mccain had to because none of the republicans wanted to pass a bill. the paulson bill sucked ass they had to have time to look at this stupid bill over that is going to cost taxpayers 1 trillion dollars (with my pinky finger in mouth doing mr. evil impersonation). from what i here this paulson bill is not good for taxpayers and why should we bailout these companies that got bad loans and we the taxpayers are going to bail them out and the big wigs are still going to get there umbrella ella ella ella a. that has no over sight and no regulations and the conservative republicans didn't want this bill so what is going to happen tomorrow is that the republicans are going to have a new bill which will be bigger faster and stronger and mccain will lead the way and will be better than what the democrats purposed and it will pass, because it has to and mccain will be the hero that did it and obama will be just an idiot that says they can phone him if they need him what an fn tool. oh i think the debate should be biden and obama discussing who is the bigger jackass, because mccain will be doing some real work.
sungson said: mccain had to because none of the republicans wanted to pass a bill. the paulson bill sucked ass they had to have time to look at this stupid bill over that is going to cost taxpayers 1 trillion dollars (with my pinky finger in mouth doing mr. evil impersonation). from what i here this paulson bill is not good for taxpayers and why should we bailout these companies that got bad loans and we the taxpayers are going to bail them out and the big wigs are still going to get there umbrella ella ella ella a. that has no over sight and no regulations and the conservative republicans didn't want this bill so what is going to happen tomorrow is that the republicans are going to have a new bill which will be bigger faster and stronger and mccain will lead the way and will be better than what the democrats purposed and it will pass, because it has to and mccain will be the hero that did it and obama will be just an idiot that says they can phone him if they need him what an fn tool. oh i think the debate should be biden and obama discussing who is the bigger jackass, because mccain will be doing some real work.
What work did he do? Nada. He showed up, whined like a 70-year-old baby and got nothing accomplished. Figures. He is just showing what his administration will do - Whine and moan and get nada done.
What exactly did he do that was presidential? He should have known his role and realized there are enough people to handle it. There is a sitting prez in office and Congress. One monkey doesn't stop a show.
Admit it - the real reason he wants to suspend his campaign is - he's tired and wanted to use that to help Palin skip a debate. There is nada about Country First in anything he has ever done.
Factcheck.org is your friend, son. I'd advise you visit it sometime. And pick up some paragraphs at the Grammar store. Muchas gracias.
Both campaigns are sniping at each other blaming each other for the bill's setback today. Democrats are blaming McCain for coming in for a photo op while stalling talks that had been going well and some Republicans are blaming Obama saying that his presence led to a shouting match preventing any bipartisan solutions from being considered.
It's really irrelevant which side is to blame at this point, even though i'm sure we'll end up arguing about that later. What should be evident though is that bringing these presidential candidates in at this point has not helped at all and both campaigns admitting that it has hindered progress.
Oh and the Democrats upset at Obama for insisting that bankruptcy reform should not be included in this legislation need to shut the hell up. He's absolutely right that the typical partisan agendas have no place here. Keep this important bill the bare minimum of what is needed to help the economy and we can get back to pushing for our respective policies later.
sungson said: mccain had to because none of the republicans wanted to pass a bill. the paulson bill sucked ass they had to have time to look at this stupid bill over that is going to cost taxpayers 1 trillion dollars (with my pinky finger in mouth doing mr. evil impersonation). from what i here this paulson bill is not good for taxpayers and why should we bailout these companies that got bad loans and we the taxpayers are going to bail them out and the big wigs are still going to get there umbrella ella ella ella a. that has no over sight and no regulations and the conservative republicans didn't want this bill so what is going to happen tomorrow is that the republicans are going to have a new bill which will be bigger faster and stronger and mccain will lead the way and will be better than what the democrats purposed and it will pass, because it has to and mccain will be the hero that did it and obama will be just an idiot that says they can phone him if they need him what an fn tool. oh i think the debate should be biden and obama discussing who is the bigger jackass, because mccain will be doing some real work.
What work did he do? Nada. He showed up, whined like a 70-year-old baby and got nothing accomplished. Figures. He is just showing what his administration will do - Whine and moan and get nada done.
What exactly did he do that was presidential? He should have known his role and realized there are enough people to handle it. There is a sitting prez in office and Congress. One monkey doesn't stop a show.
Admit it - the real reason he wants to suspend his campaign is - he's tired and wanted to use that to help Palin skip a debate. There is nada about Country First in anything he has ever done.
Factcheck.org is your friend, son. I'd advise you visit it sometime. And pick up some paragraphs at the Grammar store. Muchas gracias.
I'm pretty sure the point of going to Washington on McCain's part was to help get something accomplished. Don't you think it is a wee bit premature to be casting final judgment on the outcome of that effort? All we know about is the one meeting and Dems say he didn't do much and Reps say he was very involved....in short we don't know anything really.
The "deal" they supposedly had worked out is an absolute farce. The house was never on board with it and as you may recall the bill must originate in the house. The sudden outrage that McCain did this is somewhat staggering when you have Harry Reid asking specifically for McCain to weigh in as well as Paulson seeking his assistance to try and rally support through Lindsey Graham.
As for what he did that was presidential? He went to get something done rather than sitting around talking about it. This might come as a shock but these guys actually get paid to author, debate, and vote on legislation. The campaign is simply not the priority, their sworn duty to their office is.
I think any reasonable person has to pause when Obama has been saying "worst crisis since the great depression" all week and then caps it off with a "call me if you need me". Think about that for a second....and liberals were defending this all day! That's insane..if its a crisis we need our strongest leaders out there doing something about it and pushing the bipartisan efforts forward. A leader cuts through the partisan wrangling and gets things done, the problem here is that McCain had enough faith in his leadership to be confident any element of distraction he brought we be outweighed by his benefits...Obama apparently didn't feel that way.
As for the debates...even Bill Clinton said its silly to suggest he wanted to duck the debate after McCain tried all summer to get debates going...As for Palin I find it amusing you guys still underestimate her so much, have you looked into her past debates at all? Actually..nevermind, feel free to underestimate her I like low expectations =)
Sqrl, I think you are missing the point. It's not that he should or shouldn't be there.
McCain and Obama both were there. Neither is on a single economic committee, they are only supposed to be there because one of the two will be the next president.
The problem is that McCain politicized it by saying he was suspending his candidacy because of it. Why? The candidacy is run by other people, they can still do their work, throwing parties and rallies, going on TV, etc. and the candidates can still do their jobs. The president, republican pundits, and republican congressional representatives are all saying it was unnecessary. The moderate republicans are blaming him for derailing it.
McCain made the wrong call. If anything, if they want to look presidential they should be talking to the people right now; maybe in a setting that might seem to challenge his abilities.
I think the debates are MORE important now, than a week ago.
steven787 said: Sqrl, I think you are missing the point. It's not that he should or shouldn't be there.
McCain and Obama both were there. Neither is on a single economic committee, they are only supposed to be there because one of the two will be the next president.
The problem is that McCain politicized it by saying he was suspending his candidacy because of it. Why? The candidacy is run by other people, they can still do their work, throwing parties and rallies, going on TV, etc. and the candidates can still do their jobs. The president, republican pundits, and republican congressional representatives are all saying it was unnecessary. The moderate republicans are blaming him for derailing it.
McCain made the wrong call. If anything, if they want to look presidential they should be talking to the people right now; maybe in a setting that might seem to challenge his abilities.
I think the debates are MORE important now, than a week ago.
First, it is about whether they should be there. Leadership is setting an example and taking the lead (hence the name). Phoning it in doesn't cut it. Sorry it simply doesn't.
Second, the reason they should be there has nothing to do with the office they are running for but the office they currently occupy. While it is typically seen as not being a particularly big deal when someone misses out on routine duties because of the campaign trail that doesn't mean the biggest crisis in 50-80 years (depending on your view) should be treated anywhere near the same way. This is their job and if they have confidence in their ability to lead they should feel comfortable being part of that process (and Obama agrees with me on that).
Third, the suspension of the campaign was intended to create an air of urgency. The whole point he was making is that this is important enough to drop everything and get it done, again even Bill Clinton agrees McCain's suspension is born of good intentions and not partisanship..seriously the man spoke at the DNC...I think that should tell us something about how silly the argument is. The politicization of this is coming from everyone but McCain & Obama from what I've seen..but mostly the media. McCain has been busy all day in meetings and on the phone with very few exceptions and even Obama in the interview you linked says that if McCain thinks he can help he should be there.
I have to thoroughly disagree with you on whether it was the right call. The distinct impression I've had for about 2 days now is that they were going to ram this bill down our throats and screw us. I got a little substantiation to that, but I have yet to check into. Lindsey Grahm told Greta tonight that ACORN was being funneled cash through this bill and indicated that there were other problems as well.
Now I have to say you ignored the point about Reid and Paulson both requesting McCain's input/presence. Don't you find it the least bit sleazy that Reid asks for him by name then denounces him when he shows up? I simply am amazed by the ability of these politicians to ignore their own previous statements and say whatever works at that moment. The whining about McCain is, at least for now, nothing more than partisan blathering. Paying attention to it only serves to distract from the real issue, the issue that we should be focused on rather than worrying about whether McCain and Obama are going to have a debate that likely won't matter much if this deal doesn't get done.
As for the bill McCain supposedly ruined...again read what I said and address it. It's a defunked argument. There was no bill, they had 5 senators who agreed on terms and the house was never on board. As I said the bill must originate in the house as a matter of constituinal law so the senators were overstepping their bounds and stretching the truth more than just a little bit when they claimed to have any sort of deal.
First, it is about whether they should be there. Leadership is setting an example and taking the lead (hence the name). Phoning it in doesn't cut it. Sorry it simply doesn't.
Second, the reason they should be there has nothing to do with the office they are running for but the office they currently occupy. While it is typically seen as not being a particularly big deal when someone misses out on routine duties because of the campaign trail that doesn't mean the biggest crisis in 50-80 years (depending on your view) should be treated anywhere near the same way. This is their job and if they have confidence in their ability to lead they should feel comfortable being part of that process (and Obama agrees with me on that).
Third, the suspension of the campaign was intended to create an air of urgency. The whole point he was making is that this is important enough to drop everything and get it done, again even Bill Clinton agrees McCain's suspension is born of good intentions and not partisanship..seriously the man spoke at the DNC...I think that should tell us something about how silly the argument is. The politicization of this is coming from everyone but McCain & Obama from what I've seen..but mostly the media. McCain has been busy all day in meetings and on the phone with very few exceptions and even Obama in the interview you linked says that if McCain thinks he can help he should be there.
I have to thoroughly disagree with you on whether it was the right call. The distinct impression I've had for about 2 days now is that they were going to ram this bill down our throats and screw us. I got a little substantiation to that, but I have yet to check into. Lindsey Grahm told Greta tonight that ACORN was being funneled cash through this bill and indicated that there were other problems as well.
(Fourth) Now I have to say you ignored the point about Reid and Paulson both requesting McCain's input/presence. Don't you find it the least bit sleazy that Reid asks for him by name then denounces him when he shows up? I simply am amazed by the ability of these politicians to ignore their own previous statements and say whatever works at that moment. The whining about McCain is, at least for now, nothing more than partisan blathering. Paying attention to it only serves to distract from the real issue, the issue that we should be focused on rather than worrying about whether McCain and Obama are going to have a debate that likely won't matter much if this deal doesn't get done.
(fifth)As for the bill McCain supposedly ruined...again read what I said and address it. It's a defunked argument. There was no bill, they had 5 senators who agreed on terms and the house was never on board. As I said the bill must originate in the house as a matter of constituinal law so the senators were overstepping their bounds and stretching the truth more than just a little bit when they claimed to have any sort of deal.
From left, Sen. John McCain, House Minority Leader John Boehner, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, President Bush and Sen. Barack Obama at the White House. (By Pablo Martinez Monsivais -- Associated Press)
(2) So every senator and house member should be there, or just every senator? This is not logical, the only ones who should be there are the ones who are on the banking and finance committee or the ones specifically chosen to go. Why? Because most Senators have no idea about economics (just like Obama and McCain). This is why we have committees, so that they can act fast.
(3) at the bolded part, Should a president be creating an air pf urgency when everyone is already panicking? You cite a heavily edited Fox News cut. Here is the whole comment:
Not a very concrete endorsement. Just Clinton stuttering, on a side note, I think that's the first time that Fox news had a chose to edit a clip to make Clinton look like a more eloquent speaker.
Then you take the intention of Obama's statement out of context. They were both there, and Obama then went on to say that it's not difficult to get on a plane to Mississippi and back for a 90 minute debate.
(4) I ignored the comment about Reid requesting McCain to be there because I never heard anything about that before, and only found sources to the contrary. I want to be as respectful as possible, so I didn't want to nitpick little mistakes.
The only comment that even comes close to sounding like that is this one
"We need leadership, not a campaign photo op. If there were ever a time for both candidates to hold a debate before the American people about this serious challenge, it is now," Reid said.
I am pretty sure that he meant the literal debate and not the one going on in Washington because the context of the article stated: "...even though Senate leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, has said it would not be helpful for McCain to come back."
(5) As for the bill McCain supposedly ruined, it doesn't matter if a single house republican doesn't vote for it if the President is supporting it and planning to sign it. Most are still behind it.
As for the semantics, it's a bill, as soon as a legislative idea is being considered by a congressional commitee it's called a bill. They are working on a bill. Just like authors work on novels. Painters work on paintings. Just because it's not finished, maybe not even number yet doesn't mean it's not a bill. Often they are called drafts, but they are drafts of bills.
In case anyone wants to read the full text of Paulsons request, you can find it here:
The thing is, the last poll on the bail out was before WaMu; I think that his killing the bill, by leading some of the more squeamish republicans to basically walk out, will be a disaster IF things get worse before something gets passed.
I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.
If McCain does what I can only hope he will do, kill this and present something more common sense and without the corruption inherent in such a large sum of money, he should come out on top. Most Americans are not sure what to do, but are against this plan. No welfare for wall street, I think is what people are saying.
The agreed bill never gave out 700 billion right away. It gave out only 350 before the companies came and needed more approval. Second, it had many different provisions than just the Paulson deal.
Here, I need some spin on this. McCain comes in and gives new bailout plan, it calls for tax breaks, deregulation and for wall street to pour the funds in to save the economy. Who the hell is gonna make the capital for bailout? I'm baffled.
Someone answer this questions. Who the hell is dumb enough to invest.
Now Playing: The Witcher (PC)
Consoles Owned: NES, SNES, N64, PS1, PS2, Wii, Xbox 360, Game Boy, DS
