Opinion Streams

On November 4, 2008, The United States, a country that a mere forty-four years ago effectively denied African-Americans the right to vote, elected an African-American president. While this historic moment probably does not signal an about-face for America on race relations, it is a moment all Americans can be proud of. After more than five hundred years, America can finally say to the world that it genuinely is a country committed to equal opportunity, that it finally is a country willing to look beyond race, ethnicity and gender to the content of a person’s character.

I am an evangelical Christian with a record of voting in line with the Republican Party. This year, however, I am casting my vote for Barack Obama. My support for Obama stands on its own, and has been well documented throughout this blog. But why would an evangelical Christian vote for a Democrat? The answer is as much a reflection of what Obama stands for as it is what the GOP does not.

Last week I received an email from Dr. James Dobson – whose internet ministry I subscribe to – imploring me to “vote my values,” meaning to vote for the candidate whose “pro-life” and pro traditional marriage rhetoric carried Dr.

I cannot make any statement about this endorsement that would be better than the statements from Powell’s own mouth.  Thus, I will reprint Powell’s endorsement in whole below:

I know both of these individuals very well now.  I’ve known John for 25 years as your setup said. And I’ve gotten to know Mr. Obama quite well over the past two years.  Both of them are distinguished Americans who are patriotic, who are dedicated to the welfare of our country.  Either one of them, I think, would be a good president.  I have said to Mr.

At last night’s third and final (thank God!) presidential debate, John McCain attempted to answer Barack Obama’s claims about McCain’s “Bushiness”, and turn the tide of the campaign back in his favor, with the retort: “Sen. Obama, I am not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago.” Wonderful comeback; probably McCain’s best of the evening. Obama’s response… Well, there was no response because Bob Schieffer went to the next question. What Obama should have said, and what his campaign will no doubt begin to say in the coming days, is along the following lines.

In my post yesterday, I disclosed that McCain’s plan - abruptly announced during the second presidential debate - to buy up individual mortgages and renegotiate the principal balance of those mortgages to reflect current home values, was previously called for by Obama and was already part of the bailout legislation signed into law by George Bush. Well, I have a slight correction of sorts: as McCain revealed details of the plan yesterday, It became clear that McCain was trying to accomplish something different, and, in the spirit of McCain policy proposals, far worse, than current law.

At last night’s second presidential debate, John McCain made what will surely be regarded as his umpteenth Hail Mary throw. In response to a question from an audience member regarding ways the federal government can bail people out of “economic ruin,” McCain said this:

I would order the Secretary of the Treasury to immediately buy up the bad home loan mortgages in America and renegotiate at the new value of those homes – at the diminished value of those homes and let people be able to make those – be able to make those payments and stay in their homes.

Aside from the fact that McCain’s sudden epiphany is already part of the bailout package, McCain’s attempt, less than four weeks before the election, to transform himself from the champion of laissez faire economics to the great patron saint of government intervention into private markets may backfire.

My readers may notice that I have not devoted much space to coverage of Sarah Palin, John McCain’s spectacled salute to Dan Quayle, on my blog. The reason: after her introduction to the U.S. as a lying, venom-spewing “pit bull” during her speech at the Republican National Convention, I largely regarded her as a waste of space on a blog devoted to issues of substance. My boycott, if you will, survived her bumbling interviews with Charles Gibson and Katie Couric (although I gave those interviews brief mention in other articles) and lasted through the VP debate.

I. We Are in the Midst of an Economic Crisis

To say that we are experiencing an economic crisis is probably becoming an understatement. Explaining how the crisis unfolded is like watching a “domino effect” in reverse. Monday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 777.68 points, the biggest single-day drop in its history. The market fell on news of Congress’ failure to pass a $700 billion bailout package that, according to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, would save crumbling financial institutions and prevent a credit crunch that may send the global economy into a tailspin.

Tonight’s presidential debate was McCain’s to lose, and for a while it looked as though he might not even show up. As the key topic was foreign policy, many commentators felt that Obama needed merely to demonstrate that he could hold his ground against an elder statesman. As the debate unfolded, it became clear that McCain did not “lose”. Indeed, he appeared to have a greater command of the room when the subject switched to foreign policy. McCain did, however, appear very much out of his element, and indeed nervous, during the discussion of the economy and the banking industry bailout.