A Taipan Daily reader has the opportunity to submit questions for the next presidential debate. Honored to help, Justice Litle throws out a few possible questions for the candidates.

“Just when I thought I was out... they pull me back in.”

That’s my impression of Silvio Dante from The Sopranos, doing his impression of Michael Corleone from The Godfather (Part III, if you want to get technical).

On Wednesday I declared myself tired of politics, hoping we could give Washington a rest for a bit. (And the hike was indeed refreshing -- thanks to those of you who asked.)

Walking through the tall Tahoe timber, I did in fact get a sense of what the next “Big Trade” could be... and it looks to be a Very Big Trade indeed, the kind that only comes along once in a blue moon. But that can wait until next week. It’s not one that requires a trigger pull right away.

For now, a surprise opportunity has fallen into our lap -- and by “our” I mean all of us, every reader included -- that can’t be passed up.

It involves politics and, miracle of miracles, maybe even the chance to (gulp) make a little bit of a difference.

Here’s the scoop...

One of our very own, Taipan Daily readers John Lott, will be at the next presidential debate on October 7. John will be one of 100 or so attendees, selected by a random Gallup poll. He’ll have the opportunity to submit a question for Obama and McCain -- and that’s where you and I come in.

What John needs to know is, What would be a good question (or two) for the candidates? Assuming the question gets through screening -- and it could -- what should be inquired of the future leader of the free world (as one of them will wind up being)?

We here at Taipan Publishing Group were honored by John’s request for help on this. I asked his permission to extend the request to the full Taipan Daily audience, and he said yes. So here we are.

“I need a good question (short and sweet, of course) by Monday afternoon,” John says. “We meet Tom Brokaw on Tuesday morning... He is in charge of selecting the questions. I figure there is time for about 15-20 questions... and what is as important as our economy right now?”

So here’s how we’ll do it. Today (Friday) we’ll throw out a few possible questions for the candidates. I’ll divide them into two sections: plausible and fantasy.

“Plausible” meaning, questions that actually have a hope in heck of being selected by Tom Brokaw if John chooses to submit them.

“Fantasy” meaning, what would you ask Obama or McCain if (1) you weren’t restricted to a sound bite, and (2) you knew they HAD to answer no matter what.

Those of you who have question suggestions can e-mail them to me at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . I will look over all the entries Sunday night (October 5) and forward the best ones on to John. Then we can watch on October 7 and see what happens.

The Plausible Questions

So here we go. First, some “plausible” possibilities:

• Key sectors of our economy -- like the mortgage, insurance, and banking industries -- are being aggressively nationalized. What will you do to ensure that America remains a “free market” capitalist system?

• The rescue plan (which both of you voted for) offers a window of “unlimited funds” to the FDIC. How many banks and insurers are still in trouble, and how can we know the true cost of the plan?

• One of globalization’s downsides for America has been a ballooning trade deficit. What will you do to shore up and expand America’s exports?

• Foreign central banks held more than $2.6 trillion worth of U.S. Treasury securities as of July 2008. In light of the recent crisis, how do you plan on bolstering their confidence in our debt?

• Fast-growing regions like Hong Kong, Shanghai, Singapore and Dubai aspire to be the new global financial hubs of the 21st century. How will you ensure the ongoing competitiveness of American capital markets?

• The auto industry has requested and received $25 billion in federal loans. Will there be further bailouts of troubled industries, and where do you draw the line?

• Global warming theory is driving ever more policy decisions in Washington. What will you do to keep what’s left of American manufacturing competitive with Kyoto-exempt China and other major polluter nations?

Now let’s have a little fun. He he.

Below are a few “fantasy” questions -- the ones that would be great to ask, but would never get through screening in a million years. (Also, before we get started: a special hat tip to an anonymous, freedom-loving friend of mine who helped come up with these.)

The Fantasy Questions

FOR BOTH: Given that the U.S. has spent its money, bled its blood, strained its economy, blown up its budgets, and ballooned its deficits on the Iraq War, what are we going to do with Iraq once that war is won -- if it ever is? In other words: We've already made ourselves into imperialists, so can't we just keep the oil? If not, why not... and by the way, how will you respond when a nuclear-tipped Iran comes into play?

FOR OBAMA: In April, you conceded the fact that reductions in capital gains tax rates have historically spurred both economic growth and increased revenue. So how can you square your stated desire to raise capital gains taxes by 20%-28% with your stated desire to boost America’s economy and reduce its deficits? Is that what I can look forward to with Obama-nomics? Do you use water instead of lighter fluid to start your charcoal grill?

FOR MCCAIN: In the past, you’ve talked a lot about The Incredible Disappearing Issue: Immigration Reform. We’ve heard you endlessly advocate “border security,” but what does that really mean? In the spring of 2007, you said, “We’re not going to erect barriers and fences,” yet in Mexico City in July of this year, you said, “The American people want our borders secured... That will require some walls.” You've advocated AND opposed paths to citizenship for illegals already in the U.S. You’ve been on both sides of the guest worker issue -- and even invented some new ones. Do tell, Senator: How do we feel about immigration reform THIS week?

FOR OBAMA: Even in your too-short-to-be-president political career, you’ve managed to amass one of the most lopsidedly hostile records against firearms rights in American political history. Do you not understand the U.S. Constitution, or are you simply willing to ignore it? How am I supposed to defend myself against the jack-booted revenuers you’ll be sending out to collect on all your new taxes? Should I beat them over the head with my phonebook-sized copy of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008?

FOR MCCAIN: In recent years you have had some very nice things to say about Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan. Most memorably, you said that if Greenspan died in office, you would want to give him dark sunglasses and prop him up a la Weekend at Bernie’s. Humor aside, it is now plain to see that Greenspan was a huge culprit in creating this steaming financial mess we’re in. “The maestro” never came across a deregulation plan he didn’t like; touched off multiple bubbles even while denying they existed; dropped interest rates to 1% and held them there for a year; amassed a remarkable track record as one of the worst forecasters in economic history; and then, as the piece de resistance, suddenly learned plain English in the nick of time to blame everything on his successor! Question being, have you gotten any more savvy with all that’s happened, or are you still willing to let these two-bit financial wizards blow smoke in your ear?

FOR OBAMA: Senator Obama, you are all about “change.” Your campaign has soared above the clouds on the refreshing rhetoric of change. It’s in your slogan: “Change we can believe in.” It’s in all your make-‘em-swoon speeches, woven into delicious phrases like “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.” And yet how is it, Senator Obama, how can it be, that you came up through one of the most corrupt, glad-handing, backroom-deal-ridden political systems in American history -- I’m speaking here of the infamous Chicago political system -- without actually changing a damn thing? Not only did you fail to repudiate the “Chicago way,” sir; you actually embraced it. You were a staunch backer of Richard Daley, a candidate for the political corruption hall of fame. You made no waves on the way to the top -- only friends. You even won a primary contest by getting a team of lawyers to throw your opponents off the ballot! With all due respect, Senator Obama, you are one of the great rhetoricians of our time. But where is the evidence of this “change” you speak of?

FOR MCCAIN: Earlier this year you flatly stated that Russia should be kicked out of the G8. You were also lightning quick to side with the alarmingly brash Mikheil Saakashvili in the Russia-Georgia conflict, boldly declaring that “We are all Georgians now.” You seem ready and willing to crank up a new cold war with Putin’s Russia, one that could turn “hot” with the wrong misstep... and Russia seems happy to oblige. Putin has already stepped up money and technology transfers with Venezuela and Iran, and shows zero intention of backing down. Senator McCain, we know that you are a “maverick” who “relishes a fight”... but how exactly do you intend to take on a Russian strategy of “dissension and discord” (i.e., wreaking havoc via outside agents like Venezuela and Iran) when American blood and treasure is all but spent? Furthermore, given your legendary belligerence, your shaky medical history and, quite frankly, your 72-year-old heart, why, oh why, did you pick perhaps the least appropriate running mate possible when it comes to following your footsteps on the path to war?

FOR BOTH: Nowhere on your campaign Web sites does it list your reading speed in words per minute. How fast can you read 451 pages of legalese? It must be really fast, because you’re both on record in instant support of the “bailout bill” -- sorry, the Emergency Earmark Act -- damn, I mean the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act -- at every one of its incarnations, from three pages to 451. Do you think the American people are so stupid that they don’t realize that both of you Econ 101-flunking goofballs are endorsing something you don’t fully understand, before you’ve even attempted to read and understand it? And by the way, how do you feel about the billions in funding for things like “mental health treatment,” “rural school aid” and makers of “wooden toy bow-and-arrow sets”? Is this the kind of “fiscal responsibility” we can expect from both of you?

Whew! That felt good.

And remember, too, that you can send your own questions to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . I’ll forward the final cut of “plausibles” to John on Sunday night.