FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
In a last ditch effort to pick up those undecided voters, John McCain's message is focused on portraying Barack Obama as a socialist who wants to raise your taxes and redistribute your wealth.
A socialist? Really? A couple of weeks ago the government effectively nationalized some of the nation's largest banks– a plan signed into law by the current republican president, George W. Bush. A law Senator John McCain voted in favor of. Is nationalizing our banks socialism?
McCain says Obama will be a tax and spender if he's elected. Consider this: The Republican administration of John McCain's good buddy, President Bush, has doubled our national debt since 2000. Bush rewrote the definition of spending money, and McCain supported him more than 90 percent of the time.
We're fighting two wars and facing a giant financial crisis. My buddy, CNN Senior Political Analyst Gloria Borger, says in a column on CNN.com, quote: "No matter who is elected, the new president will find himself trying to figure out a way to keep some of his campaign promises without breaking the bank." Borger says in a week that means someone is going to have to start figuring out how to govern.
When Clinton left office the economy was sound, the government was running a surplus, we were at peace, and the banks were still private institutions. Then what happened. John McCain 's friend George Bush happened.
Here’s my question to you: Who would be the bigger spender in the White House: John McCain or Barack Obama?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Amy from Elkridge, Maryland writes:
I think when you look at what will be the bottom line, this country will be much better off financially with Barack Obama as president. Unlike John McCain, who would like to pull the lint out of the pockets of the poor, Barack Obama will go where the real money is, and tax the rich who can afford to do without a couple of bucks.
Stella from Bethlehem, Penn. writes:
I think whoever wins will have to spend a lot to get our country back on track. The question will be where the money comes from. Will it keep coming from the middle class or will someone help level the playing field and make companies pay what they should?
Jennifer from Raleigh, N.C. writes:
That depends. What price do you put on morality, on unity, or on our reputation at home and around the world? What’s the ROI for investing in the middle class and on turning our attention to energy independence? This Presidency is more than just dollars, it’s dollars and “sense.” McCain in office would be far more costly, on all fronts, economic and otherwise.
Marjorie from Canada writes:
Both would be big spenders. The difference is that John McCain would spend it on tax breaks for his wealthy buddies and continuing a multitude of wars, and Barack Obama would spend it on rebuilding the U.S. infrastructure, health care, schools and tax breaks for the poor and middle class who have been overlooked for the last eight years.
It’s a sad day in America. Barack Obama has been accused of being a socialist , a terrorist, a communist an elitist, a liar. I could go on and on, but from what I'm getting from this entire election, "McCain and Palin" are the only ones terrorizing people.
Dhiren from California writes:
I think they would spend equally. However, Obama's economic policies target the right group of people which will create millions of jobs which means higher productivity, an improvement in exports, and a lower national deficit. Although I will likely benefit from McCain's tax policies, I believe Obama is the better choice for the overall economy.