I’m not sure how many of you were watching the first presidential debate tonight in Mississippi between Obama and Mccain, but I was, because the boy and I love politics. We watched it in HD (because we just discovered that CNN has an HD channel) and WOW..  I don’t ever want to be filmed with an HD camera. They are so powerful that they completely transformed the reporters from what we were used to seeing them as, before our very eyes. Crazy. You can see every single blemish on their faces, along with makeup. Haha. I would prefer if the whole world couldn’t see my every pore, thanks. Also, Anderson Cooper is alarmingly ghostly looking on HD.

The debate was interesting, first of all, because I was somewhat surprised that Mccain actually did very well. Now, I may not like Mccain or any of his views on political issues, BUT I must concede that he did a very good job debating. Kudos to him. I’ve watching a ton of interviews with him and sometimes he seems like he’s struggling to grasp answers for the reporters. He did not do that in this debate, and he kept a fairly cool head. Obama was just as I expected, albeit he did seem to get a little frustrated when Mccain kept going on tangents about things. He had tried to interrupt a lot but Mccain just kept talking.

You can find the complete debate transcript here: First Presidential Debate.

They had started the debate asking “where do you stand on the financial recovery plan?” There was quite some teeth pulling here, each candidate had seemed to stretch out the answer and not completely take one firm stance. They left it pretty much open.

Obama had stated :

“No. 1, we’ve got to make sure that we’ve got oversight over this whole process; $700 billion, potentially, is a lot of money.

No. 2, we’ve got to make sure that taxpayers, when they are putting their money at risk, have the possibility of getting that money back and gains, if the market — and when the market returns.

No. 3, we’ve got to make sure that none of that money is going to pad CEO bank accounts or to promote golden parachutes.

And, No. 4, we’ve got to make sure that we’re helping homeowners, because the root problem here has to do with the foreclosures that are taking place all across the country.”

Mccain had ended his answer with this:

“But I want to emphasize one point to all Americans tonight. This isn’t the beginning of the end of this crisis. This is the end of the beginning, if we come out with a package that will keep these institutions stable.

And we’ve got a lot of work to do. And we’ve got to create jobs. And one of the areas, of course, is to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil.”

No clear answer from either, just a synopsis of what they both have seen, and what they wanted to see in the future.

Then, the host clearly tried to turn them on each other and make them vicious. He kept saying “Do you disagree??? If you do, say it directly to him! TELL HIM!” Maybe not with that much vigor, but you get the idea. Then they went on to talk about what each candidate thought was the fundamental difference between their plans. Mccain’s big point was that the government suffers from sever overspending; which is true.

” Well, the first thing we have to do is get spending under control in Washington. It’s completely out of control. It’s gone — we have now presided over the largest increase in the size of government since the Great Society.”

What he didn’t say (that Obama nicely pointed out) was

“Senator McCain is proposing — and this is a fundamental difference between us — $300 billion in tax cuts to some of the wealthiest corporations and individuals in the country, $300 billion.

Now, $18 billion is important; $300 billion is really important.

And in his tax plan, you would have CEOs of Fortune 500 companies getting an average of $700,000 in reduced taxes, while leaving 100 million Americans out.

So my attitude is, we’ve got to grow the economy from the bottom up. What I’ve called for is a tax cut for 95 percent of working families, 95 percent.”

So, for everybody who seems to assume that Obama plans on raising taxes and Mccain plans to lower taxes, think again. Do you research. Mccain will cut taxes but only for large corporations and businesses. Obama plans to cut taxes for 95% of working families, which are the ones who need the tax breaks more. To be more clear, the only people taxed more will be ones who make over $250,000.

Mccain had then rebutted:

“Now, Senator Obama didn’t mention that, along with his tax cuts, he is also proposing some $800 billion in new spending on new programs.”

That is also TRUE, except if you understand how the economy works, you will understand why this isn’t necessarily a bad idea. Spending on new programs that is. Our economy is based on our education and ability to be innovative. Our minds have to be constantly challenged and we need outlets to build these ideas, or foundations to help us form them in the first place. If Mccain is all about free market (which he is- and so am I. That is probably the only thing I disagree with Obama on) he should understand that having new programs to stimulate the economy is a positive thing. The economy is directly correlated to the consumer’s confidence. When confidence level falls, spending and borrowing falls. When spending and borrowing falls, businesses lose money. When businesses lose money,  they start to lay off workers and stop borrowing as much. When the businesses AND consumers stop attempting to borrow, then the banks start trying to push out subprime loans. Then, deflation occurs, interest rates rise, and people can’t pay back said loans that were given to them wrongfully in the first place. TA DA! Which goes full circle back to consumers not spending money and being in the hole.

The free market approach in economics says that the economy will always correct itself when it is left to its own means. Which has been a tried and true path before. The little recessions would always correct themselves; its the way of the market. The problem with what is happening now is that this is reminiscent of the great depression. If you pull up information about the great depression and read about the downward spiral, you will see how the market had plummeted initially after cheap credit was repeatedly given out, which essentially DID help in the short term, but what a killer in the long term.

You can’t project just short term benefits in the economy. There is always a long lasting effect that is often overlooked. So after all this credit was given out and the economy picked itself back up, things were good for a while. Then deflation occurred and everybody who has these massive debts could not pay monthly and were starting to default on their loans. When this occurred, consumer spending was cut drastically, which prevented the spawning of new products, or even a need for the preexisting products people needed to live their every day lives. Businesses failed; layoffs occurred. THEN when THIS occurred, the banks began to tighten up their loan systems, which essentially spirals into a vicious circle. Point blank: People and businesses had no money. The bottom of the market fell out. You know the phrase “history repeats itself”? Well I’m a total believer in that, especially when the feds don’t notice the tell tale signs but everyone else does.

So back to present day: Does this sound familiar? Isn’t this exactly what has been going on in the Bush administration that every body seemed to turn a blind eye to?! Obama had warned in the previous year about this possibly happening, and nobody did anything to improve it. There were still subprime mortgages being handed out to people who couldn’t even afford a car, let alone a house. In retrospect, we did this to ourselves. I am a total advocate for free market, but I think when we’re so far down like this, the government should intervene and help. The government is essentially here for the people, the people aren’t here for the government. It’s their duty to keep us safe and step in when need be, but not breathe down our necks dealing out regulations like we’re playing Go Fish. Wall street wouldn’t be such a fantastic thing if it had 43294 zillion regulations saying they can’t do this, or they HAVE to do that. Controlling investors is a no no.

What was the solution last year? The miraculous stimulus check. Which I did not get because I was a student and didn’t work the year before. Now, I can tell you, if I got that stimulus check, I would have went out shopping or bought something glamorous.

The whole plan of the stimulus check/rebate was because they wanted people to spend the money frivolously; such as on a new TV or clothes. That would stimulate the economy and ultimately would have prevented us from being in the recession that we are in now. That didn’t happen. What DID happen was that people spent the money on necessities such as paying back bills and putting money onto their mortgages. This did not help in the way it was expected. That’s why our confidence is still low. This was a good move on the part of the government, but they should have known that when families are stressed for money, the last thing they are going to do is go out and buy and new boat so that they can eat ramen noodles out of the kitchen, with their brand spankin new boat STILL docked because they can’t afford gas to explore anywhere.

ANYWAYS! Now that I’ve lectured you about the economy, let’s move on. The next lead question was:

“As president, as a result of whatever financial rescue plan comes about and the billion, $700 billion, whatever it is it’s going to cost, what are you going to have to give up, in terms of the priorities that you would bring as president of the United States, as a result of having to pay for the financial rescue plan?”

Summed up, Obama had said,

“We have to have energy independence, so I’ve put forward a plan to make sure that, in 10 years’ time, we have freed ourselves from dependence on Middle Eastern oil by increasing production at home, but most importantly by starting to invest in alternative energy, solar, wind, biodiesel, making sure that we’re developing the fuel-efficient cars of the future right here in the United States, in Ohio and Michigan, instead of Japan and South Korea.

We have to fix our health care system, which is putting an enormous burden on families. Just — a report just came out that the average deductible went up 30 percent on American families.

…

The third thing we have to do is we’ve got to make sure that we’re competing in education. We’ve got to invest in science and technology. China had a space launch and a space walk. We’ve got to make sure that our children are keeping pace in math and in science.”

Mccain had said,

“The point — the point is — the point is, we need to examine every agency of government.

First of all, by the way, I’d eliminate ethanol subsidies. I oppose ethanol subsidies.

I think that we have to return — particularly in defense spending, which is the largest part of our appropriations — we have to do away with cost-plus contracts. We now have defense systems that the costs are completely out of control.

We tried to build a little ship called the Littoral Combat Ship that was supposed to cost $140 million, ended up costing $400 million, and we still haven’t done it.

So we need to have fixed-cost contracts. We need very badly to understand that defense spending is very important and vital, particularly in the new challenges we face in the world, but we have to get a lot of the cost overruns under control.

I know how to do that.”

So after all this, they pretty much kept going over what they have previously said, interjecting new random thoughts in between. All in all, over economic issues, they had held their own ground and stuck with their own regime. The second half of the debate went to Foreign Policy. It had boiled down to Mccain stating that we can’t let up with our silent treatment.

“What Senator Obama doesn’t seem to understand that if without precondition you sit down across the table from someone who has called Israel a “stinking corpse,” and wants to destroy that country and wipe it off the map, you legitimize those comments.

This is dangerous. It isn’t just naive; it’s dangerous. And so we just have a fundamental difference of opinion.”

I disagree with this statement. Playing the whole “silent treatment” game is what 5 year olds do. Diplomacy involves hearing both sides and cooperating. Sitting down to talk to foreign diplomats will not harm the US in any way at all. If anything it will strengthen us because other countries will finally see that we aren’t the supposed arrogant snots that they think we are. They will realize that we are actually willing to fix problems that are occurring as a result of wrong from both sides. Part of the reason that I think the middle east has issues with us is because we put on this facade of being better than everyone and being in control. Vulnerability isn’t always a bad thing, and maybe seeing that we do indeed have some vulnerability will remind them that we are just the same as them, and are willing to work on something that will benefit everyone. Wars start from misconceptions.

Larry King sat down with Ahmadinejad the other day, and had a very intelligent and informative conversation with him. Ahmadinejad answered his questions and explained why he feels the way he does on certain issues. He stated that this whole feud was pretty much one sided; that America was causing it and Iran didn’t want any of it. Nuclear bombs defy their religion and they had their nuclear plans looked over and inspected more than any other country in the world. He said that viewing them as a threat was silly, and America has a one sided view on everything, when we’re the ones that other countries are beginning to frown upon and wonder about. Did you see him try to jump across the table and strangle Larry King? Did you hear him utter any obscure threats towards the American People? Did you see his temper flare once? Did you see him dodge any questions and act shady? No. They sat down, person to person, and discussed. It’s really not out of the president’s grasp to do that, and for Mccain to say that shouldn’t happen could very well be one of the things that is making world peace elusive. It’s narrow views such as Mccain’s which starts to blind side everyone who listens to him.

Mccain was a little stronger in the foreign policy section of the debate, obviously because he has spent more time overseas. I’m also sure you’ve heard (many MANY times) that he was a prisoner of war and blah blah blah. (Which does not mean he will make a good president by the way. They are not correlated. Just because you can fight a war doesn’t mean you can lead a country). Mccain stated that he wants to keep on fighting the way, and not back down, while Obama said we are misallocating our soldiers, and that Al Qaeda is the biggest threat. We are totally not on top of that by the way. They’re definitely getting the best of the situation because America is just one big dumbass.

Mccain seems to think that we are winning in Iraq,

“I’m afraid Senator Obama doesn’t understand the difference between a tactic and a strategy. But the important — I’d like to tell you, two Fourths of July ago I was in Baghdad. General Petraeus invited Senator Lindsey Graham and me to attend a ceremony where 688 brave young Americans, whose enlistment had expired, were reenlisting to stay and fight for Iraqi freedom and American freedom.

I was honored to be there. I was honored to speak to those troops. And you know, afterwards, we spent a lot of time with them. And you know what they said to us? They said, let us win. They said, let us win. We don’t want our kids coming back here.

And this strategy, and this general, they are winning. Senator Obama refuses to acknowledge that we are winning in Iraq.”

Considering the body count of this war, I doubt we’re winning. What conclusions have we reached by being over there, other than that we need to pull out before we lose all our soldiers? Have we come to any solution? Have we come any closer to finding Bin Ladin? Nix, no and nay.

One thing the news was picking on was their different debate styles. Mccain was being viewed as stronger because he talked down to Obama, saying “You don’t understand. You don’t get it” over and over.

“I’m afraid Senator Obama doesn’t understand the difference between a tactic and a strategy.”

“I don’t think that Senator Obama understands that there was a failed state in Pakistan when Musharraf came to power”

“Senator Obama doesn’t seem to understand there is a connected between the two.”

“He doesn’t understand that Russia committed serious aggression against Georgia.”

“Senator Obama still doesn’t quite understand — or doesn’t get it — that if we fail in Iraq, it encourages al Qaeda. They would establish a base in Iraq.”

etc, etc, so on and so forth. There are way too many to put in there. Obama had a different debate style. Rather than talk down to Mccain, he would pick out a point that he had agreed with, then proceed to diffuse the rest of the argument by bringing up counter points. That’s the way debates are supposed to be constructed. You agree, then you disagree and diffuse. You don’t just attack the other candidate. I do agree that it gave Mccain this aura of being “stronger” to some, because he was acting with a superiority complex, but I think that Obama was trying to keep things on more casual terms and not make it seem as if there was a dividing line between the parties. He was playing the right cards.

“No, actually, I think Senator McCain and I agree for the most part on these issues. Obviously, I disagree with this notion that somehow we did not forcefully object to Russians going into Georgia.”

I started this blog promising myself that I would attempt to write this objectively, but then I thought if somebody wanted objective, they could go watch the news. Politics is something I have a definite view on. Like I said before though, while I [obviously] am for Obama, I consider myself an independent. John Mccain did a great job in this debate, somebody should give him a cookie. It was a pleasant surprise and definitely made it more interesting. I can’t wait for the Biden/Palin debate, because both of those candidates are little sparky fireballs.

What I want people to take away from this blog is one important message:

DO YOUR RESEARCH ON EACH CANDIDATE! Don’t just catch the news every now and then (because the news puts their own spin and ideas on what’s going on) and CERTAINLY don’t just vote for one or the other because your family or friends are. Don’t say that you know what’s going on with each candidate because you catch a campaign commercial or two, and watch the news once every two weeks. I’ve been following this campaign daily since practically day one, so I know how the media can spin things. Do you own research and keep informed… the RIGHT way.

TAX BREAKDOWN

PICK EACH AND COMPARE SIDE BY SIDE

Don’t lead this country down the wrong path because of stubbornness or ignorance. The best way to make the right decision is to be informed. I can’t stress this enough. Go back and read the debate from the link I sent you. Get a clear picture.

On a completely unrelated note, I’m working with Fancy again! She finally had her teeth floated so she’s not grumpy anymore and ready to train. I went over yesterday and my thighs and calves are KILLING me. She’s still stiff going towards the left side, so every time we ride into a corner I have to use my inside leg to bend her around it. Very sore. Ow. BUT! She did amazingly well and I’m happy that she’s rideable again. I almost acquired her as my own horse haha because Julie might be getting another one that she really fell in love with, and needed somebody to take fancy. Since I’ve been riding fancy for the past year she offered her to me, but I don’t have the money to board her down here. I’m a broke college student, and the new house doesn’t have land where I can keep her. I had the luxury of my parents helping my board my horses in NY, but now that I’m older I have to find a pay to pay on my own. Oh well. The time will come when I’m financially stable and working to have a horse again.

I have another shoot coming up. I’m looking forward to it. We’re doing it down by Rollins college, which is very Saratoga like, and has cobble stone streets. So pretty.