Voters might ignore implications of Obama's tax plans because of his commanding stage presence

It’s dangerous when the government feels this entitled to citizens’ money.

You have that right! The by the time they start believing that, politicians like this Barney Frank starting also believing they don’t answer to the people. A dangerous position indeed!

So what, we’re supposed to just keep running at a deficit and borrowing money from china to pay for our Wars & the Bailout while ignoring our energy independence, crumbling infrastructure, failing schools? (not even bringing health care into it)

Tom W. I’m not the one who spent the money, nore do I approve of it being spent, so under what moral authority can I be expected to have to pay? The the proplems you list, and I agree they are proplems, they are all the governments fault, but their are going to force us at gun point to flip the tab.

So the better option is to elect McCain and have 4 (+?) more years of failed policies? Continuing No Child Left Behind, the worst educational policy ever implemented. Not implementing some government regulation of markets. Continuing our energy dependence and having staggering amounts of citizens with no health care which is a twofold problem possibly spreading disease through their lack of treatment or consistently being treated in the emergency room and passing on their inability to pay to the rest of us. But you’re right…Obama is dangerous….

Education graduate student

I didn’t think there was anything particularly arbitrary about where Obama’s tax increases will go. I thought the the top 10-5% will not get an increase while the top 5% will get a tax increase. There isn’t anything arbitrary about that beause it was the top 10% that benefited from the Bush Tax cuts, while the average income bottom 90% actually decreased.
I don’t know about you, but I’m not getting a free handout from Obama. I work hard everyday and pay a wide range of taxes.

the editors have fallen victim to the same empty rhetoric that has captured the nation.
If it’s empty rhetoric, we really don’t have much to worry about right?
Never mind that he offers nothing concrete except socialism

Wait a second, I thought he only offered up empty rhetoric. Now he offers something conrete? And that concrete something is socialism?

Tim,
Jason must work for the McCain campaign as he lacks a coherent message.

As republicans were so apt to point out when Iraq was the central issue of the campaign, it doesn’t matter how we got here, what matters is how we get out. And blaming all of our country’s problems now on the “government” is a cop out. Like it our not, our country elected those politicians who are responsible for where we are today, and those Politicians are the only ones who can get us out.

But SOMEBODY has to pay for it. You don’t want to L Spooner? Go somewhere else w/your money, although you’d likely pay even higher taxes abroad

So what, we’re supposed to just keep running at a deficit and borrowing money from china to pay for our Wars & the Bailout while ignoring our energy independence, crumbling infrastructure, failing schools?

Tom, we can always balance the budget by making cuts or raising taxes. The overarching point I think Mr. Smolinski was not that you shouldn’t vote for Obama but that we need to hold our representative responsible for for they do.

My vote is for communism.

Second- I don’t know how you could read that letter and think the point of it was anything other than to encourage people to not vote for Obama. The word responsibility doesn’t appear anywhere within the letter.

Okay Tim. Smolinski clearly doesn’t want you or anyone else to vote for Obama. I won’t dispute that. But I think the bigger message to take out of the letter is that we need to elect people to represent us that are fiscally responsible. In other words, those that make the hard choices that benefit the nation as a whole not some segment just because its the popular thing to do. That’s what I was getting at. Sorry for any confusion.