- It is dumb. The world is not crying out for John McCain's exquisite financial acumen to help shepherd us through this.
- It is politically brilliant. John McCain gets to polish his somewhat tarnished "above politics" image.
- Democrats who are mad are mad because it is politically brilliant, not because it is dumb. There is, as far as I can see, no actual harm in postponing campaigning, or the debates; we can just as easily learn McCain's terrifying plans for the country next week.
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
I don't see any Democrats that are mad. I see a lot of ridicule.
This is politically brilliant? What universe are you in? The media reaction to this move is just short of open mockery, and the available public opinion polling is uniformly negative.
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportUC.aspx?g=54d651a7-a62b-4420-bb32-9dd6b2df8c02
The first debate between John McCain and Barack Obama is scheduled to take place in two days. Should the debate be held as scheduled? Should the debate be held, but the format changed to focus on the economy? Or, should the debate be postponed?
Hold as scheduled 50
Hold with focus on economy 36
Postpone 10
I agree with you that it may be politically brilliant. Time will tell. My instincts are that it can do McCain nothing but good. It also suggests that McCain must feel his back is against the wall. Speaking of backs against the wall, hasn't every single image of Paulson for at least the last two weeks been a case study of Lovecraftian terror? His fear is palpable and contagious.
It's only politically brilliant if Americans believe that it is sincere.
If Americans see it as a ploy, then it flies in the face of the "above politics" image and will have the opposite effect.
Obviously McCain thinks the risk is worth it.
It seems flagrantly desperate to me but then again I am biased.
Time will tell.
This is going over like the joke that it is. Obama's response was perfect. "Presidents have to do more than one thing at a time."
McCain is old and tired and he got his ass kicked on multiple fronts this week. Of course he wants a fucking bunny. Poor old guy probably wants to be home in his own bathroom. One of his many bathrooms, that is.
Gaucho's right - I haven't seen a single Democrat respond to this with anything but derision.
I think the idea of a debate about the economy with a focus on educating the public about the issues is a great idea. For my money (if there is any left), how we handle this immediate problem makes the differences between McCain and Obama seem insignificant.
Obama's framing is brilliant:
"It's more important than ever to have debate."
The hilarious thing about saying something is 1) dumb and 2) politically brilliant is that it implies that you're seeing through something while not many other people in the country can.
So far, the original post and responses are running per normal partisanship.
I will reluctantly vote for McCain for two reasons: Obama is unvetted, and I prefer split government. I think Obama will win.
As far as the campaign suspension and Obama's response, Bush may have trumped all with his call for a White House leadership conference on Thursday.
Anybody who believes that our obtuse politicians and Presidential candidates even begin to understand this problem or will get out is either the ultimate Dr. Pangloss or delusional.
I agree with #1 completely and because of that I have to say that I just don't buy #2. A man who, himself, admitted that he doesn't know much about the economy quitting a campaign that is not going well to "fix" the economy is just not going to do anything for what's left of his "above politics" image. Can I just add that after choosing Palin there can't be that much left of his "above politics" image left. So maybe there's a nowhere to go but up argument to be made there.
It is politically brilliant. John McCain gets to polish his somewhat tarnished "above politics" image.
Megan, just stop doing political commentary. I don't mean to be rude, but just stop. It's an awful move because it's so obvious that he did it to (a) dodge a debate with Obama on the bailout, something he doesn't know how to talk about without sounding really stupid, and (b) to look good politically. Only Republican partisans (of which I am one) are going to take this the way McCain wants people to.
Delaying a debate would make sense for a "national moment of silence" type of occurrence - like a Hurricane Katrina (or Gustav, fine). The focus would be on (1) being respectful and (2) executing an emergency crisis plan, e.g. evacuating thousands of people.
Delaying a debate makes no sense for something where the response is uncertain and momentous, that will affect everyone in complicated ways most people do not really understand. This is precisely the time for a debate.
The world isn't crying out for McCain's (or Obama's) expertise on high finance, but at the same time, as one of the leaders of the Senate, it's hardly a stretch to think he ought to actually be there scratching his head and trying to figure out what the hell to do with the rest of them.
Ultimately those guys are going to have to vote and do some semblence of doing their jobs, and Megan, you just (rightly) belittled the Congress for sounding completely uneducated about things. So, even if they do it in a grandstanding fashion, I'd rather have them at least have a go at taking this seriously.
It beats the usual grandstanding and not taking it seriously anyway.
What you mean to say Greg, is that the usual contingent of idiot right-wingers/conservatives/et al are doing their usual idiot denial-of-reality attacks. If you actually look at whose offering what, I see that one person has asked who and where are all these 'mad' Democrats. That strikes me as reasonable and non-partisan, especially given the mere assertion that they existed with no cites or specifics. The other thing you notice is a poll which indicates that better than 85% of the respondents think the debate should still be on for Friday, while only 10% think they should be postponed. This is supposed to indicate a modicum of 'political brilliance' on the part of McCain? And on top of that, this is a 'partisan response'? Or is this just the usual riff that reality has a well-known liberal bias?
When someone posts some actual data about 'Democrats being mad', or some poll that indicates that a majority of people think this is some sort of canny move on the part of McCain, I'll accept the premise that there is some sort of parity.
But right now, I'm not seeing it.
Asher writes: "Only Republican partisans (of which I am one) are going to take this the way McCain wants people to."
And even you're not doing it.
What would it take to alienate you from your party, by the way? If the Age Of Dumbya didn't do it, what exactly would?
While there are a few Republicans I have respect for, none of them are even close to being in a leadership position in the party. It's dominated by yokels and snakehandlers and torture-loving Cheneyite bastards. Meanwhile Chuck Hagel has been essentially drummed out.
What potential do you see in these scumbags?
I have to say that I'm a bit disappointed by your analysis here, Megan. "John McCain gets to polish his somewhat tarnished 'above politics' image" with whom, exactly? Who is buying that his motives here are "above politics?"
I think you may be underestimating, well, whoever it is you believe may be convinced that McCain is putting "Country First" here by trying to avoid a presidential debate. There are some things that all people just understand, let's say, with their gut. Cowardice is one of these things. You know it when you see it. And it's not what you want to see in the leader of your country.
If a candidate that I was supporting in any race anywhere pulled this nonsense, I'd be the first to cry foul. You don't try to weasel out of a debate. There are no timeouts once you take office.
Again, I have to wonder who exactly you feel this political move may appeal to. After all, something is only "politically brilliant" in a presidential campaign if it wins your candidate some support. Just how dumb do you think people are?
Asher writes: "Only Republican partisans (of which I am one) are going to take this the way McCain wants people to."
And even you're not doing it.
Yeah, well I'm bright. As for what it would take to alienate me from my party, I guess Sarah Palin's kinda done it for this election cycle. Outside of that, though, I do tend to agree with Republicans on domestic policy, judicial nominations - not so much on foreign affairs though. It's true that there aren't a ton of admirable Republicans in Congress, but there aren't many admirable members of Congress in general.
I don't know -- maybe I'm just an idiot -- but this morning I was thinking that both the candidates really should have been in Washington, because, you know, their day jobs kind of require them to be there.
Then, when I heard McCain was suspending his campaign to head back to D.C., I thought it was (1) smart and, at the same time, (2) genuine. "Finally," I thought, "someone's taking this seriously."
But I guess I was wrong. McCain's a coward, he's a fool, he's throwing yet another Hail Mary to support a party full of snake-handlers and scumbags.
What an idiot I must be.
Saying that a move is both dumb and politically brilliant is essentially the same thing as calling the American people dumb.
Is that what you are doing, Megan?
So, apparently McCain was "ducking" a debate that wasn't going to be about economics anyway...and despite the fact that he was rebuffed when he proposed doing 10 of these things before. Right.
I guess you can allow yourself to believe that he suddenly doesn't want to debate with this in the news, AND he knew the foreign policy debate wouldn't really be a foreign policy debate, but at that point you're speculating far beyond reason.
And yes, it's at least partially politically motivated. Wow, what a shock. What isn't, exactly? Anyone notice that Obama went out of his way three times this afternoon to emphasize that HE called McCain to propose the joint statement? It's almost all politically motivated. Duh.
It's not John McCain's brilliant insight into the financial crisis that is needed.
It's John McCain's long track record of cobbling together centrist coalitions to produce bipartisan bills that is needed.
Recall that just yesterday the wheels were falling off this thing -- Reid was screaming that the Dems wouldn't pass any bill if the Republicans wouldn't give them political cover on it, and Senators were becoming openly hostile in the second day of hearings....
Time for another R-D hyphenated compromise bill. Anyone think McCain-Clinton is a total impossibility? If she thinks that 4 years from now it will be remembered as a show of statesmanship, rising above the increasingly embarrassing Harry Reid?
Granted, McCain's compromise bills aren't always my cup of tea. I think McCain-Feingold was an abomination, and the list only starts there. But the Senator has a long, clear, and well-known record of hammering out these compromises. It's at least a plausible narrative -- unless the Democrats are really willing to torpedo any compromise bill for fear of letting McCain take some credit.
It is sad but not surprising that so many people see this through the lens of their partisanship.
I can't decide if he is wimping out of his debate, or if this is part of the grand plan to get Palin out of her debate next week (which McCain is suggesting be the make-up date for the pres. debate). Either way, it sounds like a cop out. Lindsey Graham just said that even if a bailout plan is done by Friday, McCain will still not show up.
Has a campaign ever been suspended before? Did anyone stop campaigning during any of our major wars? (Civil, WWI, WWII, etc?) Did they stop during the depression?
Heck, we're facing a very serious issue right now in this country and I want to know what the two of them have to say about it, face to face, in a less scripted environment.
If Obama were the one backing out, I, and many others would be saying the same damn thing. This screams of weakness and I don't think it will play well with anyone, from the coastal elites to the nascar fans.
Well, except Meghan apparently. Even the guys at RedState can't seem to get too excited about this stroke of genius.
Asher, Lana, etc...
You do realize that (unless there's a change) there will be NO questions or discussion Friday night related to the bailout bill, right?
It's a foreign policy debate.
In the middle of an economic crisis that the Congress, of which both candidates are current members, is in panic mode dealing with.
There is, as far as I can see, no actual harm in postponing campaigning, or the debates; we can just as easily learn McCain's terrifying plans for the country next week.
Well, Sully pointed out that there's talk from the McCain camp of postponing the VP debate as well, so if you believe (as many people do) that the public needs access to Palin well before the elections, postponing the VP debate would be considered harmful.
Also I think perhaps you overlook the more important question of what damage he's going to do to the economy/bailout package/whatever if he's going into it with the intention of, you know, grandstanding for the cameras.
Time will tell. It's still clearly Obiden's election to lose.
No, but cynicism aside, you would sort of expect your political leaders to get into their day jobs as congressfolk in such times to survey the available choices and get input. Those who prefer to stand at a distance and pass judgment to me seem less relevant.
Hate the pols all you want and for any arbitrary reason. I wouldn't want to be in their positions having to make the decisions they face at the moment, if the dire predictions for inaction are true.
I'm not talking about political heroism on the part of our political leaders. But I also don't generally assume other are dumb and that I infallibly know it all better.
The only admirable Senators seem to be DeMint, Coburn, and Sessions. (all Republican). I don't know any Democrat Senators committed to reduce govt' spending and reform like them (except possibly McCain, who is actually a Republican).
pr9000 writes: "Then, when I heard McCain was suspending his campaign to head back to D.C., I thought it was (1) smart and, at the same time, (2) genuine. "Finally," I thought, "someone's taking this seriously."
But I guess I was wrong. McCain's a coward, he's a fool, he's throwing yet another Hail Mary to support a party full of snake-handlers and scumbags.
What an idiot I must be."
Excellent. I wish more Republicans would have these kinds of epiphanies.
Meanwhile Obama's still right. Presidents have to be able to do more than one thing at a time. The debate may be past McCain's bedtime, but he can make it. The two candidates can address the economy.
It's sort of important. And McCain hasn't voted in the Senate since April - apparently he's only just now remembering his other job.
(1) People seem to be treating these debates as just two guys getting together for coffee after work. It's not like that. All their free time will be dedicated to prepping for the debates. That, I think, is why suspending the campaigns makes some kind of sense. Dedicate your free time to working on the massive problem at hand.*
(2) OneEyedMan speaks the truth. Nobody** seems to be able to look past their political points of view.
* massive problem = the markets, or the bill itself
** on the internets
This "more than one thing at a time" thing would only apply if McCain had suggested he HAD to suspend his campaign. But of course, he didn't; he simply chose to, just as he chose to give this issue priority. Shockingly, people who already didn't like him don't like the choice. Fine, whatever. But the suggestion that this reflects on his multitasking prowess is pure spin, and it's just as nakedly political as people are suggesting this decision is.
"It's sort of important. And McCain hasn't voted in the Senate since April - apparently he's only just now remembering his other job."
Since Obama hasn't voted since July, I guess he "wins" then, right? Maybe it'd have been better if McCain showed up and bravely voted "Present" instead.
(feeding the trolls...I should know better.)
and when will Barracuda debate???
By the way: I'm not even sure I like this decision. I'm rather torn at the moment. But I don't have much patience for the silly pretzel logic of all the people who hated this decision before it was made. You can stop gracing us with your nuanced insight now. No, really, that's plenty.
Actually, some economics questions will be part of the debate. And Megan really should stop doing political commentary. It just doesn't fit with her petulant neophyte astrologer of the economy schtick.
I don't know -- maybe I'm just an idiot -- but this morning I was thinking that both the candidates really should have been in Washington, because, you know, their day jobs kind of require them to be there.
I've never understood this sentiment.
1) McCain may not be living in it, but it is the age of the Internet, which means that things like "reading bills" and "voting" can be done electronically, from anywhere in the world. (That was the defense of Bush having taken the most vacation days in the history of the White House, remember?)
2) I understand the criticism of politicians campaigning for the next office instead of doing the one they were elected for - it seems like we're not getting our money's worth, like when an employee uses the company printer to send out resumes - but nobody's ever explained how it could possibly be different. I mean, how would it work in your world? If you want candidates to have the requisite experience for an office, that means working their way up from lower to higher offices. And they have to campaign to get into those offices.
And the guy who chooses to do one less day of legislating and one more day of campaigning has an advantage over the other guy, so there's a red-queen's race. Very quickly it becomes the case that seekers of higher office have to drop as much as possible to campaign, starting as soon as possible.
The alternative is a field of nothing but Sarah Palin-style candidates for president, because everyone else with experience is too busy with the job they have. And if they can't ever leave Washington you're looking at electing a field of people completely insulated from anything outside the Beltway.
Honestly? The Senate can spare two people. It's not a big deal. Every state has two Senators, anyway.
Politically brilliant? Maybe stick to economics.
McCain: ... see how much of a leader I am? see how selfless I am? see how I put country first? see how I am a leader? You do see it, don't you?
You have an astounding faith that the debates will be rescheduled. (Including the veep one, which now is supposed to be postponed as well.) Please look closely at the candidates' fondness for answering questions over the past few weeks and reconsider.
The 1000 respondent flash poll had only 10% thinking this is a good idea, so I'm not sure your point 2 holds up. Especially given that anyone familiar with point 1 has noticed a dearth of Congressional Republicans proclaiming "thank heavens John McCain is riding in to set things right."
Asher, Lana, etc...
You do realize that (unless there's a change) there will be NO questions or discussion Friday night related to the bailout bill, right?
It's a foreign policy debate.
I'm having a tough time finding the story, but I'm pretty sure that Lehrer announced that he would ask some bailout questions.
McCain may not be living in it, but it is the age of the Internet, which means that things like "reading bills" and "voting" can be done electronically, from anywhere in the world. (That was the defense of Bush having taken the most vacation days in the history of the White House, remember?)
If only a Senator's job consisted of reading bills, and then voting for them ... first, I don't think any Congressperson can vote unless they're actually in the chamber at the time of the vote. Second, you grossly oversimplify what McCain or Obama would be doing in Washington. I'd rather see my next President -- or he who would be my next President -- working with his colleagues, rather than delivering stump speeches in Florida or Iowa or MIchigan.
I mean, how would it work in your world? If you want candidates to have the requisite experience for an office, that means working their way up from lower to higher offices. And they have to campaign to get into those offices.
I understand your point. But to paraphrase a wise man ... "Honestly? The campaign can spare a few days without campaigning. It's not a big deal. We've got six weeks left for that anyway."
In my above post, the italics were supposed to go up to "it's a foreign policy debate." Anyway, I was right. On Ambinder's blog:
"It has to, right?
How could Jim Lehrer, a newsman, not ask about the economy?
Well, he will.
A senior Obama adviser says that the CPD has told both campaigns that there will be questions about the economic crisis during Friday's debate.
They were told this last week..."
I've read quite a few comment sections tonight and I've not once seen anyone mention that the campaigning has become pretty dumb. Suspending the campaign is not much of a loss.
John McCain and Barack Obama are not just two of 100 senators. One of them will name the next Secretary of the Treasury with substantial new power over the economy. As mentioned supra, Mr. Paulson has the look of one gazing at chthonic, Lovecraftian depths.
Let's say Congress does nothing or worse and the candidates stay on the stump. Who cares what either Obama or McCain says in staged campaign hooey if my money market funds go to 50 cents on the dollar and the local gas station cannot get an inventory loan and my credit card stops working?
But, Cleanthes, you seem to be assuming that McCain and Obama's round-the-clock presence at Capitol Hill would help a deal get done. I don't see why that would be the case. They're pretty close already.
Well sure. There's tremendous overlap between foreign policy, international trade, and international finance. Unless the thing is set up like an extended version of Jeopardy...
This move is pure douchebaggery and reeks of political motives.
People deserve a leader.
I'm sorry but this McCain move is the equivalent of your little brother calling for a timeout in the middle of a fight when he's pinned to the ground.
It's obvious that he will jump on you if you let him up. Now I see he's trying to call Bush (Mommy) in to get the stronger kid off of him. All Maverickly like!
We had the hearings on all day at work on CNBC and it does seem like this bailout is teetering, if not falling apart. I don't think that anyone on the hill knows much about banking / trading / economics, but they do have to get their shit together and warp this up one way or another. IMHO, they should postpone the debate until this is passed, maybe with a day extra to prepare.
And also, one of these guys is going to be president and managing this 700b -1.5t bailout is going to be a big part of it. They should get on top of it as it goes through.
"Who cares what either Obama or McCain says in staged campaign hooey if my money market funds go to 50 cents on the dollar and the local gas station cannot get an inventory loan and my credit card stops working?"
Maybe then we'll have massive civil disorder as the people take to the streets to protest a corrupt and broken system.
Or, we could just hand out $700 billion in taxpayer dollars to fat cat CEOs and financial "wizards" who made the most spectacularly wrong bets in modern economic history.
I don't know which is worse - open public unrest over an economic collapse, or a complete disintegration of the last shreds of pretense that the elites have any sort of "moral hazard" in this allegedly-free market capitalist system.
Oh please- Anybody that believes that McCain is afraid to debate Obama on National Security is just an idiot. McCain will be able to beat Barry about the ears with his 5 to 6 extremely public positions on virtually every question. This is one debate (short of the town hall) that Barack is MOST afraid of, and with good reason.
Second: If you aren't scared then you're not paying attention. Watch the president's address tonight and listen for all the squeaking. My bet is that those squeaks were coming from that (sweaty?) death grip he had on the podium throughout the speech. How about Paulson, which as somebody else pointed out, smells of palpable fear? (throw Bernanke on the same pile: Whenever he speaks he looks like he's expecting one of the senators to whip out a gun and shoot him on the spot) How about Nancy's deer in headlights look the night they were rushed into that meeting? Whatever they told her turned her around pretty fast considering she was ready to adjourn the Congress. How about Reid admitting that they HAVE NO IDEA WHAT TO DO as few as THREE DAYS AGO??? These people are scared, and if you understood anything about the importance of liquidity you'd be scared too.
So in the end I don't care if it was a political move. It is simply unseemly that these two would continue to campaign when we are teetering on the brink of economic disaster. And didn't Obama say that the current Administration shouldn't blithely tie the next administration's hands like three days ago?
Not to pick on you as being a complete right-wing fruit-loop, but that's like saying creationists and people who are actually connected to reality can't get past their political points of view.
_One_ side has actually cited what seems to be a nonpartisan poll of 1,000 people who seem by a margin of 17 to 2 that the debate should either be held, or be held and have more of an emphasis on economics. I see no objective facts being cited by the other side. In fact, here's a good commentary on what seems to be the prevalent dynamic.
"It is simply unseemly that these two would continue to campaign when we are teetering on the brink of economic disaster."
So unseemly that no one found it unseemly until McCain announced he was suspending his campaign and folks like you had to come up with justifications for his doing so. If McCain doesn't want to run ads or do rallies in this time of national crisis, that's his prerogative, but I don't see anything unseemly about having a civil little 90-minute debate, which would in part address just these issues.
It's obvious that McCain isn't afraid to debate Obama, but McCain suggested they move the debate to the VP debate time and reschedule that.
Palin had her interview with Couric which apparently didn't go well. McCain does the suspend thing and calls off the debate. He dumps Letterman to do an interview with Couric, presumably to have something on the record to run after her interview for damage control. He suggests that the VP debate be pushed off.
He's afraid of Palin debating Biden and is trying to use this to force off that debate. Palin is a massive liability for them and they're becoming increasingly desperate to contain the damage.
"How about Reid admitting that they HAVE NO IDEA WHAT TO DO as few as THREE DAYS AGO???"
And how about McCain not having read the 3 page proposal as recently as 24 hours ago.
And if this is such an economic disaster, why is the market stable? One thing you can always count on is the market not sitting on their thumbs waiting for the walls to crumble - they jump on ANY little thing, and here we are a week along and we've had some nice hiccups and a few firms have gone under but there's no crisis. Greenspan uses too much inflection in his voice on a report to Congress and we drop 5% but staring down a catastrophe claimed to be the size of the Depression and reports today that the bailout is being soundly rejected by Congress and we trade in a 2% range and end 29 points off for the day? What world are you people living in? The stock market has all the freedom it needs to tell us what is and is not a crisis.
But...Mark M. -- the thing is that the financial meltdown makes the campaign, if anything, *more* important. One of these people is going to be President. One of them is going to have to deal with this mess. The American people have to choose one of them. The more information they have to do that, the better.
Campaigning went on during the Civil War and World War II. It's part of our democracy. There are a lot of things about democracy that are stupid and awful and petty and ridiculous. The temptation is, therefore, to just dump the democracy in crisis -- it's the adult thing to do, right? Who can bother with campaigning when you're trying to save the world? There's a logic to it.
But it's the logic of dictatorship and elitism. The debates are a circus. Democracy is a circus. That's the way it is when you give the people a voice in the government. Call off the circus and it's not a democracy. McCain's first instinct is to say that the "real work" is more important than what the people think. That's seductive...but it's absolutely wrong. It shows contempt for the people he wants to hire him. When you don't show up for a job interview, you tend not to get the job. There's a certain fairness to that. I suspect it'll hold true in this case.
Megan,
Is this better or worse than your Intrade judgment?
People are looking forward to the debate and an extraordinary number plan to watch it. They, dumb oxen that they are, seem to think they might learn something of importance, something that might enable them better to perform their civic duty, better to decide between the contestants for the most powerful office in the world.
But it wouldn't be bad for the republic if one candidate unilaterally refuses to show up at what has become a well established forum, central to the process of choosing a president?
No loss if they miss out on this exchange of views, better for them to rely instead on speeches written by others and the ads that deliver so many truths beyond challenge?
How fortunate that one candidate so clearly perceives the worthlessness of these debates and has determined they are best dispensed with so that he can helicopter down on the Capitol and there lead the nation away from the brink of economic disaster. And that Megan McArdle also sees how worthless and dispensable are these silly rhetorical exercises.
pr9000 writes: "People seem to be treating these debates as just two guys getting together for coffee after work. It's not like that. All their free time will be dedicated to prepping for the debates. That, I think, is why suspending the campaigns makes some kind of sense. Dedicate your free time to working on the massive problem at hand."
That's funny. Obama's going to be meeting with Dumbya & company tomorrow on this issue, so I guess he, unlike McCain, isn't afraid to deal with more than one thing at a time.
I guess McBush is looking for some sort of Senior Citizen's Discount here. He can't keep up so he needs more pillow time.
"Oh please- Anybody that believes that McCain is afraid to debate Obama on National Security is just an idiot. McCain will be able to beat Barry about the ears with his 5 to 6 extremely public positions on virtually every question. This is one debate (short of the town hall) that Barack is MOST afraid of, and with good reason."
Uh huh. McCain will (if he shows up) tell 100 POW stories and bring up the Iraq/Pakistan border and Czechoslovakia and how Iran is a bigger threat than the Soviets were. Then he'll crap in his pants and ask Sarah Palin to give him a(nother) sponge bath.
Does anyone still get hot and bothered over South Ossetia? McBush popped a war hard-on over something no one will give a damn about in a year. Even Dumbya couldn't get that worked up about it, and he's a homicidal retard.
"And if this is such an economic disaster, why is the market stable?"
With all due respect, I think you have it all wrong. The market was swinging wildly by decent 3 digits on the on again off again promise of a bailout since last week. The last two days it is hovering because it thinks that a modified version of the bailout is coming tommorrow. If a deal doesn't come down by tommorrow or friday I predict we'll go from 10K to mid 7K in a day, and that's just because they'll either run out of time or stop all trading.
Cramer has already told everyone to liquidate 20% regardless of pain. I liquidated 40% of my 401k into Treasury bonds tonight because losing the opportunity to make back the 25% I've already lost YTD is not worth risking my only fall-back if everything doesn't turn out hunky-dory and no one can get a job (It's not like I'll be able to get the equity out of my house if no one can get a loan).
BTW, I could care less if McCain hasn't read that three page scribble because while I am absolutely convinced that we need a bailout to avert Great Depression 2.0, but I am totally against THIS bailout. (I do understand why they demanded unreviewable authority: You can't let anybody who wants to crash the process buy a couple shares and slap a TRO on them) But the current plan is rewarding the very same people that put us in this position. [0ther than the people (may they wear orange) that kicked it off: the senior management at FannieMae/FreddyMac and their abettors in the Congress who now are on every cable news channel lecturing us how this was a failure of deregulation) Not to be partisan, but Barney Frank and Chris Dodd should be kicked off their committees and indicted for accepting sweat heart loans and blocking the attempts to stop this nonsense in 2003, 2005, & 2007.]
I like Newt's idea: Let the guilty go right into the smoking crater of their own making, but short-circuit the whole liquidity crisis by going into the loan business for anyone who can prove they are a good credit risk. Think about it: If you didn't use your home like an ATM, played by the rules, and can afford the payments then you can qualify for a loan from the government to get a refi, or buy a house, or buy a car. And when GM or some other joker comes calling? The government says: Prove you're worth it. Exactly how it should be, without the collapse.
Obama's going to be meeting with Dumbya
MLJ, do you realize that when you type Dumbya instead of Dubya you are implying that Bush is "Dumb"? HEHEHEH. Classic.
By declaring McCain's grandstanding as dumb and brilliant, you have produced a blog post that is both dumb and brilliant.
Nothing like covering all your bases. What is it called in logic. Oh yeah, the law of the excluded middle.
Either A or not-A.
I learned a lot from reading this post. Or I didn't.
Megan: "The American people are dumb assholes."
Megan: "Hey, no name-calling. You'll force me to ban you again."
Ah, yes. McCain is so above all the politicking, and his motives are so very very pure, that his campaign put out a talking points memo on how to best frame McCain's suspension of his campaign. A sure sign of a suspended campaign that is not at all interested in politics, spin, and bullshit. What a glorious, principled Man of Honor!
Face it. The old man is just losing it, and he lacks the patience, focus, or composure to recover. Meanwhile, his moron of a running mate did even worse with Couric than she did with Gibson. That little bump that she gave McCain after her act at the convention has now burst like the abscess that it was, and the "Palin-McCain" ticket is tanking.
But yeah, otherwise it's totally brilliant.
Asher:
with all seriousness, I've been thinking it's unseemly for days. It smacked of "we don't know wtf to do, so we'll just pretend our little show is the most important thing on earth while someone else does the messy work and we can blame them for the rest of our presidency for the consequences.
Noah:
I'm sure we'll get the debates. (we could have had 10, but townhalls aren't Barry's thing) Despite the cynics here, McCain is far too tactical to NOT let the VP debate happen. That's just nuts because it would confirm everything that her critics currently believe about her.
[Good luck with that. Exxon, Conoco and BP thought they were going to roll her too, and we know how that worked out.] Now, if Sarah showed up in his place Friday night... that would be a master stroke. Barack couldn't say no without looking like a chicken. (The audience isn't going to care that they aren't both running for president with both sides smelling blood in the air), and he couldn't say yes without reopening the door to all those experience comparisons that were a disaster for him last time. (such a smart campaigner comparing himself to the bottom of the ticket circa 2002)
MoeLarryAndJesus:
You're just an annoying troll, and nothing you say will affect how people will vote come Nov. 4th.
R. Totale says: "MLJ, do you realize that when you type Dumbya instead of Dubya you are implying that Bush is "Dumb"? HEHEHEH. Classic. "
Implying my ass. The fucker IS dumb. He's so dumb it would take a dozen Anne Sullivans to teach him to wipe his ass and chew gum at the same time. He's so dumb Corky from "Life Goes On" sends him sympathy cards once a week. He's so dumb Kathryn Jean Lopez turned down his semen.
Mark M. writes: "MoeLarryAndJesus:
You're just an annoying troll, and nothing you say will affect how people will vote come Nov. 4th."
Meanwhile the thousands of people that follow your every word in a state of absolute rapture will all vote for McCain. Damn, you're AWESOME!
I notice that I get called a troll more often as things look worse for McBush and as his followers get more divorced from reality.
I am enjoying this very, very much, as Sarah "Total Idiot" Palin might say.
Oooh, brave dude! He's actually willing to meet with the guy who scares him most (Dubya) to show us he can go on his knees before Ahminajihad as president to sell the nation out. Great news!
"with all seriousness, I've been thinking it's unseemly for days. It smacked of "we don't know wtf to do, so we'll just pretend our little show is the most important thing on earth while someone else does the messy work and we can blame them for the rest of our presidency for the consequences."
So they go back to Washington tomorrow, quit campaigning for a moment, and have their debate in Mississippi Friday night. Nothing unseemly about that. Like someone astutely pointed out above, they're really just trying to delay the Palin debate here.
MaryHoAndSneezus:
Ok, I'll bite:
"Hey, I've got a tiger repelling necklace."
"Really?"
"Yes, you don't see any tigers do you?"
[Maybe getting called a troll isn't related to how "bad" things are].
In case you're not a troll, let's find out:
Personally I'd love to see Sarah kick Mr. 57 state visiting, I see dead people, Iran's a tiny country, Jerusalem should be unif--- uh uh uh uh affirmative action man-boy any day, and you can even throw in his america hating, bitter half harpy of a wife. See her today? Nice swept back hair (more servile, less harpyish). See- you CAN put lipstick on a pig!
Good e'nuff 4 ya? - hey, and by all means, keep making fun of that dialect. The voters LUV that stuff.
Q.E.D.
MarkG writes: "Oooh, brave dude! He's actually willing to meet with the guy who scares him most (Dubya) to show us he can go on his knees before Ahminajihad as president to sell the nation out. Great news!"
Mark M. writes: "Personally I'd love to see Sarah kick Mr. 57 state visiting, I see dead people, Iran's a tiny country, Jerusalem should be unif--- uh uh uh uh affirmative action man-boy any day, and you can even throw in his america hating, bitter half harpy of a wife. See her today? Nice swept back hair (more servile, less harpyish). See- you CAN put lipstick on a pig!"
The Marks are interchangeable, and the McCain boosters know that their guy is dying on the vine.
Once again, I'm enjoying watching the long, slow death of the Republican body politic. Election Night is going to be SWEET. For the first time in far too long I will be proud of my country.
The world may not cry out for McCain's acumen, but Harry Reid did;
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV): "We Need The Republican Nominee For President To Let Us Know Where He Stands On What We Should Do." REID: "We need, now, the Republicans to start producing some votes for us. We need the Republican nominee for president to let us know where he stands and what we should do." (Sen. Harry Reid, Media Availability, Washington, '
So, McCain takes the ball. Obama hides in the bullpen, says, " Call me if you need me. I'll vote present. Some day, Obama may take a courageous political stand. But I won't hold my breath.
If McCain was afraid to debate Obama, why was he trying to get him to agree to town halls all summer? And as I recall, Hillary beat Obama like a red headed step child in all the dem debates.
M.L.J:
We are legion, but you'll see for yourself come Nov.
BTW, isn't this the guy who said he wouldn't fly back for a photo op? But then again, didn't he say he wanted a say in policy that would effect his administration a week ago? (the Iraq Security Agreement?) Wow, Mr. "I'll compare my self to the bottom of the ticket" sure is swift for a Haaaar-vrrd man.
JoshK wrote:"We had the hearings on all day at work on CNBC and it does seem like this bailout is teetering, if not falling apart"
And thank GOD for that. Paulson's proposal was a walking abortion. No oversight? No judicial review? WTF is that? We're just supposed to hand him 700 billion dollars to do with as he pleases? The Founders of the country are spinning in their graves.
I don't think so. That proposal should be shredded, not passed.
Some kind of measure may be needed. MAY. It's not as urgent as they say. Hell, they just picked $700 billion out of their asses, not because they had any reason to think that was the right number.
CNBC is just a bunch of idiot socialist cheerleaders hoping for the Paulson proposal to come through and re-inflate the bubble so their party can continue.
"Now, if Sarah showed up in his place Friday night... "
Dude, Palin has now crapped out in interviews with two people who spent most of their careers in morning news. Not exactly hard-hitting journalists.
And McCain won't let her talk to strangers.
Get a grip dude, it's been 8 years. It's time to face up to reality.
Mark M. says: "We are legion, but you'll see for yourself come Nov."
Yes - the legion of the doomed.
"But then again, didn't he say he wanted a say in policy that would effect his administration a week ago?"
Get back to me when you master the effect/affect distinction, chuckles.
""Who cares what either Obama or McCain says in staged campaign hooey if my money market funds go to 50 cents on the dollar and the local gas station cannot get an inventory loan and my credit card stops working?""
Dear god you people are so damned FEARFUL of everything. Bush knows just how to jerk your chains.
Man up, damnit.
In the midst of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, a magician David Blaine suspended himself upside down for 60 hours in NYC's Central Park. This is probably the inspiration of John McCain's decision to put his campaign on hold. Just hanging in the middle of all this commotion is a nice, albeit uncomfortable place to be. Nobody can fault you for doing something or saying something while you are just hanging. Oh, yes, I almost forgot, McCain wants to rush back to the Senate to voice his opinion on the subject which he, by his own admission, is not too familiar with. Megan calls this move both dumb and brilliant. Brilliantly dumb or dumb-ly brilliant?
Meanwhile, Sarah Palin has proven that she can speak without a teleprompter. She most definitely memorized at least one line given to her by her campaign. Specifically, in her exclusive interview with Couric she has repeated almost verbatim: "My understanding is that Rick Davis reclused himself from the dealings with that firm (those Freddie and Fannie)... I don't know... one or two years ago and he's not benefiting himself. (I would hope that it's the case.)" Bravo, Sarah. This is an amazing learning pace. Imagine what she may be able to do by the election time. Of course, "I'll bring 'em t'ya" is just an unfortunate flashback. Elisa Dolittle could not quite get that the rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain for a lot longer than this brave hockey mom.
"With all due respect, I think you have it all wrong. The market was swinging wildly by decent 3 digits on the on again off again promise of a bailout since last week. The last two days it is hovering because it thinks that a modified version of the bailout is coming tommorrow. If a deal doesn't come down by tommorrow or friday I predict we'll go from 10K to mid 7K in a day, and that's just because they'll either run out of time or stop all trading.
Cramer has already told everyone to liquidate 20% regardless of pain."
And Cramer is credible why? Because he's loud?
And those weren't terribly wild swings. Yeah, they were attention-getting, but not a crisis. Remember when the Dow dropped 22% in a day a couple decades back? Yeah, that was a crisis - and even then we didn't toss in 10% of the national debt to fix it.
But let's just revisit Cramer. He said to sell 20% regardless of pain - an opinion you assert we should respect. The president said that our economy is in danger. A presidential candidate felt compelled to suspend his campaign. And the bailout is effectively dead in the water as presented with a smaller package likely to be passed with all kinds of concessions on companies that participate. All those hints - all that news that seems to suggest that things are really bad and the big pot of money isn't actually coming... and the markets close down 0.27% - and what, 4% down over the last two weeks? I agree it's a crisis for WaMu and AIG and some others, but for most of the market?
Martin & Jon H.
Cramer is an extremely successful fund manager.
Did you listen to the president? The list he rattled off is not only foreseeable, it was deliberately understated (as it probably should have been). This ain't 1987. 1/3 of all Americans have significant investments in the market, 60% of households own their home, and let's just say that Americans are more dependent upon cheap credit than ever before.
4 percent? You have noticed the slide from 14K to 10K in the last 12 months right? I know a hedge fund manager that said this would spread out of the sub prime mess into all sorts of areas a year ago and I didn't believe him either -12 months ago. I would have thought the last several weeks of massive failure after massive failure of our largest and oldest institutions would have gotten your attention, since these institutions are major sources of liquidity within this economy, or the gov takeover of the the 5 Trillion dollar portfolion that kicked off this whole mess, (the one the GOP tried to prevent in 2005 & 2007 and which Frank, Dodd, Obama, Clinton blocked) Freddie & Fannie, which holds half the mortgages in the country. These institutions won't be lending out or investing any money anytime soon. Maybe you read what Credit Swap is, or heard about Mortgage Backed Securities? I would have thought that maybe you might have noticed how credit has tightened up and it's REAL hard to get what used to be easy? Or heard about policy holders (think whole life insurance) would have been left with zilch when AIG asked for 80B dollars in loans? Maybe you noticed all the institutions whose bonds are being cut to junk or the other thread on this blog where really rock solid companies like Catapillar and Amer. Honda Finance's costs of credit are going up. But hey, you've got a .27% quote from last night, so who am I to argue?
You think housing's is down now? Wait until people who lose their jobs can't find a buyer who will qualify for a mortgage, and you'll be hoping YOUR house burns down so you can collect the insurance before you find yourself paying for a mortgage that is deeply underwater even if you kept your job. Most people's wealth is tied up in their housing equity and their 401k's, so combine that with a collapsing stock market as the rest of the real estate backed equities fall through and a general downturn on main street industries and say hello to instant wipeout for a significant portion of responsible Americans. (At least we'll solve the illegal immigrant problem).
Credit liquidity is interconnected not just with Banks and Investment houses but with every single company you have ever heard of that relies on lines of credit to do business. How do you think the heating oil company restocks it's inventory for the winter? How do you think car companies set up financing for their would-be customers? Perhaps you work in a Bankruptcy Attorney's office? You should be okay then. Otherwise I would get some cash on hand and hope the market doesn't lose faith that a solution is coming fast.
I think McCain almost HAD to do this. Otherwise I think Obama would have brought up this financial crisis over and over at the debate (despite it being about foreign policy) and try to hang it around McCain's neck.
"While some people worry about Iraq's WMD threats that never happened, I would have been monitoring the investment bankers that have bombed our economy like the Iraqis never could have."
"Well, where were you this week when we had those meetings, Mr. Obama?"
"Megan, just stop doing political commentary. I don't mean to be rude, but just stop."
Asher - many thanks for that and the rest of your post. I just didn't think I could let the "brilliant political" part go but thanks to you I can get on with the rest of my day.
"Politically brilliant"?
No, just dumb. Really dumb.
I'll tell you the sense I'm getting from conversations here in West TN and Northern MS, where there are a lot of Ole Miss fans and alumni: people are pissed. The city of Oxford and the University of Mississippi have spent a lot of money on this event, and this is a slap in the face by McCain.
There's no way he would pull this kind of stunt if the debate were being hosted in Ohio.
I suppose there's no way that this will turn MS blue, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if Lafayette County (58% Bush in 2004) voted for Obama.
Briliant! Since it is the Republicans who seem to be giving the most grief, John M.can be the individual who gets them to fall in line, ergo, the hero
The world is not crying out for John McCain's exquisite financial acumen to help shepherd us through this.
Of course not, Megan, we're all waiting for YOU to save us. You have all the brilliant ideas, like asking the Federal government to erect a residential rental bureaucracy to take-over all the worthless mortgages.
And on the 'brilliant' point...think it through Megan. If McCain is going to call a time-out to get out of a Friday night debate near and airport for the candidate's jets, then what other 'crises' will promt him to call a time-out as president? How many times will the dogs of the world eat his homework?
Pathetic.
All I see is that Obama, again caught off guard, looks like an idiot for, once again, preferring to pursue his own personal goals rather than doing his job.
We are in the middle of one of the biggest financial crises in our history. He is one of a hundred men that need to vote on spending $700 B. and he wants to treat this as a secondary job. If he's good at multi-tasking why doesn't he run his campaign from Washington, where he gets his paycheck?
Shit, for the biggest vote in his life, he doesn't even want to be, or vote, 'present'.
Here is what makes me mad. McCain thinks that Americans are stupid. He might be right. McCain has run a campaign from the celebrity ads to the lipstick on a pig kerfuffle to changing his positions on almost everything to choosing his VP with this idea in his head: Americans aren't very smart. Now I'm sure that there are plenty of McCain supporters who aren't stupid, but if you aren't stupid this is not designed to appeal to you.
Palin ain't a brave hockey mom. She's a brief hacky mom.
Tom hannities: "Shit, for the biggest vote in his life, he doesn't even want to be, or vote, 'present'."
It's a short plane ride away, Tommy. They'll have the debate and then they can go back to Washington for your precious big-ass vote.
You've heard of planes, right? Big fast things with wings?
Michael Foody says: "Now I'm sure that there are plenty of McCain supporters who aren't stupid"
I have yet to see any evidence of this.
I agree with 1. Disagree with the rest.
It's just dumb. It's not politically brilliant, Obama is definitely the winner here. Nothing needs to be put on hold to deal with this.
How is pushing the debate back a few days going to change anything? The candidates should be in Washington right now; if this had been Obama's idea the internets would be swooning over his "genuine leadership" and post-partisanship.
Brilliant? Hardly. I forget, were also of the camp that called the Palin pick brilliant?
This is the same sort of move born from the recognition that he can't beat Obama conventionally.
Both Palin and the "suspended campaign" are attempts to change the subject, to shift the focus of the media and public away from the core conditions that favor Obama. (The Palin pick was the smarter of the two acts of desperation, since it did serve to invigorate those that McCain once described as "agents of intollerance.")
The Palin gimmick worked for about a week. This apparently won't even last that long.
McCain is looking smarter by the minute. Now the FDIC wants a bailout, Chinese banks told to suspend loans to American banks.
But this is nothing to worry about, because a president needs to be able to "multitask"!
[Isn't this EXACTLY like the lazy guy who is NEVER there for the big decisions or the real work because he's "too busy" because of "all the other stuff on his plate".] Oh this feeds SOOOOO well into the "Present" meme. But no, the Obamabots are CONVINCED that people are going to think that *the* Foreign policy expert is afraid to debate Uh uh Uh-bam-uh the stuttering twerp.
Where is Obama??? Oh, that's right, he's still preparing for the debate that's not going to happen. Like the petutalent clown prince that he is, poor Baracky is upset that his prom night will be delayed. What's next? -the coronation?
Oh what to do what to do when his lessers won't fall in line.
And since nobody mentioned it, anybody hear that laughable press conf. last night where he was talking how "he called McCain first" [but got vm I guess.] That's like "didn't you get my message that I wasn't going to make it this morning?" And then he tried to spin it like it was his idea.
RIIIGGHT. That doesn't smack of the me-to desperation this fool is known for once the answer becomes clear.
It may or may not be politically brilliant - but its not dumb. Congress wants other authority figures (presidents and prospective presidents) to put their names on the solution so that they can evade later responsibility and possible voter vengeance. They are likely to dither up to and beyond a critical juncture unless they can find cover. The next president will have a much worse problem in their administration if they don't go to DC and "own" at least part of a solution now.
Second, you grossly oversimplify what McCain or Obama would be doing in Washington. I'd rather see my next President -- or he who would be my next President -- working with his colleagues, rather than delivering stump speeches in Florida or Iowa or MIchigan.
Not entirely unreasonable. But - they can accomplish a great deal of that collaboration electronically. Well, Obama can, anyway.
And even from Washington they can keep running ads. I mean they don't have to be there in the studio to push "play" every time. Calling for the complete cessation of all campaign activity is a little weird - until you realize how far down in the polls McCain is. Then it begins to make a lot more sense.
You know, as a cynical last-ditch ploy.
People are jumping to conclusions about how this is playing publicly before the public really has had a chance to react. We may have a better basis for judgment after the weekend, if the debate is postponed, and if a deal on the bailout is brokered. McCain can even concede on the debate being held as scheduled.
Obama's response was finely tuned and quite clever, but there is a big risk here if McCain's decision is too vigorously ridiculed. The decisions being made (or not made) in Congress are momentous ones- probably the most important ones made in the last 40 years, and ridiculing a prospective president for wanting to get in on the issue and lead the way to a deal is politically perilous. McCain just made a big bet, and we haven't seen all the cards yet.
People are paying attention to what is going on in Congress like no other time in my memory. At this moment, I can't think of any better place to be at the moment if you are running for president.
Democrats who are mad are mad because it is politically brilliant, not because it is dumb.
Why do people keep mistaking contempt and ridicule for anger? It happened with the Palin pick (where Dems' initial reaction turns out to have been right) and it's happening now.
McCain's like a kid throwing a tantrum and getting everyone's attention. This doesn't mean he "won." Maybe he'll make this work, but I really doubt it.
Damn it, I should have just posted it without the attempt to rearrange the clauses for rhythm. Too often, I forget to delete one of them.
The more I think about it the worse it plays for Obama.
So- On the most important vote of the last 20 years... When the congress is ready to throw $1T to the swine who brought us to the brink of financial Armageddon because Obama's buddies thought they deserved $25M bonuses (forget the idea that these were well meaning attempts to help out bad credit risks, These ridiculously out of hand bonuses were the REAL reason Fannie/Freddie pushed all these loans), Barack says he has to "multitask". Because having the debate tommorrow night is SOOOO important.
Laughable. Baracky gets caught flat footed again. "This is not the financial meltdown I knew."
Or Cramer told people to liquidate because he wants pressure on Washington to force a favorable bailout.
Part of the business of campaigning involves leaping around like a bozo asking the media and public to pay attention -- Whee! Look at me!
McCain's approach of returning to "Warshington" involved less of the normal clowning. Whoever becomes President will have to work with whatever plan emerges from the current haggling in Congress. Since both candidates are Congressfolk, you'd expect them to dive into the details, offer proposals, and cast their votes. This is all part of their current job duties, although we give them wide latitude for campaigning here in the silly season.
It'll be interesting to see if afterwards the dichotomy between "Country First" and "Party First" obtains.
Watching Mark M. flailing around trying to lipstick the entire 200 pound pig known as John McCain is amusing but not very instructive.
But did you know McCain was a POW? He's also a former prisoner of war. He was in Vietnam, you know.
Let's just hope the Senate vote doesn't happen during one of his frequent trips to the bathroom. He'd hate to have to rush out to "lead the nation" with little Johnny still hanging out.
M.L.J:
"It's a short plane ride away, Tommy. They'll have the debate and then they can go back to Washington for your precious big-ass vote."
It's not the vote, it's the DEBATE as to what to do and whether the Next President of the United States can be bothered to attend. Barack wants to pull a "Not Present" and pretend it's because he's such an awesome debater. Uh uh uh um yeah.
Wazowski:
"Congress wants other authority figures ...to put their names on the solution so that they can evade later responsibility"
Great point, but Democrats like Clinton, Edwards and Kerry escaped accountability for their Iraq votes by claiming they were fooled. Prepare to watch our "leaders" try this again when the details of how bad this deal was come out.
Of course "leaders" like Barney Frank doesn't want McCain there because he already figured out how this is going to play out. This guy should be frog marched to a holding cell NOW. Barney Frank: The person MOST responsible for blocking Fannie/Freddie reform in 2005. Now saying with a straight face that this is a failure of "deregulation". CNBC and even Fox didn't even call him on it! Geez, where's an angry sky god with a quiver full of lightning when you need him?
John McCain's attempt to postpone the debate proves that he's nothing but a coward and weasel.
While you're at it John, can you postpone the Earth's revolution around the Sun until Congress approves a bailout package?
McCain's new campaign slogan courtesy of Ralph Kramden
HOMINA, HOMINA, HOMINA, HOMINA
McCain has become the George Costanza of the Republican Party
"This is not the Financial Meltdown I blew off for more debate prep."
"Didn't you get my call? I told you I'd be too late to help out until after all the tough decisions were made."
"A president has far more important things to do than help figure out how to avert financial disaster... like campaiging... and and uh um uh um uh... debates!"
"proves that he's nothing but a coward and weasel."
[snip]
"HOMINA, HOMINA, HOMINA, HOMINA"
That's just priceless. Doesn't Obama teach you trolls to wait more than three sentences to prove yourself a hypocrite and moron?
"We are in the middle of one of the biggest financial crises in our history. He is one of a hundred men that need to vote on spending $700 B. and he wants to treat this as a secondary job. If he's good at multi-tasking why doesn't he run his campaign from Washington, where he gets his paycheck?"
Because at the moment, this is all happening in 2 committees: finance and banking. And neither McCain or Obama are on those committees. Nor is Biden. Honestly, aside from the people on those committees, there's nothing for other legislators to do other than give their pulse on what they will and won't support. Obama has done that. McCain has done that. They're talking to their party leadership - we know that. They're talking to the chairs of these committees, we know that. What else are they supposed to do? Bring coffee and donuts to the guys on committee while they work?
When this comes to a vote, if Obama isn't there, go after him - no question. If the Dems weren't doing anything, I'd say okay to go after him, but they are. By all accounts a deal is close to being done - and it's a deal that the Republicans on the committee are comfortable with as well. Now, McCain might have a bigger problem given that some Republicans - especially in the House are totally against this, but I don't get the sense that this group is large enough to kill the bill. If it was, then getting down there to knock heads might be appropriate, but that's a political problem.
"A bipartisan meeting was set for Thursday to begin drafting a compromise, which top Democrats said they hoped could pass within days."
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080925/D93DNI7G0.html
"...take money from teachers and farmers and small business owners to line the pockets of the Wall Street crowd that got us here in the first place. And I can assure you: if I have anything to say about the matter, it's not going to happen," McCain said."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080925/ts_nm/us_usa_politicsnews_4
In other words, the idea that a deal is close is just B.S. I'm thinking D.O.A. The GOP is not going to oppose their popular nominee on something so universally unpopular. They are going to let him ham it up and propose an alternative. (Thank GOD - this thing is such a turkey)
Palin herself said they wouldn't accept a bailout for the people responsible, which could be political, (why not, Barack pulls this every day), or could already have another alternative in mind. BTW, the "great depression" comment she made is not a gaffe. It is dead on: Inflation-> Recession. Great Depression-> Rampant Deflation. Like what you get when there's a credit crunch. [Yeah, she didn't site the craptastic SOX bill bill, but why would ANY republican proposed regulation of the private sector? A government trough like Fannie Mae, on the other hand...
Where's Obama? Oh that's right, he's primping for his debate with an empty chair. ("Empty suit, meet empty chair")
Martin,
Barack's not president, but he was claiming a "right" to be involved with Iraq Security agreement a week ago because it affected the next presidency.
And in this face of an utter financial meltdown, I think that makes a lot of sense. The committee's recommendations won't be worth the paper it's written on if the party's nominee tells the foot soldiers to slow things down and take a few more days to get it right. After all, these committees' leaders are the very same guys that created this mess when they killed the 2005 & 2007 reform proposals that would have reigned in the fraud at Fannie & Freddie.
BTW, Barack claimed he *was* on the banking committee a few weeks ago before someone pointed out that he wasn't. (Just one of the many outstanding gaffes we used to hear until Joe "Chevy Chase" Biden came along.) Oh well... I like Joe - he speaks his mind at least as often as he says something funny or stupid.
I guess this is where if I mock people for not being reality-based, it's insulting, right:
Yeah, these people really have their fingers on the pulse of the American public, all right. From the only objective data posted on this thread:
So, by a margin of 86 to 10, about 17 to 2, the public prefers that the debate go on as scheduled. As verified by an objective and apparently non-partisan poll.
And yet, the Brain Trust referenced above opine that 'Obama is in trouble'. Well, maybe he is. But they sure haven't offered up any evidence to that effect. Just what looks to be very partisan opinion.
I guess this is the point where someone on the right affects some sort of sophistication by noting the disagreement falls along partisan lines right? The same tactic that's so effective in the 'debate' over evolution: "Consensus falls along partisan lines".
Well, that's one way to say that you're shooting blanks, I guess. Doesn't make me think very much of you though.
"Barack's not president, but he was claiming a "right" to be involved with Iraq Security agreement a week ago because it affected the next presidency."
And both McCain and Obama have been involved all week. McCain 'suspended' his campaign yesterday mid-day and he's still not in Washington. If we take him at his word that this is a crisis and he must be in DC, why isn't he there? He was in NY yesterday doing an interview with Couric. It's 2 hours to DC. He should have been there well before Bush's speech. He wasn't even there when Democrats announced that they were near a deal 2 hours after the speech. He wasn't there at 10AM today when Democrats and Republicans met to work out final details. Right this minute, they're writing the legislation, McCain still isn't there. What part of this did McCain feel he needed to be there for, since he's missed being in person (as has Obama) for everything so far except for the vote. So what role is he playing that Obama isn't playing as well?
I think it's hilarious how much The Obamanation gets into a tizzy at the mere suggestion that they're being outmaneuvered. This short innocuous non-economics post has elicited double the normal number of comments, and a lot of it dripping with sheer hatred. I can almost see Axelrod emailing his call2action to the Obamanation footsoldiers to rise up and shout down the blasphemist blogger post.
Keep up the good work Megan!
rick types: "I can almost see Axelrod emailing his call2action to the Obamanation footsoldiers to rise up and shout down the blasphemist blogger post."
"Blasphemist" isn't actually a word, chuckles. Next time try "blasphemous."
From rick:
Yes, I have noted the same emotional response on numerous other issues, and some McCain supporters seem to derive great pleasure in taking advantage of this characteristic. If I had to make a wager, I would bet there is a pretty significant age difference in the two camps' online supporters- Obama's are younger and more emotionally immature, and McCain's are older and just less sensitive to needling.
Well, since CBS News is now reporting that Henry Paulson asked for John McCain's help putting together a deal that conservatives would vote for, I guess Megan's point number 1 is wrong. Obviously, the world really is "crying out for John McCain's financial acumen", or at least his leadership. Obama, on the other hand, has nothing to offer here. But, at least he admits that he's pretty much useless, so at least that's something.
This post is extremely contradictory. Typical libertarian behavior. Taking pot shots, but never taking a stand.
The McCain suspension was dumb. It was not brilliant. Presidents have to multi-task. Anytime something goes wrong for McCain he becomes a drama queen just like Hillary Clinton. Americans want a steady methodical leader -- Barack Obama.
That's a stand and an irrefutable point.
BOOM!
If you can't actually argue that McCain's move is smart politically, then start talking about how the other side is getting too riled up.
EyeDoc: the fundamentals of our economy are strong. Didn't you get the memo?
Dumb AND politically brilliant. This seems to be McCains's stock-in-trade (see Palin, Sarah).
The other thing is that this is neither smart nor dumb if he doesn't actually do it, and every indication is that his campaign hasn't actualy suspended at all. He's still showing ads, still isn't in Washington, still campaigning.
I guess it's a double-secret suspension?
EyeDoc writes: "Well, since CBS News is now reporting that Henry Paulson asked for John McCain's help putting together a deal that conservatives would vote for, I guess Megan's point number 1 is wrong."
And we know Paulson would never lie, because he's a member of the Bush administration.
Chet says: "I guess it's a double-secret suspension?"
Maybe a suspension bridge to nowhere?
Begging your indulgence but maybe
might be a better subtitle for your blog than Asymmetrical Information .
"The McCain suspension was dumb. It was not brilliant. Presidents have to multi-task."
Or they could prioritize, like biggest vote of the decade vs. prepping for a debate that may or may not happen.
And we know Paulson would never lie, because he's a member of the Bush administration.
But the claim that McCain went to Washington at Paulson's urging is plausible. Republican members of Congress have clearly been opposing the plan, and McCain is probably the only one who may be able to get significant numbers of them on board. If McCain thinks the bailout plan is important, it's reasonable for him to go to Washington, make it clear this is a high-priority, and see what he can do. And it has nothing to do with being an economic guru, it has to do with trying to lead his party. The Republicans may still stiff him en masse and vote no, but if they do, they do so at the risk of torpedoing Republican chances in the presidential election.
"Blasphemist" isn't actually a word, chuckles. Next time try "blasphemous."
Whoops, my bad. Thanks.
Sad discussion.
1) Granted that McCain is not an economics expert, he is a major coalition-builder in Washington. His input may well be very important.
2) He or Obama will have to deal with the results of all this.
3) This is a tremendously important decision. As Megan has pointed out, our entire economy is on the line.
Why should people's first response be that this is a cynical political calculation? It seems to me that a decent person ought to say, I hope this doesn't harm my campaign, but I cannot be away from Washington at a time by this. The place can run without me most of the time, but at a time like this I'm needed there.
Of course, if you just hate McCain, you'll automatically see only the worst. But that's not worthy.
Why should people's first response be that this is a cynical political calculation?
Because that's what it obviously is?
I mean, what would you call it when John McCain says he's suspending his campaign and stopping all ads, and then the ads keep running and he keeps campaigning? I mean the minute after he bowed out of Letterman, ostensibly to rush to Washington to help with the crisis, he was down the street prepping for Katie Couric's show.
Of course, if you just hate McCain, you'll automatically see only the worst.
I saw him declare a suspension of his campaign and then do Couric's show; I saw him declare a suspension of ads and the ads kept running. And now we've seen a deal in Washingtron struck long before McCain even seems to have thought of, you know, going there like he said he would.
I dunno, is that "seeing the worst"? Or is that simply seeing what's as plain as the nose on your face, something McCain's supporters seem unable to do?
I think there is a simpler possible explanation for what McCain did: he just wanted to be where the action is. Some people are like that. Maybe he thought he could help - who knows? This is, arguably, the most important thing congress is going to vote on in the last 20 years. I don't know what his motives are, and in fact, neither does anyone else.
What I find interesting is how many people automatically infer the worst motives.
I see that Bill Clinton is more charitable than some of the people in the comments. I repeat what I said before: If you liked him, you would have no trouble seeing this as a noble act.
"He went on Couric's show." Here goes again: If you liked him, you wouldn't be doing this. You could answer your own questions. Just as an exercise: Put Obama in place of McCain, and hit the Redo button.
Put Obama in place of McCain, and hit the Redo button.
Is this the kind of logic that it takes to earn your McCain points? I mean, yeah; and if my grandma had wheels she'd be a wagon.
The reason I can't see this as a noble act is because there's nothing noble about it. It's a disingenuous, cynical attempt to hit the "reset" button on two weeks of negative press.
Polling indicates over 75% of the public wants the debates to continue. There was been widespread ridicule across the blogosphere AND the MSM decrying this as a stunt.
But in your eyes it comes off as "politically brilliant" and you imagine pissed off Democrats who envy such political acumen.
Why don't you go ahead and take a break from blogging for bit dear? You're starting to come off all Palin like, it ain't pretty.
Any new thoughts on whether the stunt has hurt the Republic? How about giving aid and comfort to House Republicans more interested in the future of their party than doing something about the crisis.
All McCain did was set an artificial deadline to fix a complicated problem. As of Tuesday, McCain hadn't studied the President's proposal enough to comment on it. He has yet to say what a proposal should be. And yet, a deal must be struck before he'll debate.
I guess you place no value on the credibility of our leaders as figuring into whether our Republic is harmed.
Not that I understand enough about the various bailout plans to comment. But McCain is obviously playing a key role in the Republican side of the negotiations. Of course, if you hate the Republican side, that's bad! For people who are able to see more than one side, though, I think an apology to Mr. McCain is in order. Rather than this being a "grandstanding declaration", Megan, he is closely involved in a critically important and very time-dependent piece of legislation. He may not be an economist, but none of them are. Congress has to act anyhow, as best it can. I don't know that what McCain is doing is noble. On the other hand, I do think it may be part of his job.
I hope he can go and do the debate anyhow.
It's just too bad that people are so involved in hating that they can't see any good in the other side. Look, I do the same with the President of Iran. But I would never do it with Barack Obama or John McCain, or George W. Bush for that matter. They are all decent people with very different views on how to run a country.
What is amazing to me is why politicians who run for higher office are allowed to keep their current position.
According to the Washington Post's website, (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/senate/vote-missers/) you can see that McCain has missed 64.1% of the votes for the 110th Congress; Obama is 3rd with 45.9% missed, only behind Sen. Tim Johnson (SD) who has missed most of his votes due to suffering a brain hemorrhage. Hillary is 4th and Biden 5th.
I believe once someone decides to run for President, they should give up their Senate seat (Governorship or whatever else applies here). They aren't truly representing those people that elected them anymore. So who cares about "suspending my campaign" when technically they already suspended their duties as Senators long ago.
And everyone wonders why politicians are hated.
ather than this being a "grandstanding declaration", Megan, he is closely involved in a critically important and very time-dependent piece of legislation.
How close, exactly? So close it took him a week to read a three-page proposal? (No pictures, I guess.) So close that he was doing Couric's show while Congress debated? So close that he stood there, silent and motionless, throughout most of the subsequent dealings?
So close it turns out he had no problems at all jetting off to Miss. for the debate?
"Grandstanding" sounds about right.
Is it time for apologies yet? A number of Congressmen have said by now (Lieberman, Blunt, and more) that McCain's contribution was critical to getting the House Republicans on board. And a number of Democrats (Reid, Pelosi, and more) have said that McCain messed up a done deal - which amounts to the same thing, that McCain had a big impact, though obviously not one that the Democrats wanted!
McCain himself has said very little about what he's been doing, not to the press and not at the debate. Poor job of grandstanding.
In a just world, a lot of voters would be impressed.
Is it time for apologies yet?
Only yours, genius. Here's McCain's major contribution to the bailout talks so far:
McCain's big impact - storming off like a petulant child.
McCain himself has said very little about what he's been doing, not to the press and not at the debate.
There's nothing to say, because he hasn't been doing anything! And why would he need to granstand himself? With both hands up Liberman and Blunt's rectums, he can have them say anything he likes.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/29/without-mccain-they-would-have-run-over-me-like-a-freight-train/
John Boehner says that McCain's contribution was essential.
Don't believe everything you read. You didn't provide a link, so I don't know where it came from. But did you consider that perhaps it was wrong before you started throwing insults around?
I repeat my question - if and when it turns out that McCain made a profound contribution (by now I have at least half a dozen independent sources to that effect, at least to my understanding), are you ready to apologize?