Barack Obama
Beginning Score: 300
Score History:
10/24/07: A quick summary of an Obama speech included the following phrase:
"Mr. Obama has said he would scrap President Bush's tax cuts for Americans making more than $250,000 a year when they expire in 2010, and he has backed more than doubling the tax rates for managers of hedge funds and private equity firms."I know hedge fund mangers and the big-capital Wall Street guys seem like the enemy of the little guy, but they're arguably much more imperative to our overall economic health than most other single groups. Targeting a specific group because they have a lot of money doesn't make sense when that one group is using its money for high-return investment - decreasing their take increases overall risk, which has a direct effect on their ability to fuel economic growth. This is far more complicated than I just made it sound, I swear... The basic point remains, though.
Also, even though I'm more in the reduce-the-deficit-before-we-have-huge-tax-cuts camp, I will fall back on the default assumptions (Rule 5, assumption #2) on the anti-Bush Tax Cuts statement and decry Obama's general threats of major tax increases with -4 points for the anti-Bush tax cuts phrase and -8 points for the other one.
(If our national debt wasn't so high, I'd take off more points for these infractions...It's a tough call... Any disagreement?)
NEW SCORE (unless debated) = 288
[...Waiting for more...]
7 comments:
How much of his comment is just a play towards the "working man".
Agreed: I'd say enough to make me question whether or not he'd actually go "Gonzo" on taxes... But the bigger point is more about judging his promises to figure out his primary constituency - if his primary constituency is tax crazy this season, it might be a valid promise.
But my opinion is just as valid as you allow it to be, Zane, so if you disagree with such a harsh penalty for statements about possible taxes, let it out - It's plausible (as I hinted) that low tax revenue might be more dangerous than high taxes in the coming years... So I fell back on the default assumptions instead of speculate. I'm willing to speculate a little though, Zane, if you're willing to defend Obama...
(Yes, I'm trying to get you to reveal your political preferences in exchange for a possible point reduction. Heh heh heh...)
I'm certainly not defending him. I just thought his comments sounded like the empty promises that candidates make that sound really nice.
"No more taxes" or "Tax the rich" are the political equivalent of "Hello, Cleveland? Are you ready to rock?" A cheap throwaway sentence that guarantees a cheer from the fans, and then two hours of overpriced hot dogs and uncomfortable seats.
That's a damn good - and hilarious - point, Zane.
But I am actually inclined to believe that promises to tax the rich will be fulfilled by the Democratic candidate this time...
May I suggest +4 points for being the nominee of the "best candidate for having a brew with Dave"?
I wish that I could give Guzzo some points for "Settin' us up the Obama"!
Oh yeah - I almost forgot this too...its a bit dated (from November), but I've been giving it some serious thought as of late. Back then I just thought it was bad media static - which I suppose it kind of still is, but there's a lot more character at hand that I never before gave credit...
+4 points for being ballsy enough to admitting, "...did I inhale? Yeah, I inhaled - that was the point..."
Not because its cool or hip to use drugs, but being man enough to admit his wrong doings in life.
Though on the other hand of that -
-4 points for playing into the media's trap to comment brassily backhanded toward the Clintons.
So I suppose it's even in the wash...
That is ballsy...
Post a Comment