i think the question itself was silly not the way she asked it. It is like asking do you like apple? how do you like being so similar to a horse? again i do not mean that she wasa disrespectful. she was trying to draw a line between the point when logic does not allow it
Well I saw the whole interview and I think she was out of line. This isn't even about hardball or softball questions. Honestly now, she starts off the interview with 'aren't you embarrassed' referring to ACORN. Are you serious? Like I said, I'm all for tough questions, but it's obvious she was asking questions to put Biden on the defensive and get her point across. Which is fine when done tastefully, but when it isn't don't be shocked when they don't wanna come back. I mean honestly, if Biden or Obama went on Limbaugh, Hannity or O Reilly they wouldn't even ask questions that way. Can you imagine Biden actually agreeing to go on Hannity, and Hannity's just like 'so how do you feel about your running mate being a communist' ha ha. But seriously, I don't blame Biden for denying them the interview with his wife.
The top 1 % also pay like 50% of all federal taxes, the top 10% pay 90 % of all federal taxes. Tax cuts are usually given to people who actually pay taxes
what has been usually done in the past year does not work. that is why we need a change. the tax cut that bush put in place was to help the economy but it did not work. it is time for a different tax break target to different set of people. you think middle class don't pay taxes? ================================================================= obama's tax calculator http://taxcut.barackobama.com/ i have not tried it but if you are interested
Your percentage covers less so you are worth less? We should just start giving out rights and liberties based on income? Maybe only the top 10% earners should be given a vote. Maybe we should let the top 5 all time earners run the military too.
no it did not. it took this many years for its effect to show. All the wealth moved upward and nothing came out of it.That is why such a huge difference in the wealth accumulation between middle class worker and the high class mgmt. Finally we have to bail them out to keep the country going.
You make it sound like Obama is the first politician ever to propose that rich people pay more taxes. But we all know that the rich have been paying higher tax rates for decades, this isn't Obama's new idea. He is saying we should reverse the most recent tax cut for the rich, and to put their rates back to where they were before Bush gave them a tax cut. Remember, the tax cut that McCain opposed back then? Either way, before and after Bush's tax cut, the rich paid a higher tax rate. It's a debate about how high the rate should be. It's not a debate about whether or not Obama is all of a sudden just now for the first time ever going to tax the rich at a higher rate. Now if you want to argue that Bush's tax cuts for the rich should be maintained, I think you should say why. I haven't heard that Obama intends to use the money from the tax rate hike to give to the "least productive". Where did you hear that? I thought he wanted to fund a new Manhattan style energy project for example, so we could be free of foreign oil dependence. That idea appeals to me as putting America first.
Except for the political right extreme and its followers the vast majority of Americans, virtually all around the world, historians and economists do not believe that Obama's policies even remotely reflect marxism or an extreme form of socialism. The question is so remotely radical in its concept its not worthy of receiving a response from a major candidate. Do you, or anyone else recognize the wealth created during the Clinton years from 1992 to 2000. The Dow Jones Index climbed from about 3200 in the first week of 1992 to about 10,700 by the final week of 2000. That was an unprecedented jump in stock wealth. Now of course we have a DJI, that while at one point it soared from the 10,700 level to 14,000 in these past 8 years it is currently hovering in the 8-9000 range---well below that level that was reached by the last year of the Clinton years. During those years, due in part to the growth in the value of stocks and the growth in property values, wealth in the US soared at record breaking levels. It was all done with tax rates higher than those during the Bush years. The change in tax rates was most significant with regard to the wealthy...yet it was the wealthy, whose income largely depends on investments who gained the most during the Clinton years. The rest of the population additionally benefitted with a strong economy. Adjusting tax rates at marginal levels is as far removed from marxism as day is from night. Using tax policy to try and drive the economy into more productive areas is far removed from marxism. The initial question was simply that of someone who was pushing not just a Republican agenda, but something far different...an agenda of the extreme far right extreme. I don't see why Biden should have wasted his time with the question.
Great answers by Biden. That woman is clearly a far right wing tool. Auditioning for a spot on Fox News? Sadly, she's way too old to get on Fox News.
It was a legitimate question from a real reporter. Biden does not think Obama is qualified and their is no denying that. Why do the sheep want to elect a Marxist?
Nonsense. The questions were no more legitimate than a question such as this: "Senator McCain, why do so many people think you are a senile old man who has sold his soul to the devil for a chance at the White House?" If Biden didn't think Obama was qualified then why is he running as his VP? "Marxist" ??? Just seriously get a grip. You have no idea what you are talking about.
it looks like the pugs are trying to find a different label to hide their racism. Hopefully GOP breaks up in pieces.
I don't see any of you guys being indignant about Obama or Biden going on Olbermann or Hardball and getting nothing but softballs. Sure, the reporter sounded like she got her questions from the McCain campaign, but if you're going to do interviews with interviewers that you are cozy with, then you should be able to negotiate interviews like this without seeming too much like a whiner. It's all about balance. Our media system is such that you may not get balance anymore in one instance, so balance must be achieved through aggregation.
LogicFlux - I'd like like to see Sarah Palin on Olbermann. That's the comparison. How would she handle that? I don't see Biden as "whining" at all in this interview. I see him as slapping down the pure ridiculousness of these questions. If you are going to be taken seriously as a journalist, ask serious questions.
Biden wasn't whining. You guys are. That's my point. Biden and Obama are big boys. They're running for the two most powerful offices in the world. They should be able to answer unfair questions from miss shill or whatever her name is.
Biden is a whining imbecile. That question was the first real question that the Obama campaign was asked. Obama is a Marxist