This has everything to do with McCain logic-defying claim to Change.  Earmarks are his most cited reform.  This Bridge lie seems a total washout to justify her maverickness, but a home run in demonstrating, again, that McCain's campaign will say anything- even dishonor the American people with bold face lies- to get elected.   Shame on John McCain, and shame on you." 

2.  Draw Them Out.  Make them tell you what they are saying and dispense devil's advocate attacks.  Force them to state it as opinion they cant substantiate it is an accepted fact. 

For example, Obama wants sex ed outcomes that are not included in the four corners of the bill enacted?  What makes you think that?  Who are these "some people" who say there may be other motives and what exactly have they claimed?  If that bill isnt about protecting kids from pedophiles, what is your more reasonable explanation, and why is it important enough to spend national TV type money to discuss? 

And once they are drawn out-Attack (man, Begala was so right)!.  How is this better service for our country (country first right?) talking about sex ed-  instead of the economic plan to revive our economy?  Clarify position, legsweep.  Shame them.  Use simple strong words to do damage, not deference.   

3.  Framing.  Show the audience the impact it will have on their lives.  Show them the injustice of the issues they support and its contrast to the generally accepted American way of life.  We don’t lie, we don’t steal, we don’t bullshit.  We work hard, give freedom to our neighbor to pursue happyness, and make our way. 

I wanted to continue the discussion about liberal ideals as good business.  Moreover, I want not only to market liberal policies as common sense, and appealing to the right, but all liberal values as such.  I want to take “liberal” back, we are much stronger than the current perception.  The Left is stronger on almost all topics, and agrees with the vast majority of American people on important supposedly weak Liberal issues including security, foreign policy and religion, than the Right.  Despite what the media tries to tell us, Liberal values are the real reflection of the majority of Americans.  I will blog on these topics later if people like this post.

But lets talk the economy.  Im a converted republican leaner and CPA, so this is a topic that kept me in chains with the GOP until events called on me to educate myself on realities behind the hype.  Good business is a powerful marketing concept for any Dem platform, as Desidero saw with the well received post. 

So to begin, we all know the economy has done better under Democratic presidents in recent memory, deficits have grown less fast and stock markets done better.  But even on traditional issues of Liberal concern, Dems have very persuasive arguments for fiscally conservative counterparts that they in fact have the stronger position, one that is more economically beneficial.  Consider:

 
Universal Welfare.  Healthcare makes us more able to work, helping the economy.  Child welfare is important to our economy, up to 25% of our country’s children live in poverty.  
 

http://www.heartsandminds.org/articles/childpov.htm

Your income and neighborhood are some of the biggest determinants of how well you will do in life, so more money invested means more productive future workers.  Yet we invest in children’s financial well being shamefully poorly.  Our poverty rates are among the world’s best for seniors, terrible for children.  Why?  After welfare reform, people got left out, whereas social security is universal coverage and beyond “Liberal” labels.  People feel less angry about senior free rides, after all we will all be less able older citizens someday and will hope to depend on the good nature of younger citizens to care for us, even though we can’t pull our weight as much as before.  But this justification is just marketing.  Considering the amount of a welfare check is hardly enough to live on, much yet to incent people not to get a job, there is much less free riding than there is resentment of the possibility.  But Liberalism has solutions good for business there too- make them work, like in Holland.  They create jobs just to employ people.  Such a program would add another $2 billion to our tax burden, but hey, get out of Iraq and we can fund that in one week.  Plus, don’t forget workers actually contribute stuff…
 

Deregulation.  Oh the burdens of laws.  Sure, they can go overboard and restrict progress, but much of the deregulation we have seen in the past few decades has its most major societal impact not on heightening progress, but restricting it.  Consider the relaxation of ANTITRUST laws.  These laws don’t help foment competition- we can all agree competition helps the economy right?- it helps crush competition, innovation and progress.  Further, relaxing pollution laws doesn’t help the economy overall, it helps owners of corporations make money, and passes on a bigger bill to the public to clean up.  Yes, Big Pharma may benefit from medicine sales to treat those poisoned by pollution and additives (all of us), but the cost we bear has increased as a result, overall bad for business, but good for owners of polluting corporations and other entrenched interests.  And we haven’t even begun to talk about the last three recessions are directly correlated to the Right’s deregulations in housing (2008), financial sector (late 1990s Asian monetary collapse) and the S&L crisis (early 80s).  Of course, if you ask Joe Scarborough, or McCain, it was due to greedy speculators flipping houses.  
 

Environmentalism.  The Right has been blocking solutions to global warming since the day it began.  They claim its bad for business.  No.  Innovative solutions are good for business and help fuel the economy and our economic leadership in the world.  It is bad for Big Oil and The Big 3 automakers though, for example.  Not because they cant make money selling things like the electric car (someday), but because its RISKY.  They have a good thing going with the whole oil thing, they have the market controlled, game theory says milk that until its gone.  Sure, they could jump to making innovative cars running on saltwater (yes someday this could be possible!), but your company isn’t made up of creative Silicon Valley types.  And if they do develop the market and the right technology, the new market will attract competition and making additional profit from the risk over the long haul.  Environmentalism is better business overall, just not for the companies making money killing the planet.  We don’t need to kill whales to have a thriving economy, sorry Dick.

Taxes.  Thanks to the Iraq War, Dems don’t have to defend an increase in taxes to fund many programs, such as infrastructure relief, education et all.  Whether it’s a reduction in the deficit or increase in current taxes, the overall burden on the average American would be lower post war.  Most of the tax controversy has been and will be, war or not, that the richest Americans basically lie about the middle class impact to get the support needed.  See the Death Tax discussion of 2003.  Notice today how the talk about taxes centers on capital gains, yet McCain’s more regressive tax plan is left unfettered.  The truth is the Left’s tax plan has been more fiscally responsible, the Right’s propaganda about tax and spend Liberals more effective.  But we are factually better on this issue that the GOP.  Yes, higher taxes haven’t stimulated the economy since the days of FDR, but Liberals championing rollbacks of tax cuts for the richest Americans is good business, lest we overburden future generations with more irresponsible debt.  Unpopular for Rupert Murdoch, but better overall.  Thank God we can prove that trickle down isn’t good for the economy, but, as George Senior said, it is voodoo economics after all.