Blog

Tomorrow is 9/11, Patriot Day. No politics. No partisanship. A day of remembrance. 

Today, however, being 9/10 it’s worth noting that Osama Bin Laden still walks this Earth in relative freedom. It’s worth noting that, seven years later, 9/11 has become the emotional wedge used for the repression of our freedoms in the name of “security”. It’s worth noting that 9/11 has become the iron that one side uses to brand the other as cowards or traitors. 

Tomorrow, we will remember those who died in and around the towers, as they deserve. Tomorrow, we should forget our politics, like we did seven years ago. But we won’t, because we can’t. The scars of that day are still very fresh in the minds of many, but only because we never stop picking at them.

Instead, tomorrow we’ll see countless editorials about the importance of various laws, programs, and policies. Tomorrow we’ll hear that, somehow, by supporting a certain political party, we’re somehow supporting terrorism. Tomorrow we’ll see opinions that don’t just border on jingoism, but relish in it. Tomorrow, instead of honoring the dead, we’ll use them to further the power of the living. 

2 years ago, Keith Olberman sat in front of the hole in the ground at Ground Zero and used that backdrop to highlight the corruption of the goodwill that followed the attacks on the World Trade Center. Today, new buildings may be rising in their place, but the rhetoric and fear-mongering continues unabated. Reading or watching that comment is as relevant today as it was then.

So, tomorrow, I will not post about the election or any of the idiotic or maddening articles I will read. I will not talk about George Bush, John McCain or Barack Obama. I also will not parade myself around in a flag to prove my patriotism or allow anyone to disparage someone who dissents. 

But today, I will unequivocally say that I believe, firmly believe, that this country has lost its way in the last seven years. I will not pretend that my life is more secure than it was on September 10, 2001. I will continue to wish that every soldier were home from Iraq and that no more were being deployed there. And I will continue to be angry at the way a national tragedy has been turned into a cultish denunciation of anyone who dare offer opposing opinions on how we should run one of the most powerful countries on the planet. 

We, none of us, will ever forget 9/11. Some have just forgotten what it was like before.

Taxes. We all pay ’em and we all hate ’em. Both candidate have set forth their tax plans should they be elected. The Tax Policy Center, a non-partisan think tank, crunched both campaigns’ numbers. Business Week (hardly a lefty publication), has the details.

Len Burman, a former Treasury tax official who is now a senior fellow at the Urban Institute [ed. part of the Tax Policy Center], says if Obama’s proposals—which include plans to rescind the Bush tax cuts on couples making more than $250,000, close corporate tax loopholes, and tax private equity earnings known as “carried interest” as ordinary income—were adopted in 2009, for example, married couples with earnings in the lowest quintile of the population would see their aftertax income rise 5.8%. Those in the next quintile would see an increase of 4%. Those breaks would be paid for by those with high incomes: the top 1% of taxpayers would see aftertax income fall 8.4%.

Under McCain’s proposals, by contrast—including an extension of the Bush tax cuts for all taxpayers, a corporate tax cut, and a larger reduction in estate taxes than Obama would support—far more of the benefits would go to the top. If his plans went into effect in 2009, married couples in the bottom fifth of the population would see aftertax income go up just 0.2%, while those in the next quintile would see a 0.7% hike. But those in the top quintile would see a bump up in aftertax income of 2.7%.

And the middle class? Yeah, we all get a 0.7% increase with McCain and a 4% increase under Obama.

And how about that deficit the Bush administration is leaving us?

[Under Obama] those moves would bring an estimated additional $734 billion to the Treasury over 10 years.

…

… McCain’s combined proposals would slash tax revenues by an estimated $253 billion over the 10-year period.

Brilliant. An income increase for the richest of the rich and no meaures to increase revenue to the Treasury. Of course, as the article points out, this is all based on their plans being implemented as promised, which rarely happens. So what’s the value in this kind of analysis?

“It gives us some sense of their view,” says Burman.

Exactly. And that view is pretty telling.

Obama vs. McCain: Taxing and Spending

Good read for those who couldn’t care less about race and gender.

Part 1: Examining key differences between Obama and McCain — Newsday.com.

Part 2

I hadn’t seen this email yet, but it checks out (surprisingly). I’ll put the highlights here, but read the whole thing (especially if the addition of Palin to the McCain ticket made you rethink your vote). This was written by a Wasilla resident and long-time acquaintance of Sarah Palin, Anne Kilkenny. This has also been verified by Snopes.

CLAIM VS FACT
o “Hockey mom”: true for a few years

o “PTA mom”: true years ago when her first-born was in elementary school, not since

p “NRA supporter”: absolutely true

o social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships (said she did this because it was unconsitutional).

o pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to promote it.

o “Pro-life”: mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down’s syndrome baby BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life legislation.

o “Experienced”: Some high schools have more students than Wasilla has residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska.

No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city administrator to run town of about 5,000.

o political maverick: not at all

o gutsy: absolutely!

o open & transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at explaining actions.

o has a developed philosophy of public policy: no

o “a Greenie”: no. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR.

o fiscal conservative: not by my definition!

o pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built streets to early 20th century standards.

o pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on residents.

o pro-small government: No. Oversaw greatest expansion of city government in Wasilla’s history.

o pro-labor/pro-union. No. Just because her husband works union doesn’t make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim that she is pro-labor/pro-union.

snopes.com: A Note to All by Anne Kilkenny.

This piece speeks for itself.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/sitewide/video_player/view/default/swf.jhtml

It’s over.

The deal calls for Kilpatrick to plead guilty to two felony counts of obstruction of justice by committing perjury, agreeing to serve four months in jail, pay up to $1 million in restitution, and serve five years’ probation. He also agreed not to run for office during that five-year span.

The mayor will turn over his state pension to the City of Detroit, which paid $8.4 million to settle two whistle-blower lawsuits three former cops filed against the city.

…

In a rushed monotone, Kilpatrick told the court: “I lied under oath in the case of Gary Brown and Harold Nelthrope versus the city of Detroit … I did so with the intent to mislead the court and jury, to impede and obstruct the disposition of justice.”

I’m watching him consent to the plea deal as I type this. Now, it’s up to City Council to get their act together.

Mayor: ‘I lied under oath’ | Freep.com