42 Belly Option on 2 (Play called by Tommy Boy before he goes cow-tipping)

Alright Mr. McCain, its time to play hardball; its fourth and inches and your lookin at a full court press. What, Where, Who and How do we effectively do we climb the mountain before you? How bout you relax a little bit from your store bought talking points and take these on for size.

1) Keep discussing health care. I understand the shortcomings of a Federal Health Care reform, ie inflated spending, possiblity of cutting care to save costs, long waits to "non life threating treatment", no incentive for doctors to practice in America ( salary demand will be fixed), but really break it down in the simplest of terms for everyone. Heres a starting point: http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=806950 . Fire back that your plan will not tax health benefits. "McCain does say the sum your employer pays toward your health insurance would start counting as taxable income, but in exchange, every household gets $5,000 knocked off its taxes (even if that takes you below zero). "

2) Corporate Taxes. I know its not a popular stance to stand next to Corporate America, but show how taxing the people who make most of the countries investments and are the pipeline for new innovation and jobs will be forced to cut back on all of these, if the tax rate keeps going up. Especially in a weaker economy, express how alienating companies will eventually send jobs overseas and R and D will be stagnant.

3) Ayres/ Wright/Rezko......whats the deal w/ these 3? Go on the offensive with Obama's association with these 3 clowns. Both come off as radical extremists who, whether he wants to admit or not, has had some influence over Obama's politcal stances, one way or another. He considered Wright a close, personal friend who married him to Michelle; how could these two not talk politics and share some thoughts? As for Ayres, he was the leader of the radical Weather Underground. Point out the possibility of a suppossed ex-terriorist influencing Obama. And bring up the housing scandal with Tony Rezko . http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/16/AR2006121600729_pf.html You may not remember how many houses you have, but at least you have the right paper work that Uncle Sam checks for.http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/us/politics/02rezko.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

4) play to the rural community of the swing states. States like WI, PA, for example, have a large rural population. Dont forget that rural communities tend to vote Republican. Explain what their new incurred costs will likely be, how their community will be adversely affected.

5) ACORN. Attack the intentions of this "non profit" organization and what their possible motives are. Find the smoking gun that links Obama to an organization filled w/ corruption and and a one sided agenda. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122394051071230749.html

The Battle of Independent

Just how critical are independent votes to elections? The key to office lies in their hands. By viewing exit data from the 2008 primaries, the current nominees were able to ride the independent vote towards the novembder election. Exit polls from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21226015/ are able to back up this statement: The one who appeals to the independent can be almost guarentee victory lane. I believe this is true in every election. You will have some people on the fence during the election, but traditionally, when November rolls around, voters on that fence come back to their last party identification. Candidates must appeal and incorporate the independent mind into their campaign and policy strategies to fully guarentee a solid showing. As these exit polls indicate, independent voters always voted with the eventual winner.
These exit polls also reaffirms my expectations for voter behavior. The young vote will always go Democratic, old vote Republican. To me, there arent really any suprises when exit polls come out. Am I really going out on a limb by suggesting that UWM will vote 80% for Obama? Polling is important but the focus is off. Polling should really break down independents; on their behavior, who they are, what issues concern them, how they got to be independent and when.

possible answer to the healthy democracy scenario: low turnout signals that everything is being run smoothly....why go through a revolution when there doesnt need to be one? Just ask the French, circa 1793

Howdy- i'm really not a bad guy

thanks for your comment....reading yours and these responses, heres my thoughts: m bluethman, I gotta agree and disagree with your reasoning why Republicans lost a lot of seats in 06. Did the partisanship of the party have a hand? yes, but your forgetting that fact the that Prez at the time was the lowest approved prez, i believe, ever. Anyone attached to the Republican ticket was in dire straits, mostly to do war sentiments and gas pump prices. (Which by the way, take a macroeconomics course and you'll find the answer why the prices skyrocketed). Anyway, my view on the bailout plan is that there is the remote possiblity that House members did have the taxpayer at the forefront. With the meltdown of Fan and Freddie, where some legislators just ready to dip into our pockets yet again, refinace money market institutions, and hand them over to government control, just like Fan and Freddie? check out this link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122290574391296381.html
Interesting stuff said by Mr. Greenspan, basically saying that these huge lendors setup by federal government were going to eventually cripple the money markets, which is what exactly happened. Any Tom, Dick, and Sue could get a mortgage, as long as they had a SS # and 3 bucks to their name. People got in the habit of thinking they could afford 300k homes when the reality was just the opposite. Personal responsibilty is a lost art in this country and it frustrates the hell outta me. How many times do the taxpayers need to be called upon to bail the economy, health, workforce out of sticky situations? We are skyrocketing towards a socialist economy and even Rousseau, a socialsit political philosopher, would argue that a socialistic state of this magnitude would fail to exist. So to answer Ms. Pyatt question in her comment, I am scared. You keep adding weight to the yoke of oxen, eventually, the back is going to break.

Minority Party- What about the little guy?

Even the word "minority", when pertaining to government control, brings up feelings of helplessness, domination, and little voice. But if we examine just a little further, we can understand that the minority party in a democracy plays a vital and important political role. The minority party can act as a watchdog for policy and behavior of the majority party. This title can help the minority party in future elections by pointing out the flaws and mistakes from the party in power. This leads to the second point, which is table setting for future majority control. History teaches a valuable lesson; by not repeating the failures of past administrations can further entrench approval among potential voters. The minority party can also survey what areas are weak among the majority party, i.e. issues, potential seats and use to agressively attack these points to help remove the party in power and secure the possession of majority control. My third point of the role of the minority party is the ability to comprimise and negotiate concerning policy creation. This benefits in two ways. 1. Legislators among the majority party who do not stricly vote along party lines can be ignored by the controling party,therefore paving the way for the majority to seek votes from the minority. In order for members of the minority to vote along w/ the majority, the negotiation can be begin. The minority members may not get full policy approval, but for the majority to gain some minority vote, tade offs need to occur and therefore, the minority is able to have some voice in the direction of the policy. 2. Future considerations- Minority members can cut a deal w/ majority members for current policy, but if and only if, the minorty members are able to stay in power. If this event occurs, minority members can "remind" majority legislators of where and how they scratched their backs, and the Potomic Two Step ensues. Lastly, a special benefit that occurs in the Senate, plays a huge role in policy configuration. Minority Senators have the power to filibuster any legislation that comes to the Senate floor, being able to argue whos better Fred Flintstone vs Homer Simpson for days on end. In todays Amercican Senate, the minority just has to threaten to filibuster in order to get some considerations from the new bill. The majority party has the power to block the act of filibusters but needs a rare 60% majority vote to do that.
All these points give some hope to Republicnas after the Nov. election, cause lets face it, McCain is in trouble and the majority will strengthen its numbers in Congress. The question remains, will Obama be able to reach out to minority Republicans to secure broad appeal? Or is "Change We Can Believe In" a topic for Robert Stack's Unsolved Mysteries? Stay tuned..

one note:
reason for no blog last week: Brewer Playoff Baseball...this happens once every 26 years, not every year like some heartless East Coast teams who believe in curses and putting old players heads in ice cubes. will this rant help my grade? j/k