New President Won't Have an Easy Time Paying for New Initiatives, Fiscal Experts Say

[saden1]

I would like to add that even though there are no serious 527 groups attaching Obama now it doesn't mean there won't be any in the future. Also, at the request of Obama MoveOn.org has announced that they are shutting down it's 527.

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

The weakest argument is the one that says, "Whe he made the commitment to public financing he didn't know how much money he could raise." This is like saying, "When I married my wife, I didn't realize the twenty-two year old former cheerleader was going to move in next door".

Geez - that completely misrepresents what I said. It's an absolutely valid argument, not to mention a strong one. If the goal is to avoid corruption, how does this fail to do that?

Originally Posted by 70Chip

I also find it interesting that everyone says that BHO will not be beholden to his contributors. I thought his contributors were all mom and pop salt of the earth types, so wouldn' he want to be beholden to them? The idea that Democratic givers are intrinsically more virtuous than Republican givers is an assumption the media is making that should probably be looked into.

This is such a fundamentally flawed argument. It's not about being beholden to the interests of all of his contributors. It's about being beholden to the interests of a small percentage of his (or any politician's) contributors simply due to the size of their contribution (either directly or through bundling or other fundraising). That's not what is happening here.

Originally Posted by 70Chip

In addition, Obama made the argument that he needs the money to head off GOP 527s at the pass.

I haven't heard this statement. This is the weakest argument by Obama - anyone with an ounce of foresight could see this coming, and, if it was a concern, he should not have made the pledge.

That said, the reasons I outlined above make this no worse than McCain's reversal on drilling (which I did not blast him for, either).

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

He also promised to use the public financing system for the election. Everything Obama syas must be taken with a grain of salt. His word means nothing.

What's your take on McCain's word?

I mentioned earlier today that it was quite a thing to see John McCain denouncing Barack Obama for breaking his word on public financing when McCain himself is at this moment breaking the law in continuing to spend over the spending limits he promised to abide by through the primary season in exchange for public financing. (By the FEC's rules, we're still in the primary phase of the election and will be until the conventions.)
I want to return to this subject though because this is not hyperbole or some throw away line. He's really doing it. McCain opting into public financing, accepted the spending limits and then profited from that opt-in by securing a campaign saving loan. And then he used some clever, but not clever enough lawyering, to opt back out. And the person charged with saying what flies and what doesn't -- the Republican head of the FEC -- said he's not allowed to do that. He can't opt out unilaterally unless the FEC says he can.

Talking Points Memo | McCain Breaking the Law in Plain Sight
FEC Warns McCain on Campaign Spending

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

What's your take on McCain's word?
Talking Points Memo | McCain Breaking the Law in Plain Sight
FEC Warns McCain on Campaign Spending

In my eye's Obama can change his mind if he want's and I just don't see what the real big deal is to start with. Maybe someone could explain why its a big deal other than just saying he flipped flopped. That article you posted about MacCain while he says its illegal he does not provide a link to anyone backing this view. He is a liberal writer who has slanted view so I would need more info and something proving that he knew he was doing something wrong. While I'd never vote for Obama I can state why and I do not have to nit pick everything he does I just need to point to his platform he is running on. McCain does not do much for me either but he is the lesser of the two.

[onlydarksets]

Originally Posted by firstdown

In my eye's Obama can change his mind if he want's and I just don't see what the real big deal is to start with. Maybe someone could explain why its a big deal other than just saying he flipped flopped. That article you posted about MacCain while he says its illegal he does not provide a link to anyone backing this view. He is a liberal writer who has slanted view so I would need more info and something proving that he knew he was doing something wrong. While I'd never vote for Obama I can state why and I do not have to nit pick everything he does I just need to point to his platform he is running on. McCain does not do much for me either but he is the lesser of the two.

Read the second link - it's a WP article quoting Jan Baran and Brad Smith, two of the leading Republican campaign finance attorneys. Mason is also a Republican, and a current commissioner.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by onlydarksets

Read the second link - it's a WP article quoting Jan Baran and Brad Smith, two of the leading Republican campaign finance attorneys. Mason is also a Republican, and a current commissioner.

Did you read the date on that article? Feb. 22, 2008 I believe those issues have been resolved by now. I love how that person who wrote the article had to jump back and forth on the issues and also in the first paragraph its pretty clear the writer was out to attack him by adding his own insults at McCain.

[saden1]

No shit, Bush and Co. really stunk up the joint. Taxes will have to be raised and belts will have to be tightened. Hopefully there will be fiscal discipline. I do love McCain's fuzzy plan though...continue the war, cut taxes, cut 100 billion dollars in pork even though 18 billion is spent on pork, and of course rely on American ingenuity to solve our problems.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by saden1

No shit, Bush and Co. really stunk up the joint. Taxes will have to be raised and belts will have to be tightened. Hopefully there will be fiscal discipline. I do love McCain's fuzzy plan though...continue the war, cut taxes, cut 100 billion dollars in pork even though 18 billion is spent on pork, and of course rely on American ingenuity to solve our problems.

Wow. What an intellectual argument.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Buster

Wow. What an intellectual argument.

and pretty one-sided. both candidates want to spend spend spend, but neither one has a viable plan as to how they plan on paying for it.

fixing medicare and social security, since they consume an ever growing piece of tax revenues, should probably be the first target. no one wants to hear that though.

maybe just make them like FEGLI (gov life insurance), where you don't have to use it, and it's retardedly expensive, but it's charges enough to pay for itself.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by That Guy

and pretty one-sided. both candidates want to spend spend spend, but neither one has a viable plan as to how they plan on paying for it.

fixing medicare and social security, since they consume an ever growing piece of tax revenues, should probably be the first target. no one wants to hear that though.

maybe just make them like FEGLI (gov life insurance), where you don't have to use it, and it's retardedly expensive, but it's charges enough to pay for itself.

If financial planners (or other in the same line of work) did with customers money what the gov. has done with SS they would be in jail. SS should have plenty of funds but they have been robbed over the years and now is in trouble. This is something tha both parties have done so its not an issue who has caused the problem.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by That Guy

and pretty one-sided. both candidates want to spend spend spend, but neither one has a viable plan as to how they plan on paying for it.

fixing medicare and social security, since they consume an ever growing piece of tax revenues, should probably be the first target. no one wants to hear that though.

maybe just make them like FEGLI (gov life insurance), where you don't have to use it, and it's retardedly expensive, but it's charges enough to pay for itself.

What's McCain's plan?

p.s. I don't claim to be a McCain fan and I in fact despise his policies and everything the republican party of today stands for. I am not impartial with respect to McCain but when I post something about him I post the truth. You are more than welcome to defend him if you feel I'm being disingenuous or inaccurate in any way.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by saden1

What's McCain's plan?

p.s. I don't claim to be a McCain fan and I in fact despise his policies and everything the republican party of today stands for. I am not impartial with respect to McCain but when I post something about him I post the truth. You are more than welcome to defend him if you feel I'm being disingenuous or inaccurate in any way.

the only thing i think is disingenuous is how you bash mccain relentlessly and totally omit any mention that obama is no better on the issue of how the f do we pay for things.

i mean, you're right that he plans to spend more than we have, but you mention him by name an awful lot and don't say a word about how obama has exactly the same plan (spending on lots of trinkets, like homeowner bailouts, universal health insurance, tax cuts, and no way to pay for it).

i really don't have a strong personal attachment to either, since they both seem to be pandering and promising things they most likely can't deliver.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Buster

Wow. What an intellectual argument.

Thank you.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by saden1

No shit, Bush and Co. really stunk up the joint. Taxes will have to be raised and belts will have to be tightened. Hopefully there will be fiscal discipline. I do love McCain's fuzzy plan though...continue the war, cut taxes, cut 100 billion dollars in pork even though 18 billion is spent on pork, and of course rely on American ingenuity to solve our problems.

I'd say it would be easy to find 100 billion in pork and they could double that figure. How much pork spending is added each year and how many of them are on going year after year?

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I'd say it would be easy to find 100 billion in pork and they could double that figure. How much pork spending is added each year and how many of them are on going year after year?

i highly doubt there's 100billion in pork, and it doesn't grow like federal budgets either.

no one likes the idea of building bridges to nowhere for a tiny village worth of people (which, last i heard, got thoroughly shot down), but the truth is that congress loses more money through accountability lapse in big budget contracts (aircraft, cost+ deals, etc) than they lose in pork.