America's Got Talent Amazing Race The X-factor American Idol Dancing With the Stars SYTYCD

Who Won The Presidential Debate 2? Obama versus McCain. There is a Rainbow! Obama Wins

Posted by REALITYTV on Oct 8th, 2008 and filed under Debates 2008, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry | Viewed 114511 times.

Rainbows have been a sign of hope in fable from the Bible to legends of magic and leprechauns. There is always a hope that the person we elect will make a difference, and that the achievements of these great men will touch and benefit us all as a nation.

What was clearly evident in this debate was that McCain is not good at projecting that rainbow. Obama painted one with dozens of colors, and McCain painted reality in a somber brown. McCain has the inherent trait that he does not want to promise what he cannot deliver. Obama has the inherent trait that he will promise anything whether he can deliver it or not. There are many more colors in Obama’s palette, but that is because he makes you imagine the paint instead of actually having to apply any of it.

The latter technique wins debates, because it paints that colored arch of promise. It leads Americans, especially those less educated, to believe that there is a pot of gold to be found at the end of the election.

Here is the reality. At the end of Obama’s rainbow, there is no pot of gold. All there is at the end of Obama’s rainbow is an inexperienced man that would be President.

When Obama speaks of health care, he speaks of covering people with pre-existing conditions, but he does not say how he will pay for it. He challenges McCain on his tax cuts. But anyone with third grade math skills can easily understand that 300 billion in tax cuts is only 1/3 of the government spending that Obama incorporates into his plan. The questions that had to be asked by McCain weren’t. McCain just plain was not aggressive enough. It may have to do with the platform, which did not allow enough challenge of the other’s positions, but these are the questions that McCain missed.

1. If Obama is going to cover pre-existing conditions for health care, where does that money come from? Does it come from those that are healthy in America? You bet. Will people with health problems just be able to jump on the train now at everyone else’s expense? How could that possibly be paid for? Get some numbers and pin the man down.
2. Senator Obama, you say Republican tax cuts will total 300 billion dollars, but you are also offering tax cuts. How much will those cost and how could you possibly believe that will be made up by only taxing people that earn over $250,000 without destroying small enterprises. Someone has to pin this man down on the costs of his programs. Where does the money come from?
3. On every topic Obama speaks to, he talks of spending. We will need money for education, health care, Social Security, Medicare, foreign aid, energy independence, blah blah blah. But he has no way to pay for any of it other than some absurd idea that taxing people making more than $250,000 will make any difference at all. He sounds like he has his wallet open to help America, but what he has open is America’s wallet, and it is empty.

On the McCain Front:

McCain is easy to debate. He is just too much of a straight shooter. He doesn’t want to tell you there is a rainbow if there isn’t one. He doesn’t speak of spending for everything in creation while promising a pot of gold.

Problem is, if you don’t promise the pot of gold, and your opponent is, you have to challenge the other man’s pot by calling his bluff. McCain was challenged on how he would fund his tax cut, but didn’t take the opportunity to drill Obama on his tax cut or his spending programs. A simple response, “You promise a tax cut plus all 900 billion dollars in new spending. Specifically how much will your tax cut cost, then add on your 900 billion dollars in spending and tell America how you will pay for that? Here is a piece of graph paper and a pencil, show us.”

It is sad to see McCain being weak in the debates because we have no faith in Obama. We believe he is the same hollow promise campaigner we have seen many, many times in our past. And we also believe that if he wins this election, all we will hear for years as his policies fail, is that the Republicans made it worse than he thought. He has built up the perfect excuse and continues to make promises he knows he can never hope to meet.

We believe that America wants that pot of gold. They will follow the candidate that calmly promises it to them. And for that reason, we believe Obama won this debate. He won it with false promises and false hopes that Americans want to hear. And McCain failed to challenge him appropriately to bust the concept of the Obama Fantasy Island.

While McCain is a poor debater, we also believe the formats being chosen for these debates, especially this debate, clearly favor Obama. He overstays his welcome, overruns his time frequently, and leaves little time for the other side. He also gets to answer questions from people that have no chance to challenge him on his response. They ask a question, he answers and it is done.

We would prefer a face to face debate. One in which each man confronts the other, one in which the promises of one can be clearly challenged by the other. This debate clearly did not cater to that and we do not think that an accident.

Obama comes across as confident and cool. McCain comes across as uncomfortable and stressed. As long as that is true, it is like listening to a story at bedtime. As you doze off to sleep, there is just the story. It takes you over as you gradually doze off to your slumber. It wishes you happy dreams as you hear of the characters of the story (in this case us) living happily ever after. Obama tells that story well, but we believe that under Obama’s leadership, our cradle will rock, the bow will break, and down will come America, cradle and all.

Related Posts with Thumbnails

9 Responses for “Who Won The Presidential Debate 2? Obama versus McCain. There is a Rainbow! Obama Wins”

  1. mansonforobama (3 comments) says:

    Originally Posted By HoraceObama and Biden are both more presidential than McCain or Pallin.

    That is funny. You think a man that associates with terrorists and misappropriates charitable funds for education presidential? Love it.

    The financial malaise is neither of these men’s fault, and both of their faults. There were many chances to pass regulation there that would have prevented this mess, much of it resisted by the Democrats like Barney Frank, a known child molester.

    I suppose if you could place murderers and drunks like Ted Kennedy, child molesters like Barney Frank, and sexual deviants like Bill Clinton in government, then it is perfectly fine to elect a man that associates with a terrorist that cheered on Osama Bin Ladin.

  2. realitytv (117 comments) says:

    Good point Charles, we do not like the concept either. This was a promise that Obama made in the first debate and apparently, the Huffingtonpost claimed was originally Obama’s idea.

    What we believe is that this is being discussed on the House and Senate and both men were privy to the discussions. We don’t like the idea of supporting home prices artificially by forcing the reduction in principle either. That is totally unfair to the rest of America. Obama and McCain are off base on this.

    It would be more fair to eliminate the marriage tax or spend the same amount of money on energy independence than it would be to buy up bad loans and reduce the principle. Next, who do you help with bad investments? All those that ever lost money in the US Stock Market? Business owners in failed businesses, etc.

    Anyway, thank you for your post. You are right on topic there. Both candidates need to rethink that policy, but because both are discussing it, we are concerned they will try to push it through regardless of who gets elected.

  3. Charles Goodwin (1 comments) says:

    So I guess you missed John McCains “Pot O Gold”. He said the government would buy distressed mortgages at face value, and refinance at current value, with the taxpayers eating the difference.

    Who benefits?
    Banks get all of their money. Irresponsible homeowners who bought more than they can afford.

    Who loses?
    Taxpayers lining the pockets of banks yet again. Resposible people like me who bought a home a could afford with a traditional loan with a fixed rate that negotiated the best deal from the buyer. I get noting the the joy of bailing out someone else.

    If you like John McCain and his programs, talk about them. Talk about what you like about his plans for this country. This “tear the other guy down” is getting old. Show you are not just another uneducated voter. Use your post to convince me why I should vote FOR John McCain and not AGAINT Barack Obama.

  4. Milady (1 comments) says:

    Is this really all you can come in with?. Why is Your so good candidate McCain unable to talk about his own plan and explain it in a clear and appealing way? Why is it always about BO? His personality, his this, his that. Now it will be BO’s fault if McCain was not in his shoe? Wasn’t that the form of debate in which he was the best? I think the best thing for you people to be satisfied is for BO to just come to debate without saying a word allow your candidate to talk the whole time, but i’m sure that even then you will find something to criticize because BO will still win the debate.

  5. Tyler (1 comments) says:

    Well not spending billions of dollars on the Iraq war will probably help cut spending, leaving it for other areas like health care. Or we could just keep the war and print more money, which leads to massive inflation, like McCain plans to do.

    It’s actually a really easy thing to offer health care to every person in America for FREE. We’re just so tied up with the insurance companies that we’re paying for their greed rather than actual service. We pay more for our partial, crappy health coverage than other countries (Japan, Canada, many European countries) pay for COMPLETELY FREE AND TOTAL health care. How does that make any sense? Not that I’m saying Obama’s current plan is much better, but it is a little better. Both candidates know that it is simple to offer universal free health care, but they are either too afraid to say it because the media will spin it and make them sound like a socialist, or they are making too much money from campaign contributions from the health industry.

  6. mansonforobama (3 comments) says:

    Originally Posted By LisaGet a clue! He’s not going to let Bush’s rich people tax break go through! There is plenty of money squandered through tax breaks to pay for all his plans and more.

    You see how he can lead the uneducated by playing on your stupidity. If you take away a tax break, you raise taxes. There is no difference. It is semantics. I know that is a big word for you, but dictionary.com should help. Now, suppose you, or Obama, lay out exactly what tax breaks you are speaking about. Then, we have some meat to his plan. There is nothing there. Obama’s is making promises he knows he cannot keep. He is lying to win the Presidency. That is what he is all about. And he has people like you to vote for those lies without actually any thought whatsoever. If Obama said it, that is good enough for you. Childish woman.

  7. Susie Hyde (1 comments) says:

    OBAMA 08!

  8. Lisa (1 comments) says:

    Get a clue! He’s not going to let Bush’s rich people tax break go through! There is plenty of money squandered through tax breaks to pay for all his plans and more.

  9. Horace (1 comments) says:

    Obama and Biden are both more presidential than McCain or Pallin. The financial situation of the nation is the worst it has been since the 1930′s. One hell of a job for the next president to deal with. I will vote for Obama, although I find him agreeing to many times with the failed policies that keep drowning the country. He is too quick to fraternize with the other political party. It feels like there is only one party running. He is not liberal enough and agrees with going to war with other countries. I find that despicable. We are not a peaceful nation when we attack other countries just because they are our enemies at the time and not our allies doing our bidding. I also don’t like his idea of getting the young generation to do national/military service, Does he think this is Germany 1930′s? Just because the dates are similar doesn’t mean we must behave similar.

Leave a Reply

Open Sort Options

Sort comments by:
  • * Applied after refresh

Please leave these two fields as-is:

Protected by Invisible Defender. Showed 403 to 90,467 bad guys.

Comments links could be nofollow free.


Hot Deals
Coupons

Read Via Tags


Entertainment Reality Television Enterntainment TopOfBlogsFree Auto BacklinksMy Reality Television at BloggedBlog DirectoryBlog Directory & Search engine Television Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog DirectoryA Do Follow Blog Directory. Submit Free!Get listed at www.millionbloglist.comTV Anagrams Television Blogroll Center
NETWORK: Idol Season and The Lie Politic 2008-2011 © ALL RIGHTS RESERVED