From the annals of silly, and perhaps revealingly silly, arguments – an email from the Obama campaign following last night’s debate repeats a line he’s used before:
I will fight for the middle class every day, and — once again — Senator McCain didn’t mention the middle class a single time during the debate.
It’s true that Senator McCain didn’t use the words “middle class.” But let’s go to the transcript and look at what he did say:
I think you have to look at my record and you have to look at his. Then you have to look at our proposals for our economy, not $860 billion in new spending, but for the kinds of reforms that keep people in their jobs, get middle-income Americans working again, and getting our economy moving again.
+++
So let’s not raise anybody’s taxes, my friends, and make it be very clear to you I am not in favor of tax cuts for the wealthy. I am in favor of leaving the tax rates alone and reducing the tax burden on middle-income Americans by doubling your tax exemption for every child from $3,500 to $7,000.
+++
When he ran for the United States Senate from Illinois, he said he would have a middle-income tax cut. You know he came to the Senate and never once proposed legislation to do that?
That’s right: on three occasions, McCain used the term “middle income” to describe Americans whose incomes are in the middle of the spectrum. Apparently, Senator McCain doesn’t think in terms of dividing Americans by “class” or running to represent only one such class against others; he simply looks at income groupings to discuss how his plans will affect people at different income levels. He doesn’t think of himself, being a wealthy man, as being in a different class of people than everybody else. In terms of language, the difference is subtle, and for most of us the terms are interchangeable…what is telling is how indignant Senator Obama is that McCain would not think in terms of class.
I can’t believe one of these guys is actually going to win this election. Holy cow.
Yeah, I’m right there with you, Chris.
Gosh, Crank, you and the Repubs are in complete nit-pick mode because your candidate just doesn’t stack up on any of the important issues.
So, why don’t you go contemplate flag burning and prayer in school, while the rest of us worry about the small things like health coverage, the economy, and the envirmonment.
Hey, my candidate wasn’t the one who sent the email. And this is at least the second time they’ve made this point. But I know you guys get awfully touchy when your Messiah gets criticized.
OK Crank. You want to nit pick over words, it was your guy who said Obama would “negotiate” with Iran with no preconditions, when he said he would “sit down” with them. Far different things, and way more important to our national interest than someone doing to your party what they’ve been doing for decades. Suddenly, it’s not so nice, is it?
Daryl, I’m not sure I even see your point … what exactly is the difference? The relevant point is, you don’t have summit-level meetings with these guys. If your argument is that Obama will meet with them but not say anything…huh?
Except that both he & Biden said in their respective dabates that he did NOT make such a statement.
Which, as the video shows & all of us saw, are blatant lies.
*yawn*
Kind of funny how a mediocre campaign, fought on the right by a mediocre candidate and his highly overmatched running mate, keeps harping on mediocre arguments regarding items that barely register on the average voter’s radar screen, in a time of grave Economic importance.
It’s what I’ve come to expect from any national candidate, honestly – and it’s sad. However, nobody said that we have to stoop to that level. Tackle an issue, willya? Enough with the minutiae.
Did anyone notice Barry’s mangling of an English idiom when he said that McCain was trying to paint him as being “green behind the ears” (it comes from not washing there, barry, like Mommy told you to!)
That Harvard education must have left the po’ boy “wet behind the ears” and his association with Ayers has him a little “green around the gills”, but Barry wouldn’t know that seeing as they don’t use English idioms a lot in Indonesian madrassas or on Chicago!
Wow. I mean, WOW.
So we should be happy that both candidates are willing to play class warfare? Rather than arguing from coherent philosophies? Although, I suppose class warfare might result from some philosophies I wouldn’t want the candidates following. Either situation is bad.
I don’t know about you, but I felt all giddy inside when a candidate basically said that one American has a ‘right’ to the services of another American. I always thought the Constitution was overrated.
*sigh*
“…green behind the ears….”
“…the acorn doesn’t fall far from the tree…”
Once again, today, the “genius” ex-editor of the Harvard Law Review showed his ignorance of, or disdain for, correctness in citing the idioms of his adoptive homeland….you know, that homeland whose flag his bosom buddy desecrated photogenically on 9/11/2001; that homeland where paying taxes is patriotic but wearing a flag pin isn’t!
If it happens just once more, THIS comes into play…
“Once is happenstance; twice is circumstance; but three times is enemy action…” Auric Goldfinger
Minutiae? Yes! That’s where this po’ devil is hiding!
WOW is right. Coherence (or lack thereof) aside, you sure are making a strong argument for gun control and education. Oh, and the ubiquitous American flag lapel pin. Splendidly done, chap.
Would you like a list of blown idioms and verbal gaffes from the past 7+ years? The list is staggering. Why don’t you just come out and say the word you want to say in association with Obama. Come on, you know you want to.
Does this story have any shred of credibility? If so, it is not good for Obama…https://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/who_wrote_dreams_from_my_fathe_1.html
I know nothing about literary forensics (or whatever you would call this), but I’m sure there are people who could refute this. Will that be done?
I don’t know if there’s any one word I’d use in association with Obama, one word I’m dying to say. Is there a word that describes a person who has fools for followers?
If there is, then that’s the word I’m dying to use.
Is there a word that describes a person who has fools for followers?
Yes “Republican”.
It’s pretty ironic that a whole cottage industry was built around the incredible ability of GWB to jack up even the most simple and well-known turns of phrase. “Fool me once”, anybody?
I know that some of you didn’t vote for him and even more have seen the light after initially supporting his dumb ass. But to split hairs over crap like this at a time like this is utterly asinine. Most of you – whether you supported Shrub or not – would have accused a critic of being “elitist” or “out of touch with average Americans” or something like that during the 2004 election, were Dubya’s intelligence doubted as a result of his clearly challenging moments with modern English.
My stepmother has given me a wall calendar chronicling these foot-in-mouth moments so many years in a row, I’ve truly lost count.
And you guys are willing to hang out in your glass house and throw stones with all your might. Truly pathetic.
… you and the Repubs are in complete nit-pick mode because your candidate just doesn’t stack up on any of the important issues…. like health coverage, the economy, and the envirmonment.
Posted by Dorce at October 8, 2008 1:46 PM
How exactly does Senator I-Was-Against-NAFTA-Before-I-Was-For-It “stack up” on the economy, beyond asset theft, er, redistribution?
https://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2008/10/hundres-of-econ.html
You want to nit pick over words, it was your guy who said Obama would “negotiate” with Iran with no preconditions, when he said he would “sit down” with them. Far different things….
Posted by Daryl Rosenblatt at October 8, 2008 2:08 PM
How ‘far different’ is ‘sitting down with them’ or whatever, from five years of stroking it all over one old photo of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam?
*yawn*
Kind of funny how a mediocre campaign, fought on the right by a mediocre candidate and his highly overmatched running mate, keeps harping on mediocre arguments regarding items that barely register on the average voter’s radar screen, in a time of grave Economic importance.
It’s what I’ve come to expect from any national candidate, honestly – and it’s sad. However, nobody said that we have to stoop to that level. Tackle an issue, willya? Enough with the minutiae.
Posted by macsonix at October 8, 2008 5:44 PM
And yet, he trails The Uniter only within the margin of error.
By ‘time of grave economic importance’, do you mean ‘our best chance ever to tip the country Soviet’, or ‘times are so grave
we’re down to $20 scratch tickets and the ballparks are chock full, every last $80 bleacher seat’?
BTW, the link to the transcript’s no good’ seems like CNN’s taken the page down.
Lot of that going round lately.
He knows that small businesses are the core for the middle class. They keep us employed and afloat. By taxing these businesses, they’ll end up folding, and jobs will be cut. So the liberal illuminati need to re-evaluate middle class and what will affect it.