Tuesday, October 7, 2008

Debate, Drug Clock, and Money Bomb

What can we expect out of tonight's Presidential debate? The debate tonight will be held in a town-hall sort of format, the only debate of this form that Obama agreed to. McCain thrives in these small settings, while Obama thrives in arenas. This is a debate that McCain desperately needs to 'win.' A win for McCain in my opinion would be to appeal to disgruntled Republicans and swing voters. If McCain's ratings in key states do not increase after this debate, he is in trouble.

Let's face it, the war on drugs is not on the forefront of everyone's mind. I think that needs to change. We need to realize the social injustice that has come from this event, and take a different approach. I haven't blogged much about it besides my first post a month or so ago, but it is something that I will try to concentrate on more in the future. These statistics are staggering.

The markets continue to collapse. Not just in the United States, but worldwide. The bailout legislation was supposedly supposed to provide immediate assistance but now Bush claims "It's going to take a while." Even when the specifics are battled out, the reasons to oppose this bill are tremendous, and the actual result of the legislation will not be what was expected. It seems like more negatives concerning the bill come out every day. BJ Lawson recently wrote in his blog about how new powers will be given to the IRS through the bailout bill. It really is a sad situation, and the economy will continue its tailspin in the meantime.

Speaking of BJ Lawson, today is the money bomb for his campaign. They've already received over $50,000 in donations today and are well on their way to their $500,000 goal. Hopefully this will provide him with the funds to make the final push and win the election next month.

1 comment:

LeoM said...

One thing we can expect from the debates is a whole lot of talking about not much in real dispute. Ralph Nader on C-SPAN yesterday put it very well when he said that in their current format, these are not debates -- they are parallel interviews. How delightful it would be to hear men and women of conviction argue their beliefs ex tempore about the constitutionality of having our monetary policy in the hands of private bankers. I have little faith that the question will even be raised tonight. But who really wants to think about economics anyway, when Paulson explains it so ... I was going to say "succinctly," but that's really a stretch.

So who wins the debate? Oh, somebody, I guess. But not the American citizen.