I stole this, in its entirety, from Patrick at Eternityisaday. Well worth a read.

Obama's Economic Policy: Socialist or Progressive?
I had originally planned to devote this post to the issues of abortion and Supreme Court nominations, but those issues will have to wait, because I can't let another day go by without addressing McCain's ongoing efforts to turn this election into a choice between "socialism" and "capitalism." I'll give McCain credit: the "Joe the Plumber" stunt has unleashed a tidal wave of conservative fear-mongering, particularly among demographics who still haven't moved beyond the Cold War. But McCain's efforts to portray Obama as a socialist have only solidified my belief that McCain does not have the integrity to lead our country. If Obama's tax policies were truly "socialist," then McCain would have some serious explaining to do concerning his own "socialist" tendencies over the past 8 years:



Continuing with George W. Bush's legacy, McCain's campaign seems to be guided by the belief that the average voter is persuaded more by fear than reason. Rather than rationally explaining why a proposed 3% increase on the top-5% income bracket would be a bad idea for the economy, McCain's campaign has resorted to McCarthyism by insinuating that Obama is conspiring with terrorists to become the world's next Stalin.

I would love for McCain and his supporters to explain why Obama's tax plan is any more "socialist" than Reagan's earned-income tax credit, or any different than McCain's proposed health care credit, both of which intentionally redistribute wealth by giving low-income Americans a tax credit which, in some cases, exceeds the amount of taxes paid by the recipients. I don't know whether to be more outraged by McCain's hypocrisy or terrified by his disconnection from reality.When McCain actually attempts to discuss the specifics of Obama's tax plan, he seems to focus almost exclusively on the effect Obama's plan would have on small businesses, despite the fact that Obama's plan would only affect about 10% of all small businesses, and in some cases, would even reduce some small businesses' taxes:

FactCheck.org: "McCain's Small Business Bunk"

In reality, Obama's proposed tax rates would be almost identical to the rates established during Bill Clinton's first term (a time when our economy was thriving by today's standards). Although a lot of economic growth during Clinton's presidency might be attributed to technology growth, it is difficult to argue with the fact that the country enjoyed more economic prosperity during Clinton's presidency than during any of the five Republican presidential terms since 1980. It is also difficult to argue with the fact that the superior economic growth during Clinton's presidency is consistent with the superior economic growth during all Democratic presidencies since 1947 as compared to Republican presidencies:

NY Times: "Is History Siding With Obama's Economic Plan?

As even most conservatives would concede, a robust middle class is vital to any democracy. Over the past 8 years, however, the wealthiest 5% of our nation has flourished, while the middle class has rapidly diminished. This disparity has only snowballed over the past several months. Ultimately, "trickle-down" economic policies have resulted in "trickle-up" redistribution of wealth.Anyone who has spent any significant time in a developing country will tell you: when wealth is concentrated in the hands of only a few people, the rule of law loses its relevance, citizens become alienated, and democracies die. In his magnum opus, The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith espoused a progressive tax based on the same rationale adopted by Obama (and John McCain, at least up until a few weeks ago). In Adam Smith's own words:
"The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state. The expense of government to the individuals of a great nation is like the expense of management to the joint tenants of a great estate, who are all obliged to contribute in proportion to their respective interests in the estate. In the observation or neglect of this maxim consists what is called the equality or inequality of taxation."

Unfortunately, all of the controversy surrounding the "patriotism" of Obama's tax policy obscures a larger question: which president is more capable of handling the present economic crisis and responding to the future crises that will almost undoubtedly occur in the near future? I don't expect any candidate for president to be a world-renowned economist, and I certainly don't believe that the fate of the economy rests solely on who eats breakfast in the White House, but I do expect a president to have enough discernment to surround himself with competent advisors and exhibit enough intelligence to make informed decisions based on the input he receives from those advisors. Interestingly, most economists, including most Republican economists, think Obama is more capable than McCain in this area:

The Economist: "Examining the Candidates"

I'll admit: part of the reason I don't trust McCain to surround himself with quality advisors is McCain's troubling selection of Palin for his VP. But I also believe, for the reasons explained in my "Ability vs. Experience" post, that Obama is simply smarter and more talented than McCain. I'm also satisfied by the long list of respected economists and financial experts, including America's wealthiest taxpayer, Warren Buffett, who will advise Obama on economic matters:

List of Obama's Economic Advisors/Supporters

I don't think anyone believes the economy will recover overnight, regardless of who wins the election, but one thing is certain: when I cast my vote on November 4, I won't be questioning my patriotism, and I won't be worrying about whether or not I'm voting for a "socialist." And neither will Warren Buffett.

Candidate Dance Off

Ron Paul would destroy these fools:

Click HERE.

Vote Obama just because he's black?

He is black, you know.

This is funny.  Thanks, Spencer for sending it my way. Must listen:

http://www.bpmdeejays.com/upload/hs_sal_in_Harlem_100108.mp3

Blog Pillaging

I have had a hard time articulating the reasons I am choosing to vote "blue" for the first time in my life.  My friend, Patrick (www.eternityisaday.blogspot.com) is blogging his reasons for voting Obama, and I couldn't resist the temptation to plagiarize his genius.  Here is the post, which I copied and pasted directly on to my blog.  I will continue to pillage his blog as he makes future entries.
Ability vs. Experience

I thought it might be a good idea to write down some of the reasons why I'm voting for Obama so I can start referring family members, friends, and neighbors to my blog instead of wasting several more hours engaging in debates with people I love. For my first installment, I thought I would analyze the difference between "experience" and "ability" to address the popular concern that Obama lacks McCain's experience.

First, "experience" doesn't necessarily translate into "ability." Obama was editor-in-chief of the Harvard Law Review (the first Black in the history of the school) and is on the verge of becoming the 3rd youngest president in the history of the country, despite overwhelming odds against him. McCain, on the other hand, graduated in the bottom 1% in his class at Annopolis (No. 894 out of 899 to be precise). I'm not saying that school achievements necessarily dictate a person's entire life, but when it comes to someone's ability to run a country, it certainly raises a red flag when a candidate was only 5 people away from graduating last out of a class of 899 students. Obama is winning a lot of independent and conservative votes because he appears to be smarter, more talented, and better tempered than McCain. In other words, Obama's perceived "ability" is trumping McCain's "experience" in the minds of many voters, including conservatives like George W. Bush's former Secretary of State, Colin Powell. I thought Powell'sexplanation for his support of Obama aptly described the reasons why so many people, including conservatives, have openly supported Obama's candidacy.

Second, McCain's 25 years of experience can't save him from his VP nomination. Unlike the concerns about Obama's lack of experience, the concerns about Palin actually involve her intellectual fitness. What good are McCain's 25 years of experience if he can't be trusted to select a vice president capable of surviving an interview with Katie Couric without complete embarrassment? I realize this might offend a lot of people, but be honest, do you really want a vice president that has to be shielded from the media because she can't be trusted to answer questions about her political views and her record as Alaska's governor?

Third, I think Obama is smart enough and cares enough about his historical legacy that he won't become a liberal communist like all the right-wingers in the world think. All presidents tend to move toward the center, particularly those who, unlike George W. Bush, like ideas and welcome opposing viewpoints (see, for example,Team of Rivals, a fine book about Abraham Lincoln, which analyzes how Lincoln brought together advisers who often strongly disagreed with him). McCain, on the other hand, has a legacy of taking unsafe risks (whether it be wrecking air planes in the military or nominating a vice presidential candidate that scares 75% of Americans). McCain himself touts himself as a "maverick." I would think that 25 years of experience in Congress would teach you that acting like a maverick isn't the best way to run a government and protect a country.

So, ultimately, I am willing to take a chance on someone who might turn out to be an incredible president as opposed to playing it "safe" with someone who hasn't proven to be incredible even after 25 years in office and, in some ways, someone who has proven to lack well-tempered judgment. At this critical time in our country's history, I don't think we can afford to play it safe with a self-proclaimed maverick. Instead, I think it's safer to "bet it all on Black."

Old Crow Medicine Show

I was with some friends the other night, and one of them started strumming the guitar and busted out a killer rendition of this song.  These guys are straight out of the ozarks, and I'm not sure why I enjoy them so much.  I just do.