One of the things liberals are good at is saying one thing and meaning another.  Like when they say "we shouldn't be talking about experience in this election - we should be talking about the issues" you know they don't mean it.  How could they?  The only thing they are weaker on than the experience of their candidate is his stance on the issues.

Let's pick just one.  Taxes¹ -  Obama wants to have an exemption on the estate tax of $3.5 million and top rate of 45%.  McCain by contrast wants to have a $10 million exemption and a 15% top rate.  Proponents will say this only targets the rich, because after all, who has an estate valued over $3.5 million?  The problem is that estates are comprised of wages and goods that have already been taxed.  But the government wants to stick it's hand in the till one more time.  What's great is if you die and pass it on to someone else it can get taxed a third time!  At least McCain wants to minimize that. 

Obama wants to tax long term capital gains and dividends at 25%; McCain at 15%.  Who chould care about this?  Anyone who plans on retiring.  Retirement portfolios almost always have a capital gains eligible component in them, so if you are retired, or retiring soon, this one will impact you. 

In terms of tax cuts, McCain wants to double the dependent exemption from $3500 to $7000.  This will be a huge boon to people of ALL classes (at least those that have dependents) - and will effectively make lower income families almost exempt from paying income tax.  Obama wants to give a $500 tax credit to each worker.  Thanks for (next to) nothing. 

More importantly, McCain wants to cut the corporate tax rate to 25% from 35%.  Talk about a boon to the economy!  This means more money in the bottom line for investors (again, anyone with a 401K will benefit from that!!), more money for capital investment (which means more jobs!) and more money for research and development into new technologies (like alternate fuels maybe?  Just a thought...).  In addition, when you remove the tax incentive to relocate job to other countries, more jobs will stay here in the US!!  Obama, on the other hand, wants to eliminate tax breaks for corporations that move jobs overseas and give them to companies that create them here².  He doesn't talk about the fact that often times these are the same companies, and that global growth is inevitable, and with America's tax rates the second highest in the world jobs will continue to flow out whether we like it or not.

Popular belief holds that the Great Depression began with a stock market crash in 1929 and that Franklin Delano Roosevelt pulled us out of it.  The truth is that anti-trade talk caused the stock market crash, and the Smoot-Hawley Tariff act sent the economy over the edge.  In the midst of the Depression when the market was actually showing signs of recovery, Roosevelt raised taxes, which prolonged the misery.  Had World War II not come along, the Depression could have lasted well into the 1940's.

Fast forward to 2008.  We're exiting a period of housing depreciation (caused largely by economic policies of excess liquidity implemented by Alan Greenspan and made worse by Bernake, and brought home by banks eager to make a fast - but risky - buck and people either uneducated about that risk or too eager to overextend their ability to repay their loans) and a weak dollar.  We're showing signs of recovery.  Do we really want a president who will reverse trade agreements, penalize companies that do business globally and raise taxes?  As Fred Thompson said on September 2nd, Obama doesn't want to take water from your side of the bucket, he wants to take it from other side.  If you still don't get the picture, go get a bucket and give it a try.  See how it works out for your side.

So I say again - do the libs, who favor tax-and-spend, really want to discuss the issues?

^{1Source: Forbes, June 2, 2008 p 103
2Obama's nomination acceptance speech, August 28, 2008}