Originally posted by kmax87You might be right about McCain trying to paint himself the hero, but I dare say I think you overestimate your Democrat kinsmen in terms passing the legislation. I am not as confident in them passing it.
When you work out that you don't get to Washington until they know where your skeletons are buried, you also work out that when a move really has to happen, a whole bunch of bones rattling in closets everywhere is all the coercion necescary for those unwilling to come onside. Given that that's a given then what McCain is really trying to do is paint himself i ...[text shortened]... at he does not recognise when he is making a spectacle of himself and being a right show pony.
As for Obama, this economic crisis is the best thing that could have ever happened for him. Really, all he has to do now is hope for the worst from here on out and people will run in droves to him as they seem to have begun to now. As a result, I think the less he says the better off he will be just in case he has any more bone headed slip ups like the pig and lipstick comment.
Originally posted by whodeyYou are correct in one thing; this is the best thing that could have happened for Obama, because it shows how dangerous McCain and Gramm's deregulation really is.
You might be right about McCain trying to paint himself the hero, but I dare say I think you overestimate your Democrat kinsmen in terms passing the legislation. I am not as confident in them passing it.
As for Obama, this economic crisis is the best thing that could have ever happened for him. Really, all he has to do now is hope for the worst from here ...[text shortened]... he will be just in case he has any more bone headed slip ups like the pig and lipstick comment.
This bailout, if pushed through by dolts like McCain, will give more power to Henry Paulson than anyone else in the government, including the President. Is this what you want? The person that ignored all of the signs, to now "fix" the whole thing. That doesn't seem that smart to me.
Perhaps I was wrong. Maybe you aren't smart enough to see this for what it really is.
As for the "boneheaded slip ups"; he got more press out that than anything else in the last 2 months. No one was focusing on McCain or Palin, they were focused on Obama.
Statement from Obama Campaign:
"At 8:30 this morning, Senator Obama called Senator McCain to ask him if he would join in issuing a joint statement outlining their shared principles and conditions for the Treasury proposal and urging Congress and the White House to act in a bipartisan manner to pass such a proposal. At 2:30 this afternoon, Senator McCain returned Senator Obama's call and agreed to join him in issuing such a statement. The two campaigns are currently working together on the details."
The Obama campaign was trying to do this quietly, in a way that would cause the least politicization possible. It was McCain who yelled fire in the movie theater and caused this insane dog and pony show which will result in nothing BUT further politicization of the process.
McCain would rather loose his integrity than an election. His behavior over the last two weeks has proven as much over and over again.
Further, I think there is another aspect to this we must consider.
from CNN:
"McCain supporter Sen. Lindsey Graham tells CNN the McCain campaign is proposing to the Presidential Debate Commission and the Obama camp that if there's no bailout deal by Friday, the first presidential debate should take the place of the VP debate, currently scheduled for next Thursday, October 2 in St. Louis."
Could this be a ploy by the McCain campaign to once again save little Sarah from the scary, scary questions?
2 edits
Originally posted by CliffLandinWhat I do know, or at least what all the "experts" are saying, is that if NO legislation is passed to prevent the market from seizing up, which means infusing money, all economic hell will break loose, In effect, it will be one continuous snow ball effect.
You are correct in one thing; this is the best thing that could have happened for Obama, because it shows how dangerous McCain and Gramm's deregulation really is.
This bailout, if pushed through by dolts like McCain, will give more power to Henry Paulson than anyone else in the government, including the President. Is this what you want? The person tha in the last 2 months. No one was focusing on McCain or Palin, they were focused on Obama.
You mistake my position if you think I am 100% Paulson and company. I am only observing that many "experts" I have heard from on the matter seem to be in agreement that legislation needs to be passed very soon to prevent a collapse. In fact, I think McCain even has some issues with the current Paulson plan from what I have heard but at the same time recognizes the need to act now.
As for this being the best thing that could have happened to Obama, I say you are right. In fact, I say without the crisis he would have lost to McCain.
I'm genuinely astonished how anyone could see McCain's decision not to participate in the debate
as a heroic gesture. As Obama (whom I don't hold in particularly high regard either) points out:
it's a fundamental aspect of being President to be able to juggle many things at once.
It's not like McCain is a particularly important Senator (no more important the Obama) when it
comes to matters of economy, and his knowledge of economic matters isn't particularly broad
(again, no more than Obama's).
Now, let me make clear, I find the whole 'get elected' process to be revolting, especially the
amount of money that is raised and gets spent just to promote a given individual, so it's not
like I'm going to pine over seeing a few less McCain ads on television over the next few days.
It's the notion that he's soooooo important and vital that if he were to do anything else but
hang around in the Senate over the next few days, it would delay the solution by any amount
of time. That's a pile of crap, and I'm astonished that so many people are so committed to
hating Obama or worshiping the ground Republicans walk on that they would view this action
as laudatory.
Mind you, if Obama were to suspend his campaign with the argument that the Senate needed
his full attention, I would be just as disgusted.
Nemesio
Originally posted by whodeyFrom a purely capitalistic standpoint, isn't 'economic hell breaking loose' just a market correction?
What I do know, or at least what all the "experts" are saying, is that if NO legislation is passed to prevent the market from seizing up, which means infusing money, all economic hell will break loose, In effect, it will be one continuous snow ball effect.
It's the purging of companies too inferior to manage their own money properly. If it's a big
company with lots and lots of money, then they should only be that much more careful.
The bigger they are, the harder they fall.
If we go into a recession or worse yet a depression (a trajectory which isn't particularly novel),
so what? Yes people will suffer, yes people will lose their homes and go hungry and everything
else. It will be tragic, no doubt and I don't want that to happen any more than anyone else.
However, how much more dangerous is giving companies who mismanage their money to the
tune of 100s of millions of dollars a safety net? Capitalism is about the how the public will
support the best companies by purchasing their products; the embracing of this package is
nothing short of socialism. Is that what we want? Avoid recession by letting the government
pick and choose whom to rescue? Yes, we will pay for it right now by allowing a recession to
take place, but how deeply will we pay for it if we let the government 'correct' businesses who
can't stay out of cataclysmic bankruptcy?
Nemesio
Originally posted by NemesioSo what if we slip into a depression you ask? Well I guess that is what we are going to find out if there is no government intervention. As for myself, I was thinking of the average Joe like myself rather than the corporations at large.
If we go into a recession or worse yet a depression (a trajectory which isn't particularly novel),
so what? Yes people will suffer, yes people will lose their homes and go hungry and everything
else. It will be tragic, no doubt and I don't want that to happen any more than anyone else.
I have seen and heard what the last Great Depression was like and it to be honest it doesn't look like that much fun. In fact, it would be nice to avoid that fate altogether if possible. Are you suggesting we allow people to suffer all in the name of being a capitalistic purest? Somehow having myself suffer and the rest of the US to suffer and future generations to suffer all in the name of capitalistic purism does not seem like a fair trade off. Don't you agree?
As for corporations, the ones responsible for this mess have already undergone dramatic changes. In addition, I doubt those responsible will be able to evade public scrutiny at this point in the game. It would be political suicide for those in Washington not to go on witch hunts after these guys.
Originally posted by NemesioAs I said before, if I were in his position and I believed that legislation needed to be created to avoid economic collapse, I would do the same as McCain. In fact, I hope Obama would do the same as well no matter if their participation ends up amounting to anything of significance. The point is that this whole affair is of great significance that everyone in Washington needs to be working on this 24/7.
It's the notion that he's soooooo important and vital that if he were to do anything else but
hang around in the Senate over the next few days, it would delay the solution by any amount
of time. That's a pile of crap, and I'm astonished that so many people are so committed to
hating Obama or worshiping the ground Republicans walk on that they would view ...[text shortened]... rgument that the Senate needed
his full attention, I would be just as disgusted.
Nemesio[/b]
In short, neither McCain nor Obama may amount to a hill of beans but one thing is for sure and that is this is our hill and these are our beans!!! 😛
1 edit
Originally posted by NemesioHow could it hurt McCain's chances by not showing up for the debate? He is down in the polls, therefore, these debates are his only chance for a bounce. In effect, these debates have traditionally meant more for the underdog than for the one ahead in the polls. In fact, if you ahead in the polls all you want is for November 4 to come as quickly as possible before the sentiment swings the other way. That means saying and doing as little as possible to prevent yourself from screwing up.
[b]I'm genuinely astonished how anyone could see McCain's decision not to participate in the debate
as a heroic gesture. As Obama (whom I don't hold in particularly high regard either) points out:
it's a fundamental aspect of being President to be able to juggle many things at once.
Originally posted by whodeySo I would be correct in saying that you would rather become socialist than slip into a depression
So what if we slip into a depression you ask? Well I guess that is what we are going to find out if there is no government intervention. As for myself, I was thinking of the average Joe like myself rather than the corporations at large.
I have seen and heard what the last Great Depression was like and it to be honest it doesn't look like that much fun. ...[text shortened]... would be political suicide for those in Washington not to go on witch hunts after these guys.
driven by the particular capitalistic market forces at work, right?
Nemesio
Originally posted by whodeySo, you genuinely think that McCain's full-time presence manifestly contributes to the progress
As I said before, if I were in his position and I believed that legislation needed to be created to avoid economic collapse, I would do the same as McCain. In fact, I hope Obama would do the same as well no matter if their participation ends up amounting to anything of significance. The point is that this whole affair is of great significance that everyone ...[text shortened]... l of beans but one thing is for sure and that is this is our hill and these are our beans!!! 😛
made in the discussion about economic bailouts even though he's had no substantial involvement
with such economic discussions in the past and doesn't demonstrate a particularly insightful viewpoint
on economics in general (cf. his 'refund' for gasoline relief idea)?
Nemesio
1 edit
Originally posted by PocketKingsThe only thing that McCain will do is bring presidential politics into it.
Touche. I, however, stand by part of my previous statement. The part where I said it was a good move.
In my mind, this should be a very technical decision. There are potentially serious problems at stake here and I don't think that this is the time for a decision based on populism. Because that's what will happen if you bring the campaign directly into it.
Originally posted by whodeyMcCain is no leader. He can't even keep a coherent message over the span of a few hours! Goodness gracious.
I just heard on the news that John McCain has suspended his campaign for President to focus on the economic crisis at hand. So the question must be asked, will Obama follow his leadership?
Regardless, the Democrats already have enough votes to pass the bailout legislation without John McCain's input. Suspending his campaign was a pointless venture; yet another over-reaction to a crisis.
If the situation was so urgent that McCain felt he needed to suspend his campaign 40 days before the election, then why did he schedule an interview last night with Katie Couric? He lied to David Letterman. He told Letterman that he had to get back to Washington immediately and therefore could not appear on his show (canceling hours before showtime), yet during the taping Letterman cut to a live feed of McCain getting makeup put on for a Katie Couric interview. WTF? Pardon my french, but this is getting downright ridiculous. I think something is seriously wrong with the guy.
The legislation will most likely be passed before the debates begin, leaving McCain looking absolutely foolish. If he still decides to skip the debate, I don't think a single unbiased soul will doubt it was due to him being unwilling to face the music. John McCain's is no leader. A good leader is someone with principles.
Originally posted by whodeyIt's ridiculous to think that a presidential candidate can suspend his campaign a mere 40 days before an election. If Obama and McCain go galavanting into Washington at a time like this, there is no way on God's green earth that the situation there won't be immediately politicized.
As I said before, if I were in his position and I believed that legislation needed to be created to avoid economic collapse, I would do the same as McCain. In fact, I hope Obama would do the same as well no matter if their participation ends up amounting to anything of significance. The point is that this whole affair is of great significance that everyone ...[text shortened]... l of beans but one thing is for sure and that is this is our hill and these are our beans!!! 😛
Dodd's got this, babies. Obama, go finish your debate prep. McCain, go crawl under a rock.