Voters should listen to facts, not fears and smears.
Some Kentuckians will believe anything, unless they hear it from a person well educated on the subject.
Historians have long noted Kentucky’s anti-intellectual streak, which has helped keep the state near the bottom of national rankings in education, income and other measures of progress.
Some Kentuckians fear change and scorn “elites,” who are generally defined as anyone better-educated or more broad-minded than they are.
I happened upon an interesting example last week while driving back from an interview in London. I was flipping through the radio channels and heard WVLK talk-show host Sue Wylie introducing Charles Haywood as her guest that hour.
Haywood is a Ph.D. economist and retired dean of the University of Kentucky’s Gatton College of Business and Economics. He was Kentucky’s first economic development secretary and is a former research director for Bank of America. He has appeared on Wylie’s show several times recently to discuss the economic crisis.
Wylie framed that morning’s show around this question: Are Barack Obama’s tax proposals socialism?
Haywood politely explained that returning tax rates for people earning more than $250,000 a year to pre-Bush administration levels was hardly socialism. Using that measure, he joked, you would have to call the tax policies that prevailed during Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower’s administration in the 1950s communism.
But Wylie and her audience were having none of it. She justified the assertion by repeatedly saying “a lot of people are talking about this.” Of course, she didn’t explain that those people are McCain and his surrogates.
Many people who called in to the show argued with Haywood and dismissed his expertise. At least one called him a liberal — talk radio’s favorite insult.
“I was surprised that so many people just didn’t really understand what’s going on, and certainly are misinformed about some things,” Haywood said when I called later to ask him about the show.
“I was trying to explain it to my wife, Judy, too,” Haywood said. “I said, well, there is just a lot of anti-intellectual sentiment out there. … It’s awfully hard to explain irrationality. It is a curious reaction from people who are obviously in a fairly low- to middle-income group and would benefit from a tax change.”
Haywood favors Obama’s economic proposals over McCain’s, although he didn’t say so on the air. He’s not alone.
An informal survey of academic economists by The Economist magazine found that “a majority — at times by overwhelming margins — believe Mr. Obama has the superior economic plan, a firmer grasp on economics and will appoint better economic advisers.”
Haywood went on: “The thing that’s so shocking to me is really the extent to which McCain has played fast and loose with the proposals of Obama.” Actually, it is in complete character with McCain’s increasingly shrill and desperate campaign.
For me, this election was an easy call. George W. Bush’s presidency has been a disaster. His tax breaks for the wealthy, giveaways to big business and aversion to government regulation have wrecked the economy and racked up a staggering public debt. The cake was iced with a huge bailout for the financial-services industry, which seems more interested in using public money to buy up weak rivals than in easing the credit crunch.
Rather than finish the job in Afghanistan, Bush led the nation into a senseless war in Iraq. Now we’re bogged down in both places, and Osama bin Laden still runs free. Bush has ignored the Constitution, embraced torture and government secrecy and seriously damaged America’s image among our allies. His administration has favored ideology over science, and it has consistently played to fear rather than reason.
The last thing America needs is another four years of the Republican policies that got us into this mess. And McCain’s decision to put Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin a 72-year-old heartbeat away from leadership of the free world says all I need to know about his judgment.
I find it interesting that people such as Warren Buffett, one of America’s most successful capitalists, and Gen. Colin Powell, Bush’s former secretary of state, have endorsed Obama’s ideas and leadership over McCain’s.
Many intelligent Kentuckians I know and like are supporting John McCain. Many are more comfortable with Republican ideology, or they prefer McCain’s résumé and leadership to Obama’s. I respect that.
What I can’t respect, though, is the gullibility and willful ignorance of Kentuckians who buy into and perpetuate right-wing fear-mongering.
How else to explain recent poll results that show 14 percent of Kentuckians — and 28 percent of Kentucky Republicans — think Obama is Muslim, even though it’s a well-publicized fact that he’s Christian. Like Obama’s race, it shouldn’t even matter. But we all know that it does to some people.
We must replace fear with hope, ideology with logic and ignorance with education. The stakes are simply too high.
RSS Feed
October 29th, 2008 at 9:48 am
I guess I fall into the ignorant, right-wing fear-mongering believer category. It must be my simple mind that cannot understand how it is fair or just to take more money from the rich just because they have it. Fact: the bottom 50% of taxpayers in this country pay less than 5% of the total bill, while the upper 10% pay close to 80%. Income and wealth re-distribution is already in place based upon those measures. How much is enough? How much should those who earn over $250,000, or is it $200,000, or $150,000 (seems to always be changing from the Obama camp), pay? Is 50% fair? Should a person who makes $300,000 a year pay $150,000 back in taxes? Who cares if that person who makes $300,000 a year went to school for close to 25 years and spent the majority of their lives striving to make their family’s life better? Let’s give some of that money to the people (in the form of rebate checks - or welfare if you will) who actually pay no money in taxes. Why does someone who pays no money in taxes deserve a tax break? The socialistic undertones of the Obama camp are worrisome to all of us who are not so blinded by Bush-hatred, which is the syndrome that those who lean left of center are afflicted with and can’t seem to shake. Wake up people.
October 29th, 2008 at 11:51 am
Well, at least you recognize that you fall into that category. Acceptance is an important first step.
You say people should wake up. Are we currently asleep in a nightmare economy that Bush ruined? Please tell me its not real. If I wake up is there an alter-ego President Bush that exists that really is a true fiscal conservative that believes in balanced budgets and less government spending? Because I feel like I’ve been in a nightmare for 8 years as MY republican party sold out its old base to cater to a bunch of religious zealots.
October 29th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Considering we rank 48th in the nation in education, do the responses on Sue Wylie’s show really surprise anyone> The same types of disdain, disbelief, and criticisms were usually leveled at the guest when Sue would have the former dean of the Patterson School of Diplomacy on to talk history and politics. Yet even though we are at the bottom in education, we seem to have an inordinate amount of “scholars” who feel they know more than the educated professionals and experts. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing…
October 29th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
Thanks Chris for your sentiments. I have one question for IgnorantRedneck? What about those of us who have done the things you named, like went to shcool and strived to make our family lives better? I’ve done all the things required to obtain the American dream, such as obtaining a Masters Degree, but I make no where near $300,000 a year. Are you suggesting I don’t because I didn’t do what the people that make that much money did to get the money. I can probably guess I may have a higher degree than quite a few of them, but still don’t make the kind of money they do. I’m not knocking them for their wealth, it gives me hope that I too may obtain it. However, I’m not opposed to a tax break for my $60,000 a year salary. What McCain, Palin and their supporters seem to keep focusing on are the small percentage of Americans who for whatever reason doesn’t work and require public assistance. What about people like me, the so called middle class? When will relief come to us? I tell you when, when Obama is elected President of the United States of American.
October 29th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Your column describes my political philosophy perfectly. I trust Warren Buffett and Colin Powell, and their support of Obama makes me feel even better about my vote. I am a small business owner, and I have suffered the past 8 years from the Chaney/Bush econpmic policies, not to mention this misguided war. Thank you for putting my thoughts into words so well. One of the reasons, people on ‘talk radio’ are so ignorant of the facts, is that many of them to not read the newspaper, so unfortunately they won’t see your column. Shannon Peck
October 29th, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Who is ignorant and who has their head in the clouds?
Obama is promising to ONLY raise the taxes on the rich and corporations making over $250,000 per year.
Corporations do not pay taxes. Their customers pay taxes. Taxes are an expense. Just like paper and ink if I run a newspaper. When my expenses erode my profits, I have to make a choice to raise prices, which reduces demand for my product. Or I can reduce my expenses, by reducing employees or pay employees less or reduce employee benefits. If I cannot deliver profit to my shareholders they sell my stock and invest in companies that give them more value. If the shareholders cannot find value in one market (USA) they will look in other markets (China). Without profits companies go out of business. When companies go out of business people loose jobs, prices go up because of reduced competition and no taxes are paid.
Raising taxes on anyone in our current economic climate guarantees that if I have a job, buy groceries, fuel or anything, I am going to make less and pay more.
Mr. Obama made the following statement in his February debate with Hillary Clinton “my tax policy is more about fairness than about bringing in more revenue”?
What is fair about high inflation, high unemployment and fewer benefits? This sounds familiar, does anyone remember Jimmy Carter?
October 29th, 2008 at 8:24 pm
FlyGirl, I think it is people like you (and me, I make nowhere near $300,000) that need the biggest tax break. For that matter, we all do. DerbyDog makes an interesting point - if taxes go up on the big, corporate rich (companies included), then we all suffer. It’s the same argument that can be made for raising minimum wage. The buck (i.e. bill) will get passed on to those who needed the extra buck in the first place. I’m for tax breaks for all, and a much smaller government than what currently exists. Has Bush screwed things up? Sure. Does the economy smell like a cow-pattie? You bet. But the Obama plan is the worst solution this country can look to.
And Chris, grow up. I see you too have been brainwashed by the left. Blame Bush, Blame Bush, Blame Bush. If you are truly a believer in the old, Reagan conservative policies of balanced budgets and fiscal conservatism, then there is no way you can vote for Obama next week. I may be wrong, but the general overtone of your entire post says vote for the other party because a vote for McCain is a vote Bush. And Bush is the sole etiological factor in this mess we currently find ourselves in. So to teach all the Bush backers a lesson, why don’t we all vote for the most liberal senator to ever reach this political point… and he’s only been in the senate for 2 years (most of which has been spent running for President). The next four years are going to really suck.
October 30th, 2008 at 5:41 am
I can only feel compassion and sympathy for our next president, whomever he may be. So many problems exist in our little part of the world. I do not believe 4 years of even the best leadership can right the American ship but we have to believe that we can at least put the ship back on course! Is Obama the answer? Not sure but the fearmongering, untruths, and inuendo’s which have spewed out of the McCain-Palin troops have convinced me that it’s WIN at Any Cost for the GOP. Are Rove & Attwater lurking in the shadows? Can fear & boogie man defeat reason & rational thinking?
Yes, I’ll admit I’m a registered Democrat but I have voted Republican when I felt that person (not that party) was the best for the job, and for our people. I’ve seldom, if ever, voted a straight ticket and doubt that I will again. Apologies to Mr. Haywood. I did not hear his discourse with Ms. Wylie but please reassure him that there are Kentuckians out there who do listen to both sides of the conversation & try to decide therein.
Ask yourself if Something were to happen that McCain, could Palin actually cope with the presidency? Oh yes, my fears of her in this role have nothing to do with her gender. Like many Kentuckians, I voted for Hillary in the primary and believe she could have been a great president. But Palin has far too many Bush traits and characteristics for my palate. And really, so does J. McCain! Senator Obama is no doubt far from perfect but he is head & shoulders above the alternative.
October 30th, 2008 at 8:32 am
There are currently 49 Blue Dog Democrats in the Senate, there could be 61 after Nov. 4. Mr. Redneck, the party of balanced budgets and fiscal restraint is the democratic party, regardless of how you feel about Obama. His agenda and spending will be moderated by more conservative democratic senate.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122532312630982163.html
Again, your party is run by the religious right now. It is a party of hate and fear on social issues, and without remorse when it comes to spending.
Is my vote for Obama a vote against Bush? Possibly, but it is definitely a vote against the current Republican hate-machine.
October 30th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
“Many intelligent Kentuckians I know and like are supporting John McCain.” Tom, would you like to define “intelligent” so that I might see how a Herald-Columnist can make such a statement!!!!
October 31st, 2008 at 2:21 pm
To those of you who need some facts, lets set some things straight that seems to have missed pretty much all of the liberal press the last 2 years:
1. Bush, done what he said he would do, lowered taxes for everyone. Yes the wealthy got the great deal of that BECAUSE THEY PAY THE MOST. Under Clinton: simple math 36% of $250,000 is $90,000 in taxes. Bush: 33% of $250,000 is $82,500 in taxes So the “wealthly” got a 7,500 break. Now look at someone making $50,000. Clinton: 28% = $14,000 in taxes: Bush: 25% = $12,500. $1,500 doesn’t seem like a lot compared to $7,500, but when you pay more in taxes than someone in the “middle class” makes, you should get a little bit more back. Don’t forget to take into count that the tax breaks Bush gave ALL AMERICANS actually increased tax revenues, rather than decreasing them. More people were spending their money, rather than giving it to the government to sit on.
2. The current economic situation: Many of you may think that Bush done this, yes he had his helping hand, it was called the Clinton Administration. With only a year left in office, Bill Clinton signed in to law the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999. Supported heavely by Alan Greenspan, the congress, and the current president, Bill Clinton. This was the biggest change and deregulation of our banking system since the Great Depression. These changes were in large part to promte competition to allow those who had less than stellar credit the oportunity to get a mortgage and buy a home. We all know what happened after that. People bought homes they couldn’t afford, banks got high on greed, raised interest rates, people defaulted on their loans, etc, etc.
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/11/12/banking.reform/index.html
3. Some of you seem to forget that Bush also weathered one of the nations biggest disasters when we were attacked on 9/11. Which was also about the same time that the internet bubble burst, again thanks to Clinton Administration Policy. The Dow Jones plunged and and a severe economic slow down occured. Now take all that into account and to see where our economy went within a short period of time was astounding. Then take remember John McCain noticed that the problems were going arise within banking systems, specifically Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. He brought it to the attention of the Democratically controlled House and Senate. What did they do, NOTHING!! Not a single thing. Why, because Barney Frank, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reed were all in the pockets of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.
Yes, Bush could have done a better job. But hindsight is 20/20. So, if a vote for John McCain is a vote for Bush, then so be it. I’ll take lower taxes, greater national security, smaller government, peace and prosperity over Obama’s higher taxes, lower GDP, high consumer prices, high risk national security, and government controlled everything, anyday!