Where they each stand on each issue, and what the actual truth is on each issue. Everything in quotes is either a direct quote from the candidate, or a quote from the candidate’s web site.
Issue: Global Warming (or is it now climate change? I can’t keep up.)
Obama: “I believe it’s one of the greatest moral challenges of our generation.”
Clinton: “It will take a movement for change from the ground up.”
McCain: “…climate change and energy independence is a national security issue.”
The Truth: There has been no increase in global temperature for the last ten years. In fact there has been a slight decrease. Even the alarmists are now saying there won’t be any temperature increase for the next ten years either. But after 2018, boy, watch out! This is a giant hoax, designed to bring wealth and power to its advocates. The polar bears are not in danger. McCain is at least right about energy independence, from oil, being a national security issue.
Issue: The Gas Tax Holiday
McCain: drivers would “have a little money left over, maybe to buy a better meal, maybe to buy something for their kids.”
Obama: “a phony scheme that nobody thinks is going to work.”
Clinton: “…her proposal would save the average family $70 this summer, and she would ensure the oil companies will pay through her windfall-profits tax.”
The Truth: The oil companies have a much smaller profit margin than Microsoft or Apple. Why not take away their windfall profits? Over half of the shareholders of oil companies are pension funds and asset management firms, i.e., just folks. Why should anyone make a profit? Let’s take them all away. The average oil company makes ten cents on a gallon of gas. The federal government makes twice that. If you live in New York, each gallon costs an extra 68 cents in state and federal taxes. The oil companies will just pass through any increase in their costs as higher prices, so nobody will save anything. Obama gets a gold star on this one.
Issue: Iraq
Clinton: “Our message to the president is clear. It is time to begin ending this war — not next year, not next month — but today.”
McCain: “I do not want to keep our troops in Iraq a minute longer than necessary to secure our interests there. Our goal is an Iraq that can stand on its own as a democratic ally and a responsible force for peace in its neighborhood. Our goal is an Iraq that no longer needs American troops. And I believe we can achieve that goal, perhaps sooner than many imagine. But I do not believe that anyone should make promises as a candidate for President that they cannot keep if elected. To promise a withdrawal of our forces from Iraq, regardless of the calamitous consequences to the Iraqi people, our most vital interests, and the future of the Middle East, is the height of irresponsibility. It is a failure of leadership.”
Obama: “Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq.”
The Truth: What McCain said.
Issue: The Economy
McCain: “Cutting the corporate tax will expand the U.S. economy, creating jobs and opportunities for prosperity.”
Clinton: This is the most specific prescription for the economy that I could find from Hillary clinton: “To jumpstart our investment in alternative energy, I will establish a $50 billion Strategic Energy Fund to develop clean energy technologies like biomass and bio-fuels grown right here in Iowa to combat global warming and end our dependence on foreign oil.”
Obama: “He will use trade agreements to spread good labor and environmental standards around the world and stand firm against agreements like the Central American Free Trade Agreement that fail to live up to those important benchmarks.”
The Truth: The President has almost nothing to do with the economy. The Congress can hurt the economy, but can’t really do much to help it. The government does not create wealth. Private enterprise, especially small businesses, create wealth. The less the government does about the economy, usually the better for us all. So-called “regulation” is almost always legislation designed to shore up and protect monopolies and oligopolies, and is bought and paid for by campaign contributions from large corporations. Fortunately, we now know that Obama doesn’t really mean any of the nonsense he has said about NAFTA. That’s a relief. McCain is dead-on right about the corporate tax, which should ideally be zero. What a crock, making people believe that if we tax corporations, we are somehow not taxing people.
Issue: Health Care
Obama: “If you already have health insurance, the only thing that will change for you under this plan is the amount of money you will spend on premiums. That will be less. If you are one of the 45 million Americans who don’t have health insurance, you will have it after this plan becomes law. No one will be turned away because of a preexisting condition or illness.”
McCain: “While still having the option of employer-based coverage, every family will also have the option of receiving a direct refundable tax credit – effectively cash – of $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families to offset the cost of insurance. Families will be able to choose the insurance provider that suits them best and the money would be sent directly to the insurance provider. Those obtaining innovative insurance that costs less than the credit can deposit the remainder in expanded Health Savings Accounts.”
Clinton: “Hillary’s American Health Choices Plan covers all Americans and improves health care by lowering costs and improving quality. It speaks to American values, American families, and American jobs.”
The Truth: Four things need to happen to improve health care availability: 1. Health care insurance must be separated from employment. 2. Federal and state regulations restricting what types of health care insurance are allowed to be offered, must be removed. 3. Health savings accounts must be available to everyone. 4. Individual health care insurance (and savings accounts) must be tax-deductable. McCain is the only one saying anything close to this. That government take-over of health care will improve efficiency and lower costs is bs.
Issue: Supreme Court Appointments
Obama: “We need somebody who’s got the heart, the empathy, to recognize what it’s like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand what it’s like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled, or old. And that’s the criteria by which I’m going to be selecting my judges.”
McCain: “My nominees will understand that there are clear limits to the scope of judicial power, and clear limits to the scope of federal power.” He likes Roberts and Scalia, but maybe not necessarily Alito, and he voted for Bork.
Clinton: “As the Supreme Court recognized in Roe v. Wade in 1973, this issue is complex and highly personal; the rights and lives of women must be taken into account. It is precisely this erosion of our constitutional rights that I warned against when I opposed the nominations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito.”
The Truth: I can’t really claim to be the arbiter of objective truth here. Clarence Thomas is my favorite justice, so, given the alternatives, I like McCain.
Issue: Abortion
Who cares? What’s the Presidency got to do with it? If Roe v. Wade is overturned, it won’t make any difference anyway.
Issue: Gay Marriage (Is this still an issue?)
See Abortion. The only thing I wish is that this wouldn’t be dictated by the courts. If a majority votes for it, fine, go ahead, make marriage meaningless.
“Issue: Gay Marriage (Is this still an issue?)
See Abortion. The only thing I wish is that this wouldn’t be dictated by the courts. If a majority votes for it, fine, go ahead, make marriage meaningless.”
John,
I wish I could understand where you are coming from about this. When I read about people upset about the concept of Gay Marriage because of their religious beliefs I can understand their point of view. I don’t agree with it and strongly feel that there should be a separation of church and state, but at least I can understand how they must see this issue. I don’t get why exactly you care, much less think that Gay Marriage makes the concept of Marriage meanlingless.
Have Gay Marriages in Boston, MA or Vancover BC harmed your marriage or devalued it in anyway?
Doesn’t Government have far more productive things to do than concern itself with the sexuality of its citizens?
As for things being “dictated by the courts”. Sometimes majorities can be wrong (how much time and effort would it have taken to get the peoples of the South to vote to abolish slavery themselves?
Just an opinion.
Cheers
James
James, I understand your sympathy for gay men and women who wish to have the imprimatur of “marriage” applied to their relationships. The assumption here is that gay marriage, and marriage as it has always been defined, are in fact one and the same, and that it is only obvious bigotry that would say otherwise.
I disagree. I believe that to apply the concept of marriage to homosexual relationships is a profound redefinition of the word. They are not the same thing. This is not to say that one is inferior to the other, only that they are not the same, and therefore it does violence, not only to legal language, but to literary and common language.
I have no objections to conferring the same legal rights on homosexual unions as on heterosexual marriages. I am pretty sure that most Americans would agree. My two objections are about the radical redefinition of the word, and that this is something that should be decided by the voters, not the courts.
There is absolutely no justification in the Constitution of the United States or of California for saying that marriage means homosexual relationships. To say that this is somehow prescribed by the Constitution, is a gross and inexcusable expansion of judicial power. These judges don’t care about the Constitution. They care about outcomes. That is not their job. That is the job of our elected representatives in the legislature.
Having said all that, I don’t really have a dog in this fight. I just don’t care. I don’t like the courts doing this kind of thing. In fact I think it does more harm than good to the cause of gay rights activists. But I don’t really care very much. Gay people want to get married? Go ahead. Once the political excitement dies down, I suspect we won’t be seeing a lot of gay marriages. And if we do, fine, what do I care? I’m past child-bearing age. Evolution is done with me.