" is all i hear from him. if you watched the debate the other night you cant disagree that mccain looks scared, he just looks like hes going to wet his pants. obama on the other hand is cool, composed, intelligent.
and you didnt seriously just say that what foreign countries think about our president isnt important did you? cuz i think you just did... youre right, it doesnt matter what our allies IN WAR think about our leader, or hell even just the people we could convince to like us again... i think id actually be satisfied with just one country in this damn world liking us.
and if you want to talk about experience, perhaps we can talk about your vice presidential candidate... wow... shes a real winner! (please god note the sarcasm)
"Jessica Alba-Hottest chick EVER."
thats a bold statement. there have been some pretty hot chicks throughout history. i wont 100% agree with you on this one nuke, but i wont disagree either, i have too much respect for such an intelligent and dignified individual such as miss alba.
i think im going to start a new thread for glen to rant about religion... seems like another potentially bloody topic :)
you're right, i never said that what foreign countries think of our President isn't important. It is very important, and that was the point of my entire argument, that you can't have someone who'll be walked over. You don't make friends in government, who have people who fear you, and that's the respect I'm referring to. Why do we even have political parties, they manipulate all of politics because people look at the color jersey someone's wearing, not what they believe. Did you like Reagan?
Christopher...James(I took a guess...?) White, you've done it again. We'll have to talk about Jessica some other time, but other than that, spot on...mostly.
I do have one more quick little tidbit to throw in. The phrase "dependency on foreign oil" gets thrown around a lot today, and it conjures up the same image for your average American (and I include myself in this group, until recently): "foreign" in this case surely means the middle east; Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc. etc. The truth of the matter is most of the oil in the United States comes from two not-so-far-and-foreign countries: Mexico and Canada (eh?).
And Sean, for your part, you also said something extremely worth noting..."Why do we even have political parties, they manipulate all of politics because people look at the color jersey someone's wearing, not what they believe."
So true it pains me. As Chris Rock put it, "Wait 'til you hear the issue, then decide if you're liberal or conservative...when it comes to theft, I'm conservative. Prostitution? I'm liberal!" It's a sad fact of this country (and indeed, probably any democratic country) that the general populous is more-or-less uneducated when it comes to this sort of thing, and if they were raised in a Republican household, chances are, they'll vote Republican, without even looking at the candidate's stances on the issues (and obviously, the same goes for a Democratic home, or an Independent home, or whatever). The same sort of thing happens with religion; a child is born into a (insert religious belief system here) home, and before he's old enough to even fathom the concept of religion, his entire belief system is thrust upon him.
my point sean, is that g.w. has not been walked over, but did just the opposite, he walked on everyone. i dont want that, i would like an administration who gains respect from other countries, by giving it in the first place. theres a lot of middle ground between not giving a shit about anyone else, and getting walked on, i foresee obama in that nice fluffy middle ground.
My point, Sean (and Ben...), is that G.W. is a douche bag. And though McCain is miles ahead of that, there are too many similarities between the two for me to want Johnny Boy in office.
Post a Comment