On Sep 27, 2008, at 8:03 AM, Francis Drouillard wrote:
> Some are criticizing McCain for not attacking Obama on the financial > crisis. (See video clip in my "Who did this to us?" post.) Well, that left McCain open to his close association with Phil Gramm, whose legislation Gutting Glass-Steagal lead directly to the current crisis. Also, McCain needs to tread carefully there...it's widely acknowledged that he announced he was suspending his campaign to rush to washington to help solve the thing in 'a bipartisan way' and ended up getting the House Republicans to walk out of the negotiations, and come back with their completely unworkable plan to provide insurance (hint look up the financial term 'moral hazard'...guaranteed insurance promotes riskier, not more conservative behavior) and cut the capital gains tax (which is just laughable. People aren't not investing in this market because they'll pay taxes on their gains, they're not investing because they don't think there are gains to be had. Besides, what are people going to do with their money, stuff it in their mattresses?) I was kind of stunned, though, that McCain called Pakistan a 'failed state' when Musharraf pulled his coup. He deposed a democratically elected government. (And lets not forget the entire A.Q.Khan nuclear weapons network...which occurred under Musharraf's watch. Either it was done with Musharraf's consent, or Musharraf never controlled Pakistan)...and his take on North Korea was laughably wrong. When Bush came into office, North Korea did not have a nuclear weapon, did not have enriched uranium to make one, and their reactors were cold, under seal and monitored by the IAEA. The Clinton administration left the Bush Administration with a deal, an unsavory one amounting to blackmail, to be sure, but it was a deal and the North Koreans WERE sticking to their word. All we had to do was keep oil and food flowing. Then the Bushies had to go show the world by turning into the cowboys they are with their 'yer with us or agin us' worldview. The Bush Administration is going to hand the next president a nuclear armed North Korea who shows no inclination to honor deals The US makes because clearly we'll happily renege on any that don't suit our current political needs. THAT is the Bush Doctrine (the original Krauthammer(R) Bush Doctrine) in action. Obama should have hammered him on that. Mr. 90% supports the same 'tough' stance on North Korea, a toothless 'toughness' because, frankly what the hell CAN we do now that we let them get the bomb? Nuke them into submission? I think Obama needs to emphasize putting that he'll be putting adults in charge of our foreign policy again. -- Bruce Johnson U of Az College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions don't have opinions, merely customs --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "StrataList-OT" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/StrataList-OT?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
