Political Punch

Biden claimed [to Barbara West]:

..they [Bush] have devastated the middle class. We, for the first time since the 1920's - 1 % of the American people make 21% of all the income in America. That wasn't the way before George Bush became president.

Bottom line. False. This wealth gap exploded during the 90's under Bill Clinton. Hit 21% (+/-) in 2000. Here's the backup:

Let's look at this great misrepresentation in two ways. First it's rather to handy that the MSM stood on it's heels when in June, 2005, NY Times economic writer David Kay Johnston wrote a piece attacking the Bush tax cuts. The article, Richest Are Leaving Even the Rich Far Behind, used data illustrating how the rich got richer during the Clinton years, but then the rest of the media ran with the view that it was all about Bush.

Not since the 20's roared -- at when this great rise in wealth of the super rich occurred. The president here was Bill Clinton, not George Bush. Then look at when this rising trend ended.

Now. Biden said specifically, "first time since the 1920's - 1 % of the American people make 21% of all the income.."

Well, technically he may be right, but only by 0.19% - this is simply a political sales job. From 1993 to 2000 the top 1%'s income rose from 13.79% to 20.81% (I'd call that 21% - then) of all the income. Imagine the power of the proper follow up question to Biden here.

Enter Bush. By 2003, the top 1%'s share had dropped to 16.77%. Latest data I have does show that by 2006, it's up to 22.06%. (*source; same source that Biden is using - the IRS)

So under Clinton, this "horrible thing" increased by a large amount; while under Bush it's managed in 7 years to pop up a point. So let's love Clinton for it, and hate Bush for it. How about, "let's challenge the lies - and educate the voters - the readers."

An extra on the same angle: Anyone want to look at how CEO's vs. worker bees faired under Bush compared to Clinton? Once again look closely at the chart - where is the anger at the Clinton years - and the celebration of the end of the Clinton years?:

Average CEO to Average Worker Pay Ratio

Note: the last data year in the chart is 2005. The ratio for 2007 has continued to drop to 344. And something tells me it will have dropped further in 2008 - just a sneaking suspicion.

There are several enormous economic items (affecting the election outcome) out there that are severely hurting the McCain chances. The Obama/Biden camp uses them as daily fodder for their cause. They are really not true.

- Clinton did not leave Bush a wonderful and warm purring economy. Bush inherited a crash, with almost every economic indicator long reversing long before the fall, 2000 election. data and graphs easily available -

- The $5 Trillion surplus - see above, was only a silly "projected surplus," based on the late 90's bubble continuing for ten more years. Any revisit to year end 2000 - shows that the surplus was out the window for the next president.

All taxes spread wealth in one direction or another. It seems that McCain doctrine is that giving a tax break (spreading the wealth) to the wealthy is to be applauded, while giving a tax break (spreading the wealth) to any lower income group is Marxist. When will the non-wealthy citizens wake up to the fact that the tax code is designed to distribute wealth--away from them and to the already wealthy? The wealthy are getting more wealthy while others are not even keeping up, in large part because of taxing the lower income groups.

The comments by some of the people are are incredible. The questions by the anchorwoman were both baseless and rude. Anyone who can read and do research knows the facts. It seems that most people do not know that this woman's husband is a consultant to the GOP campaign. That is what the GOP does, in the face of a losing campaign, use the most ignorant and baseless people as their pawns, no different than selecting Palin as a VP.

Finally....a reporter who is not afraid to ask some tough questions to the Obama/Biden campaign. The only reason Biden thought it was a joke is because none of the mass media have given him anything tough or relevant to answer. These were all questions aimed at the policies they are touting...so why the difficulty in answering them? Also..who really believes that Katie Couric's interview with Palin wasn't intended as a "gotcha interview" from the moment it was scheduled? The double standard in this election is just plain embarrasing. One other thing ...Obama is not running against Bush...he is running against McCain.The way all Democrats running for office this year seem to be running against Bush is just unbelievable!

The only reason democrats are getting upset and defensive about this interview is because it asked real questions and THE DEMOCRATS DON'T WANT TO HEAR THE TRUTH. They want "change" so much that they are willing to be blind to the dangerous change that is headed our way if Obama becomes President. We all want change, we all are scared, but if Obama becomes President, you will have something to really be scared about. God help us.

Obama's policies will be death to our economy.

He says he will give tax breaks to 95% of Americans. That's funny because approximately 40% of Americans DON'T PAY ANY TAXES! Soooooo, Obama intends to INCREASE WELFARE to those who pay no taxes calling it a tax break.

Roughly 70% of our jobs are created by small businesses yet Obama wants to tax people (including businesses) who make more than $250,000 year.

What happens when businesses have to pay more taxes?

a) They pass the cost off to their customers.

b) They stop hiring.

c) They lay off employees.

d) They make less money, contribute fewer taxes to our economy etc.

Obama also talks about "windfall profit taxes" on BIG OIL. Now, let's consider this rationally. When a company has higher taxes, they pass these costs onto their customers. Hence, Obama's plan to tax BIG OIL will RESULT IN OUR PAYING MORE FOR OIL AND GAS! Is that what we really want or need??? If that happens, the painful price of gas at $4 and more may seem very cheap compared to where future prices can go. Our gas prices are subsidized by our government. Would you prefer to pay $8 to $10 per gallon like they do in Europe? Taxing BIG OIL's PROFITS WILL RESULT IN THEIR PASSING THOSE COST ONTO US.... THE CONSUMERS!

The ONLY people who should be excited about Obama's tax proposals are those who HAVE NO JOBS AND DON'T INTEND TO WORK WAITING FOR A GOVERNMENT HANDOUT INSTEAD!

I doubt that includes all of Obama's supporters. So, please, people..... do your homework and THINK before you elect the MOST RADICAL, FAR LEFT SENATOR of today.

Sarah,

Wake up, the govt. isn't supposed to get you a job you are supposed to get off your couch and go get one yourself. I have been out of work for less than one day since I graduated High School 20+ years ago. At times that has meant I've worked security jobs, telemarketing, delivering papers, filing, ect... what ever it took until I found a better job in a field I wanted.

I hate to break it to you but the Government isn't here to give people jobs or money. The Government does not make a single thing, they only take something from us to pay for their programs.

Who is Barack Obama?

Very little is known of him prior to this campaign. If you will do your homework and look at HIS RECORD.... you will see that he voted to raise taxes 94 times.

When he was in the Illinois Senate, he voted "present" 130 times.

What are his ethics... his morals?

We KNOW he lied about his past associations..... He said he never heard Rev Wright spout hatred of America. By his own count, he attended church about twice a month for 20 years... that's 500 times. Do you really believe that in 500 sermons he NEVER heard the hatred in Wright's sermons?

People.... HE LIED then and continues to do so.

He said he would accept public funds for his campaign... but then he fiip flopped once again. HE LIED ONCE AGAIN did not take the public funds for his campaign and is spending almost 8 to 1 against McCain.

Is a liar a man of CHARACTER?

By contrast, Senator McCain (son and grandson of Admirals), was given the option of being allowed to leave the POW camp and to return to the US. HE CHOSE TO STAY WITH HIS MEN in the POW camp and was tortured and imprisoned for 5 1/2 years. McCain MADE THE HARD AND ETHICAL CHOICE WHEN NO ONE WAS LOOKING. It's a very good indication of HIS MORAL FIBER AND CHARACTER!

Lots of comments that the questions were biased in here. I guess asking questions based on what the candidates have said and done is bias now. Bring on the new censorship doctrine.

When the Barack campaign gives $845,000 to ACORN for campaign services what part of that money isn't actually going to ACORN. So Biden was technically correct when he said they haven't given any money to ACORN for getting out to vote. Instead they just gave them huge sums of money not only from the campaign but from congressional earmarks.

When Barack tells an American that he wants to redistribute the wealth and increase the capitol gains taxes so that the amount a person pays is based on fairness, how does that not parallel the saying from Karl Marx?

I guess in the interest of fairness the Obama campaign should stick to CNN and Larry King for more softball questions. Or maybe questions they can answer like "What do you want to tell us as we won't really ask you a question about what you have said?"

Excellent questions from someone at a real news desk instead of the normal questions from the Obama campaign desk.

I welcome tough probing questions by ethical reporters. However, this was a statement of the reporters political believe couched as a question. When an ethical reporter asks a tough and probing question, the listener should not know their political belief...not necessary, not relevant, not ethical. This question obviously came from a conservative Republican reporter attempting to make a statement. I am a Republican that used to consider myself conservative-however, my party has been highjacked by the religious right and has gone so far right I find myself to be moderate. This woman, and my party, has been an embarrassment to me in this election.

This is absurd and that anchor should be fired. She is no more a "journalist" than I am an astronaut. I think it's sad that the media can't ask real questions about the economy and instead focus on red herring issues that distract people from the fact that John McCain isn't going to be able to pull us out of this recession or get me my job back.

I do not condone either Ms. West's questioning strategy or Senator Biden's responses to her.

Ms. West definitely conveyed if not a republican bias an anti-Obama sentiment. She conducted her interviewing very much like an attack-ad, raising questions into Obama's character through insulting, biased inquiries.

However, a couple of Senator Biden's responses were inappropriate overreactions since Ms. West did state the bare truth in some of her comments. For instance, her question about whether Sen. Biden could call his campaign's economic policy "Marxist," though rather blunt, was legitimate. A policy that calls for redistributing wealth through taxes and tax cuts or other means, subscribes to Marxism. Senator Obama's and Senator Biden's economic policy advocates placing more taxes on the rich to "bring more tax cuts for the middle class." It is therefore Marxist. Senator Biden was unjustified in telling Ms. West that her question was dumb.

Although it is debatable whether this interview was appropriate, I think that it is a good thing that it was broadcast to the public. The media does Americans a service by presenting such political discussions that challenge politicians; doing so protects voters by forcing politicians to hold a certain level of accountability in their words and actions. That is much better than if the media stood aside and allowed politicians to make any given claim in order to gain our votes. If candidates knew that voters would be largely uninformed of whether their statements were true or false, then there would be little incentive for politicians to be truthful to voters.

I do not condone either Ms. West' behavior or Senator Biden's flawed "facts."

Ms. West definitely conveyed if not a republican bias an anti-Obama sentiment. She conducted her interviewing very much like an attack-ad, raising questions into Obama's character through insulting, biased inquiries.

However, a couple of Senator Biden's responses were inappropriate overreactions since Ms. West did state the bare truth in some of her comments. For instance, her question about whether Sen. Biden could call his campaign's economic policy "Marxist," though rather blunt, was legitimate. A policy that calls for redistributing wealth through taxes and tax cuts or other means, subscribes to Marxism. Senator Obama's and Senator Biden's economic policy advocates placing more taxes on the rich to "bring more tax cuts for the middle class." It is therefore Marxist.

Although it is debatable whether this interview was appropriate, I think that it is a good thing that it was broadcast to the public. The media does Americans a service by presenting such political discussions that challenge politicians; it protects us by forcing politicians to hold a certain level of accountability in their words and actions. That is much better than if the media stood aside and allowed politicians to make any given claim, knowing that they would be uncontested, in order to gain our votes.

EXCELLENT & VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION !!!!!!!God Bless You for doing your job, & focusing on the "serious" issues of Obama's radical history!!! Having lived in Florida for 20 years, I pray Fl does us proud in electing John McCain. You make me proud of you!
Thank You

Dear Ms. Barbara West:

Let me make it clear, up front, I am a conservative, but the in-depth question you asked Senator Obama was an excellent one. Even if you had asked the question of a conservative, I applaud you. What Senator Obama proposes is a Marxist approach, and I'm not sure he would be able to deny it, if you had asked him the same question. I was born in and lived in Florida for more than 60 years, and you made me proud of my state.

Dr. Wendell V. Fountain

Asking questions that come to conclusions before they are answered is not journalism.

When asking questions such as this, it is common and understandable to quote the candidate. Quoting Karl Marx instead in an obvious (and lame) attempt disparage the candidate is reprehensible.

She should be reprimanded, not defended.

I commend our next Vice President Joseph Biden for taking the high road on this interview. It's about time that our national leaders of high integrity take on the right wing media's bias and stupidity to task.

to - do your own research: History is best qualified to reward research, So who was ever qualified to be president? If they were qualified then how did the situations the country is in come about if qualifications of Presidents past were a criteria? I guess your definition of qualification is what the country was founded on - Lies and deception. It's time for CHANGE!

I commend Barbara West for her professionalism in asking some tough questions to a Democratic candidate - something that the media has avoided.
The reaction from the Democrats is a peek of what's to come following an Obama/Biden win.

Nothing brings out the ugly & prejudice in people than a major election. We are very inteligent people. We know politics well enough to know that congress runs the U.S. not the president.