May 5, 2008 issue  of Newsweek 
 'Questions for  Obama' by George F. Will
  
  'Senator,  concerning the criteria by which you will nominate judges, you said:  'We need somebody who's got the heart, the empathy, to recognize  what it's like to be a young teenage mom. The empathy to understand  what it's like to be poor, or African-American, or gay, or disabled,  or old.' Such sensitivities might serve an admirable legislator, but  what have they to do with judging? Should a judge side with  whichever party in a controversy stirs his or her empathy? Is such  personalization of the judicial function inimical to the rule of  law?
  
  Voting against  the confirmation of Chief Justice John Roberts, you said: Deciding  'truly difficult cases' should involve 'one's deepest values, one's  core concerns, one's broader perspectives on how the world works,  and the depth and breadth of one's empathy.' Is that not essentially  how Chief Justice Roger Taney decided the Dred Scott  case? Should other factors say, the language of the constitutional  or statutory provision at issue matter?
  
  You say, 'The  insurance companies, the drug companies, they're not going to give  up their profits easily when it comes to health care.' Why should  they? Who will profit from making those industries unprofitable?  When pharmaceutical companies have given up their profits, who will  fund pharmaceutical innovations, without which there will be much  preventable suffering and death? What other industries should 'give  up their profits'?
  
  ExxonMobil's  2007 profit of $40.6 billion annoys you. Do you know that its  profit, relative to its revenue, was smaller than Microsoft's and  many other corporations'? And that reducing ExxonMobil's profits  will injure people who participate in mutual funds, index funds and  pension funds that own 52 percent of the company?
  
  You say John  McCain is content to 'watch [Americans'] home  prices decline.' So, government should prop up housing prices  generally? How? Why? Were prices ideal before the bubble  popped? How does a senator know ideal prices? Have you explained to  young couples straining to buy their first house that declining  prices are a misfortune?
  
  Telling young  people 'don't go into corporate America  ,' your wife, Michelle, urged them to become social workers or  others in 'the helping industry,' not 'the moneymaking industry.'  Given that the moneymakers pay for 100 percent of American jobs, in  both public and private sectors, is it not  helpful?
  
  Michelle, who  was born in 1964, says that most Americans' lives have 'gotten  progressively worse since I was a little girl.' Since 1960, real per  capita income has increased 143 percent, life expectancy has  increased by seven years, infant mortality has declined 74 percent,  deaths from heart disease have been halved, childhood leukemia has  stopped being a death sentence, depression has become a treatable  disease, air and water pollution have been drastically reduced, the  number of women earning a bachelor's degree has more than doubled,  the rate of homeownership has increased 10.2 percent, the  size of the average American home has  doubled, the percentage of homes  with air conditioning has risen from 12 to 77, the portion of  Americans who own shares of stock has quintupled.  Has your  wife perhaps missed some pertinent developments in this country that  she calls 'just downright mean'?
  
  You favor  raising the capital gains tax rate to '20 percent or 25 percent.'  You say this will not 'distort' economic decision making. Your tax  returns on your 2007 income of $4.2 million show that you and  Michelle own few stocks. Are you sure you understand how investors  make decisions?
  
  During the ABC  debate, you acknowledged that when the capital gains rate was  dropped first to 20 percent, then to 15 percent, government revenues  from the tax increased and they declined in the 1980s when it was  increased to 28 percent. Nevertheless, you said you would consider  raising the rate 'for purposes of fairness.' How does decreasing the  government's financial resources and punishing investors promote  fairness? Are you aware that 20 percent of taxpayers reporting  capital gains in 2006 had incomes of less than  $50,000?
  
  You favor  eliminating the cap on earnings subject to the 12.4 percent Social  Security tax, which now covers only the first $102,000. A   Chicago  police officer married to a Chicago  public-school teacher, each with 20 years on the job, have a  household income of $147,501, so you would take another $5,642 from  them. Are they under taxed? Are they too  rich?
  
  This November,  electorates in four states will vote on essentially this language:  'The state shall not discriminate against, or grant  preferential treatment to, any individual or group on the basis of  race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in the operation of  public employment, public education or public contracting.' Three  states California , Washington and Michigan  have enacted such language. You made a radio ad opposing  the Michigan initiative. Why? Are those states' voters  racists?
  
  You denounce  President Bush for arrogance toward other nations. Yet you vow to  use a metaphorical 'hammer' to force revisions of trade agreements  unless certain weaker nations adjust their labor, environmental and  other domestic policies to suit you. Can you define cognitive  dissonance?
  
  You want 'to  reduce money in politics.' In February and March you raised $95  million. See prior  question.
  
 Cognitive  dissonance is a psychological <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological>  state  that describes the uncomfortable  feeling when a person begins to understand that something the person  believes to be true is, in fact, not true. Similar to ambivalence <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambivalence> , the term cognitive dissonance  describes conflicting thoughts or beliefs (cognitions) that occur at  the same time, or when engaged in behaviors that conflict with one's  beliefs. In academic literature, the term refers to attempts to  reduce the discomfort of c onflicting thoughts, by performing  actions that are opposite to one's beliefs.