Obama Speech Part One

I woke up yesterday morning to a beautiful blue sky that we have become accustomed to in Colorado. I guess that James Dobson's Focus on the Family prayers for rain during Obama's speech didn't work. Still, a smoky haze did settle in over Denver because of forest fires northwest of Denver.

We met at a Joe and Sarah's house in the Highlands area of Denver and rode our bikes to Mile High Stadium. Security fencing was set up around the entire perimeter of the stadium and parking lots. We were meeting up with some friends who were coming in on RTD Light Rail and had Sarah's credential, so we walked way around to the Bronco's bridge to meet them.

While walking around, we got to see some of the security measures in place. Vehicles entering the security perimeter went through strict inspections. They inspected the interior of the vehicle, the engine, the undercarriage, and also used bomb sniffing dogs. The Army had set up triage tents to handle any emergencies, and police and firemen from up and down the front range were there for support. The security that I witnessed for the event was exemplary.

We made it over to the entrance by the Broncos bridge, where we expected to meet our friends. Unfortunately, the security by the Light Rail sent them completely around the stadium to the other side, where the lines to get in were up to four hours long. Sarah must have had someone looking out for her, as a girl walked by and handed her a golden ticket - a hall credential that provides access to many areas of the stadium. We were able to go right in, as the security was less than 20 minutes at that entrance.

We went inside the stadium and hung out in the shade. We didn't get to see Olympian Shawn Johnson lead the crowd in the Pledge of Allegiance or Jennifer Hudson sing the National Anthem, but we did get to hear it. Then we headed up to our seats to witness the rest of the activities.

Part II coming soon.

The Daily Show in Denver

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart is currently on location in Denver to cover the events of the Democratic National Convention. The studio was set up at the Newman Center for the Performing Arts at the University of Denver. I have been in the studio audience for a TV sitcom and a nationally syndicated radio show, and I really enjoy seeing the behind the scenes of how things are done. We had the good fortune of having VIP tickets, so we were able to skip the line wrapped around the building. After passing security, they had us wait around for awhile and then let us into the studio. They had a comedian come out to warm up the crowd, and then Jon came out to meet the crowd and answer questions. I think there was a change in the guest for the show, as they had delayed the start by about an hour to do script rewrites. Instead of a studio guest, they ended up using a satellite feed to interview DNC Chariman Howard Dean on the convention floor. When they first went to Dean via satellite, he thought he was on the air and went straight into a joke about McCains houses. However, it was just a test of the satellite feed, and a few minutes later they started the interview. His joke wasn't that good either time. Another part of the show included correspondents Samantha Bee and Wyatt Cenac, who were "at" the convention. Instead, they were in the studio in front of green screens next to Jon. It was alot of fun and I am glad that I had a chance to be in the studio audience. I would like to thank Travis LaBerge and Gabe Grifoni for hooking me up with a ticket for the taping. Below are some clips from the show.

Green Sunday at Red Rocks

The 2008 Democratic National Convention kicked off last night with the official welcoming concert. In addition to starting the DNC, the event, called "Green Sunday At Red Rocks," raised environmental consciousness and focused on the importance of renewable energy and green jobs. The evening featured performances by Dave Matthews with Tim Reynolds, Sheryl Crow, and Sugarland.

Between acts, there were addresses by Laurie David, global warming activist and producer of Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth"; Van Jones, founder and president of Green For All; Bill McDonough, architect and sustainable living pioneer; and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., senior attorney for NRDC and chairman of Waterkeeper Alliance. There were also short speeches and introductions by Gov. Bill Ritter Jr., Mayor John Hickenlooper, Sen. Ken Salazar, and Gov. Tim Kaine of Virginia. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. had the best speech, as he wrapped together renewable energy, jobs for Americans, global warming, and the malfeasance of the Bush administration to form a powerful and concise message.

The evening was more of an unplugged affair, with most of the acts sticking to acoustic instruments. I have had my ups and downs with Dave Matthews in the past, but this was the best that I have seen/heard him. That is likely due to the guitar prowess of Tim Reynolds. The crowd was made up of all different colors, sizes, and classes of people. It wasn't a typical concert crowd, as many of the attendees were delegates or party donors. But overall, it was a fun evening with a strong message.

Special thanks go out to our friend Julia who gave us the tickets for the show. Julia is the executive assistant for Steve Farber, the co-chairman of the convention, and she has been working her tail off to help plan and organize the convention.

The Denvercratic Convention

With the Democratic National Convention in Denver, I thought that I would share some of my experiences during the week. I am currently planning on attending a few events, so I will try to write a post about them as soon after the event as possible. So check back this week to find out what is going on in the D-town. Also, drop a comment or two with your thoughts about the convention, personal experiences, opinions about the media coverage, or questions about what is happening.

Taxes (again)

A while ago, I wrote a post on taxes, and mentioned that the non-partisan Tax Policy Center had performed an analysis of both Obama’s and McCain’s tax policies. I also said that after I had read it, I would provide you with additional information regarding both candidates’ tax plans. Well, I have read it, but I am too busy to write more about it. So here is the Tax Policy Center's introduction and summary of the candidates tax plans.

Tax and fiscal policy will loom large in the next president’s domestic policy agenda. Nearly all of the tax cuts enacted since 2001 expire at the end of 2010. The individual alternative minimum tax (AMT) threatens to ensnare tens of millions of Americans in a web of pointless complexity and higher taxes, but a permanent fix palatable to both political parties has proven elusive. In the past year, the federal budget deficit has ballooned, and, more worrisome, large projected increases in spending on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid will put unprecedented demands on federal government revenue sources in the coming decades.

Fundamental reform of our tax system is one way to resolve these problems, but, at least in part because reform creates both winners and losers, the leading presidential candidates have not addressed it seriously. Nonetheless, both candidates have proposed major changes to the nation’s tax laws. Senator McCain would permanently extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, increase deductions for taxpayers supporting dependents, reduce the corporate income tax rate, and allow immediate deductions for investments in certain capital equipment. Senator Obama would permanently extend certain provisions of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts primarily affecting taxpayers with incomes under $250,000 but repeal the cuts in the top two marginal income tax rates ahead of their scheduled expiration in 2010; increase the maximum rate on capital gains; raise the top tax rate on qualified dividends from its current level (but keep it below pre-2001 levels); and enact new and expanded targeted tax breaks for workers, retirees, homeowners, savers, students, and new farmers. Senator McCain proposes to extend permanently and increase the AMT “patch” that has prevented most individuals and families with incomes below $200,000 from being affected by the tax and lowered the tax for others, and in our interpretation of his proposal, Senator Obama would also extend the patch. Each candidate would also increase the estate tax exemption and reduce the estate tax rate compared with current law in 2011 and beyond, although Senator McCain would cut the tax much more than Senator Obama. Finally, each candidate promises to broaden the tax base and reduce corporate loopholes. McCain lists eight breaks for oil companies as targets but, other than that, is short on details for his pledge to eliminate “corporate welfare.” Obama identifies a variety of steps, including basis reporting for capital gains, taxing carried interest as ordinary income, and enacting sanctions on international tax havens that don’t cooperate with enforcement efforts, but he would also need additional as-yet-unspecified policies to achieve his revenue target for base broadening.

Although both candidates have at times stressed fiscal responsibility, their specific non-health tax proposals would reduce tax revenues by an estimated $4.2 trillion (McCain) and $2.8 trillion (Obama) over the next 10 years. Both candidates argue that their proposals should be scored against a “current policy” baseline instead of current law. Such a baseline assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts would be extended and the AMT patch made permanent. Against current policy, Senator Obama’s proposals would raise $800 billion and Senator McCain’s proposals lose $600 billion.

The two candidates’ tax plans would have sharply different distributional effects. Senator McCain’s tax cuts would primarily benefit those with very high incomes, almost all of whom would receive large tax cuts that would, on average, raise their after-tax incomes by more than twice the average for all households. Many fewer households at the bottom of the income distribution would get tax cuts and those tax cuts would be small as a share of after-tax income. In marked contrast, Senator Obama offers much larger tax breaks to low- and middle-income taxpayers and would increase taxes on high-income taxpayers. The largest tax cuts, as a share of income, would go to those at the bottom of the income distribution, while taxpayers with the highest income would see their taxes rise significantly.

The impact of the tax code on economic activity under each candidate’s policies would differ in several important ways. Under Senator McCain’s proposed policies, the top marginal rates (35 percent on individual income and 25 percent on corporate income) would be significantly lower than under Senator Obama’s plan (39.6 and 35 percent, respectively). McCain’s reduced individual and corporate rates could improve economic efficiency and increase domestic investment, but the larger future deficits would reduce and might completely negate any positive effect. In contrast, Senator Obama’s proposed new tax credits could encourage desirable behavior, particularly if the childless EITC and payroll tax rebate encourage additional labor supply among childless low-income individuals. However, he would also direct new subsidies at an already favored group—seniors —and an already favored activity—homeownership—which could probably be better directed elsewhere.

As I have stated before, I like that Obama's plan will make permanent the tax breaks for individuals making less than $250,000. I also like that his plan will bring in more revenue than McCain's plan, although both are relying on fiscal responsibility to reduce spending and help balance the budget. With the current size of the US deficit, I think that we need to start taking several corrective actions to reduce our addiction to borrowing money from countries like China.

Larry Who?

You may already have heard about this, but I only just found out. Turns out Larry the Cable Guy is kind of a phony. Check out this YouTube clip of Dan Whitney before he created his Larry character.

Say What?

McCain:"But in the 21st century, nations don't invade other nations."
Umm...what about Iraq?

The Media Mess(ages)

The corporate media's coverage of the Presidential election (including the primaries) has been a stunning crapfest. Corporate media has a vested interest in a close election, as it gets viewers to tune into the news and thus increases ratings. They seek controversies anywhere they can find them and then magnify the significance of them. Often times, you will hear them discredit some of the falsehoods in the political commercials, only to hear them repeat those falsehoods later (if they mention the falsehoods at all). During all of this scrutiny of trivial items, the policy issues are ignored. Here are just a few examples of the ludicrous items that have been brought up in the media about Obama.

-Obama is too presidential
-The average American can't relate to Obama because he drinks orange juice
-Obama is too skinny for the average Joe
-Obama vacations in exotic locations (Hawaii)

The last one really cracks me up. I can't believe that Obama has been criticized for taking a short break in Hawaii prior to the DNC. The man was born in Hawaii, he has family in Hawaii, and, last time I checked, Hawaii is one of the fifty states that makes up the United States of America. So remember to think for yourselves when watching the news talk shows. In depth, relevant, critical reporting went out the window a long time ago.