“Number two, create jobs.”

When asked how to deal with the economic troubles recently, Biden answered that he would create jobs.

Thankfully, the interviewer didn’t let him get away with it.  This reminds me earlier when an Obama ad said that he would “fast-track” new technology for alternative fuels.  You can’t fast-track science.  You increase spending in a particular field, but there’s no guarantee that usable technology will come from that science.

They criticize McCain for supporting drilling, but drilling is the only proven source of energy here.  It may be 5-10 years away, but we have no clue at all how far away usable alternative fuels are.  I’d rather pursue the “all of the above” strategy that will at least give us a back-up plan with having more of our own oil.

That’s all I’ve heard so far out of Obama-Biden is vague goals of what they want to accomplish, but not how they are going to accomplish them.

This is especially true with their economic policies.  They are shooting for policies that sound good now—taxing oil companies and big corporations and giving money back to people.  However, that idea is extremely shortsighted.  What I want is a candidate not just with ideas, but with plans.  There’s a huge difference.

When looking at examples of these tax and spend policies, we look no further to the "laboratories of democracies” the states themselves.  California and New York have adopted the approach that Obama has advocated with dire consequences.  The Wall Street Journal recently noted:

Anyone who thinks the path to "fiscal discipline" is through higher taxes ought to look at the current budget spectacles in New York and California. The two liberal states have among the highest tax burdens in the country, yet both now find themselves with huge budget deficits and are debating still higher taxes to close the gap.

Ideas make for great rhetoric, but plans make for great results.

Palin Smears Rebutted

These are just a few. I know people don’t consider Fox News “balanced” but Brooks Jackson, the guy being interviewed is from factcheck.org.

The highlights:

• Palin didn’t call for Creationism to be taught in schools
• She didn’t call for books to be banned
• She never endorsed Pat Buchanan for president

Jackson also makes a note about the Obama lipstick remark. As I said before, it is obvious that the what Obama was directly was referring to McCain’s policies and not to Palin. However, the audience obviously pulled a double meaning out of it—whether it was intended or not.

I think its interesting to see how charges of veiled sexism are being brought against a man who has been charging the Republican party with unfounded accusations of overt racism the entire campaign.

Biden: Life begins at conception

Barak Obama's running mate, Joe Biden dropped what ammounts to a bombshell in an interview on Meet the Press this past Sunday:

"They believe in their faith and they believe in human life, and they have differing views as to when life — I'm prepared as a matter of faith to accept that life begins at the moment of conception."

Wow.  Usually, proponents of abortion rights hide behind the "uncertainty" of when life begins.  We saw Obama use a simlar dodge when asked about human rights for the unborn with his "above my pay-grade" comment.  He was criticized by many, including me, for not having a clear answer on such an important question.

Speaker of the House, and #3 person in the federal government, attempted to defend her position on abortion by muddling Roman Catholic teaching on the matter.  Christianity has been clearly against abortion since its founding.  Pelosi was later rebuked by leaders in the Catholic Church, of which she is a member, for her misleading statements about Catholic doctrine.

However, Biden's statment goes beyond the pale.  Biden cuts through the uncertainty and says that he believes life begins "at the moment of conception."  Yet, he still supports the rights of those who want to take that life, and furthers the industry which profits off the practice.

The question that was asked of Obama at the Saddleback Forum would be especially poigniant if redirected at Biden.  Since Biden believes that life begins at conception, when does this life get human rights?

Then there's a new set of questions that spring forth:  Are there other human lives that can be denied human rights?  Which human rights do we withhold?  Are human rights additive or subtractive?  Meaning, do humans automatically have human rights unless they are restricted, or are they considered withheld unless specifically given to people by the US Congress or Supreme Court?  I know what the Constitution says, but does Biden?

Even for supporters of abortion rights, the Obama-Biden ticket has a lot of questions to answer.