Althouse: McCain will debate.

September 26, 2008

McCain will debate.

Good call.

He needs a graceful explanation to go with that, but it would have been awful not to show.

Advance warning: I'll live-blog.

216 comments:

1 – 200 of 216 Newer› Newest»

Anonymous said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 9/26/08, 10:37 AM
Anonymous said...: McCain did a great job of taking away Obama's 3 days of preparation by making Obama go to Washington DC.

Advantage McCain, on this one, I believe; 9/26/08, 10:38 AM
Paddy O said...: His explanation (via The Corner):

John McCain’s decision to suspend his campaign was made in the hopes that politics could be set aside to address our economic crisis.

In response, Americans saw a familiar spectacle in Washington. At a moment of crisis that threatened the economic security of American families, Washington played the blame game rather than work together to find a solution that would avert a collapse of financial markets without squandering hundreds of billions of taxpayers’ money to bailout bankers and brokers who bet their fortunes on unsafe lending practices.

Both parties in both houses of Congress and the administration needed to come together to find a solution that would deserve the trust of the American people. And while there were attempts to do that, much of yesterday was spent fighting over who would get the credit for a deal and who would get the blame for failure.

There was no deal or offer yesterday that had a majority of support in Congress. There was no deal yesterday that included adequate protections for the taxpayers. It is not enough to cut deals behind closed doors and then try to force it on the rest of Congress — especially when it amounts to thousands of dollars for every American family.

The difference between Barack Obama and John McCain was apparent during the White House meeting yesterday where Barack Obama’s priority was political posturing in his opening monologue defending the package as it stands. John McCain listened to all sides so he could help focus the debate on finding a bipartisan resolution that is in the interest of taxpayers and homeowners. The Democratic interests stood together in opposition to an agreement that would accommodate additional taxpayer protections.

Senator McCain has spent the morning talking to members of the Administration, members of the Senate, and members of the House. He is optimistic that there has been significant progress toward a bipartisan agreement now that there is a framework for all parties to be represented in negotiations, including Representative Blunt as a designated negotiator for House Republicans.

The McCain campaign is resuming all activities and the Senator will travel to the debate this afternoon. Following the debate, he will return to Washington to ensure that all voices and interests are represented in the final agreement, especially those of taxpayers and homeowners.; 9/26/08, 10:43 AM
Trooper York said...: I took a few hours off today and went for a walk. It rained pretty hard in Brooklyn and there was a lot of wind. So a lot of leaves and stuff was on the ground. As I got close to my favorite pizzeria The House of Pizza and Calzone on Union street, I saw a bunch of kids who were obviously cutting class. The were hitting each other over the head with itchy balls and running around like idiots. It was reassuring to see that life goes on and that the kids today are doing the same shit we did in 1963.; 9/26/08, 10:44 AM
Trooper York said...: In 1963 we didn't know anybody who owned any stock unless they worked for the phone company or something like that. No day trading or on line brokerage accounts. It was a simpler time.; 9/26/08, 10:45 AM
Trooper York said...: Everybody either worked on the docks or some business related to the docks, except for my dad who was a clerk on Wall Street. He worked in the cable department.

Not TV cable, but cables from overseas where they did wire transfers before this new fangled internet thingy.; 9/26/08, 10:47 AM
Anonymous said...: L'chaim! I will drunk-read the live-blogging.; 9/26/08, 10:48 AM
Trooper York said...: I used to see Joe Gallo and his brothers a lot on Union St and President St in those days. When he wasn't hiding out because the Colombo's were after him. Or if he wasn't in the joint.; 9/26/08, 10:49 AM
Trooper York said...: They sold that insurance like the government is trying to peddle with these mortgages. If you paid them five dollars a week you could be sure that no one would throw a brick through you window.; 9/26/08, 10:50 AM
Unknown said...: There is no doubt this has been a messy couple of days for McCain. The press has nothing to help, buying complaints of Republican obstruction and presidential politicking. Nevermind that 1) Pelosi and Reid have the votes and Presidential support already; and 2) Reid repeatedly demanded McCain's intervention (he also repeatedly rejected it, of course).

But you know, that's just tough for McCain. The press response and his opposition's politicking should have been part of his calculation.

Did he calculate wrong? Net net is this a positive or negative for McCain? I don't think we can say. I mean, I'm skeptical it paid off politically, and I'm a supporter. And of course, lefties here have panned it as a stunt from the beginning. But neither of the coalitions on this blog dominate the polls; we're the outliers. The polls are all over the map; the lefties quote the ABC poll, the righties quote Gallup and Zogby. Maybe in a couple of days a new poll consensus will emerge.

Perhaps the answer to the question depends on the debate itself. Needless to say I'm going to be watching with great interest.; 9/26/08, 10:50 AM
garage mahal said...: Cadaverick!; 9/26/08, 10:54 AM
former law student said...: I used to see Joe Gallo and his brothers a lot on Union St and President St in those days. When he wasn't hiding out because the Colombo's were after him. Or if he wasn't in the joint.

The chickens vs. the doves?

1) Pelosi and Reid have the votes and Presidential support already

The Democrats should fall on a grenade for Bush while the Republicans stand back and kibitz?

In what world does this make sense?; 9/26/08, 10:55 AM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Has it reached the point where the average American discounts ABC/ NBC/ Fox spin and forms their own opinion?

I think it must be reaching that point when McCain is trounced by MSM talkin heads but his poll numbers don't reflect the beating.; 9/26/08, 10:57 AM
MadisonMan said...: What Obama should do if McCain offers an explanation: Be gracious and accept it.

Will he do that? Doubt it.; 9/26/08, 10:58 AM
Brian Doyle said...: The polls are not "all over the map." McCain is in serious trouble.; 9/26/08, 10:58 AM
Peter V. Bella said...: They sold that insurance like the government is trying to peddle with these mortgages. If you paid them five dollars a week you could be sure that no one would throw a brick through you window.

They helped the communities by providing easy credit for people who could not get loans from those evil tight wad banks. Yes the interest was high, but so was the risk. People were usually glad to pay those loans off. They also had a much bettter system for dealing with dead beats; not like the banks and our government.

Those were the days.; 9/26/08, 10:58 AM
Revenant said...: Bad call on McCain's part, in my opinion; he should have stayed in Washington, or asked to teleconference in.; 9/26/08, 11:03 AM
Trooper York said...: I once saw a debate in a VFW hall between Congress John Rooney and Allard Lowenstein who ran against him in the Democratic primary. Everybody in Brooklyn was a Democrat and Rooney was old school conservative chairmen of Armed Services or something like that. A lot like McCain.

Lowenstein was a young, energetic community organizer with ties to Robert Kennedy who wanted to bring a much more liberal outlook to Brooklyn Heights, Cobble Hill and Carroll.

In those days all the liberals were Republicans. Lindsay, Rockefeller, Javits. Funny eh?; 9/26/08, 11:09 AM
Paddy O said...: "Bad call on McCain's part"

I'm not sure.

Tonight is now going to be all about who has the most mastery of this crisis and who can best discuss it in terms that the majority of folks can understand.

This isn't about vague promises or hopes and changing. This is about specific issues, specific problems, specific responses.

This is put up or shut up.

And everyone will be watching to see who really is the best prepared.

In my mind, this is the absolutely perfect time for a debate. There is a national crisis that most people do not really understand, and now polarized political stances that seem resistant to bipartisan action.

We have more than rhetoric now. We have two nominated champions of each party entering the lists.; 9/26/08, 11:14 AM
Trooper York said...: The Gallos wanted a bigger piece of the pie and old man Profaci didn't want to give it up. Plus he wanted to go more legit because his olive oil company was doing really well. They used a lot of this stuff in the Godfather. The fish in the bullet proof vest thing happened on President St. I think they said it was Joe Jelly but I don't remember for sure.; 9/26/08, 11:14 AM
Invisible Man said...: What Obama should do if McCain offers an explanation: Be gracious and accept it.

Will he do that? Doubt it.

In other words, McCain makes crass political stunt to boost standing and try to embarrass Obama, Obama is a meany for not bailing him out after stunt blows up in McCain's face. Up is down here.

This was a complete unforced error on McCain's part. He could have done the joint statement thing, or just tried to broker a meeting with Obama & Bush, but instead he tried to jump in the fray to score an advantage and it didn't work. Now, he's forced to drag his tail to Mississippi despite his vowing to stay out of the debate. This is just plain pathetic.; 9/26/08, 11:18 AM
Unknown said...: The Democrats should fall on a grenade for Bush while the Republicans stand back and kibitz?

Do the Democrats believe in the need for a bailout or not, FLS? If they do, then they can hammer Republicans for obstruction. They have the votes to pad this thing with all their favorite fluff and ram it through, and Bush will sign it.

If they don't believe in it, why should the bother trying to pass anything?; 9/26/08, 11:18 AM
Brian Doyle said...: This is put up or shut up.

Right, and now McCain has decided to put up after threatening to shut up.

Leaderiffic!; 9/26/08, 11:20 AM
Invisible Man said...: Tonight is now going to be all about who has the most mastery of this crisis and who can best discuss it in terms that the majority of folks can understand.

You mean the McCain who sat in the corner saying nothing as he runs to a meeting in DC "To Save The Republic". The next coherent thing that McCain says about this crisis will be his first.

FIRE SOMEBODY, ANYBODY!!; 9/26/08, 11:22 AM
Beth said...: Now, he's forced to drag his tail to Mississippi despite his vowing to stay out of the debate. This is just plain pathetic.

I don't think he ever meant not to show up for the debate. He wanted the drama. I said in another thread I didn't think he'd screw over Mississippi and Haley Barbour - and according to Mississippi news reports, Barbour has been confident the debate would go on. It was all for show, and that's starting to look like a hallmark of the McCain campaign. It's ugly, and trite.; 9/26/08, 11:23 AM
Unknown said...: Barney Frank:

The chairman of the House Financial Services Committee declared Friday that an agreement on legislation to relieve a spreading financial crisis depends on House Republicans "dropping this revolt" against Bush.

So the Dems hammer McCain for voting in lockstep with Bush. But now, what they'd really like McCain to do is convince the House Republicans to vote in lockstep with Bush.; 9/26/08, 11:24 AM
Paddy O said...: Right, and now McCain has decided to put up after threatening to shut up.

Doyle, this election is not a yay or nay about McCain.

We vote for McCain or for Obama.

Those are the choices.

So, where's the leadership on either side?

Where's the 'reaching across the aisle' we are told to expect?

Where is the clear leadership that would get things accomplished?

Is it a sign of leadership not being able to pass a bill when there is a majority of your own party in power to pass a bill?

It's fine to criticize McCain in this. But he's not the only player and leadership is not about saying how the other guy can't lead, which is all I've been hearing from Democrats the last few days.

Obama has to put up or shut up too.

Rather than talk about McCain, tell us about Obama. Hope and change. Not deride and defame.

Where's the hope? Where's the change?

Why should I vote for Obama?

That's the question everyone will be asking.

It's the question I'm willing to still ask, even as I'm leaning strong McCain.; 9/26/08, 11:27 AM
Anonymous said...: McCain is a good debater. He would be a moron to pass this moment up.

Obama will do fine, but he'll be boring.

But there are big policy differences, so this will be more interesting than the primary debates. The issues will play to Obama's strength, so I have a hunch that people will say that Obama won (because the polls are leaning towards him), simply because they'll side with him on the issues - even if McCain DOES really win.

Unless Obama does a major f*uck up.

I doubt one-liners will matter. Most of those are made up in advance now instead of being ad-libbed.; 9/26/08, 11:32 AM
Unknown said...: Paddy O, Doyle is an unapologetic lefty. He isn't the least bit interested in bipartishanship, unless perhaps the two partisans are left and far left. Notions of "reaching across the aisle" aren't the least bit interesting to him unless it involves a Republican caving to the left.; 9/26/08, 11:36 AM
Roberto said...: What Actually Happened Yesterday--Sept. 25 Edition

"Mr. McCain was at one end of the long conference table, Mr. Obama at the other, with the president and senior Congressional leaders between them. Participants said Mr. Obama peppered Mr. Paulson with questions, while Mr. McCain said little."

"Mr. Boehner pressed an alternative that involved a smaller role for the government, and Mr. McCain, whose support of the deal is critical if fellow Republicans are to sign on, declined to take a stand."

*Swampland, TIME
September 26, 2008 9:02
What Actually Happened Yesterday--Sept. 25 Edition
Posted by Joe Klein | Comments (49) | Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email This

The New York Times has an excellent account of the impact of John McCain's bailout freakout on the actual work of negotiating a compromise. There are several stunning revelations here. First, House Minority Leader John Boehner's top aide pretty much conceded that among the motivations for the House Republicans' refusal to go along with the plan was to save face for McCain:

The aide, Kevin Smith, said Republicans revolted, in part, because they were chafing at what they saw as an attempt by Democrats to jam through an agreement on the bailout early Thursday and deny Mr. McCain an opportunity to participate in the agreement.

This is patent nonsense of course--it was the Bush Administration and Senate Republicans, as well as the Democrats in both houses, who favored the renegotiated bailout plan.

But more important is the revelation that McCain, who rushed back to Washington to expedite the negotiations, had very little to say--or even ask--about the plan:

Mr. McCain was at one end of the long conference table, Mr. Obama at the other, with the president and senior Congressional leaders between them. Participants said Mr. Obama peppered Mr. Paulson with questions, while Mr. McCain said little.

McCain couldn't even pull the trigger on whether he favored the Paulson bailout, the House Republican alternative...or some combination of the two:

Mr. Boehner pressed an alternative that involved a smaller role for the government, and Mr. McCain, whose support of the deal is critical if fellow Republicans are to sign on, declined to take a stand.

So McCain "suspends" his campaign--he didn't, really--and equivocates about whether to debate because the financial emergency is so crucial--a week after he said the fundamentals of the economy were sound--and he flies to Washington where:

1. The House Republicans blow up a rare, and necessary, moment of true bipartisanship to make it look like McCain, who has no expertise in this area, has come to the rescue.

2. McCain sits mute in the White House summit arranged for his benefit. He doesn't even ask Paulson what he thinks of the House Republican plan.

3. He refuses to take a stand, one way or another, on the Republican plan.

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/what_actually_happened_yesterd_1.html; 9/26/08, 11:36 AM
P_J said...: Given that Reid begged McCain to tell him what to do, then turned around and stabbed McCain in the back (even going so far as to promise there would be no voted today so McCain wouldn't have "any excuses" for "dodging" the debate), what McCain supposed to do?

It was obvious that all the feckless Democrats in Congress were interested in doing was grandstanding, deflecting blame from their own criminal mismanagement and intransigence, and holding a pissing match.

So McCain will leave those things to Reid, Pelosi, Dodd and Frank and have the debate anyway.; 9/26/08, 11:37 AM
Unknown said...: DTL, I agree. I will say though that Obama delivers scripted one-liners a heck of a lot better than McCain does. Someone needs to get McCain to quit telegraphing his self-satisfaction with a stupid grin when he fires off a good one :); 9/26/08, 11:38 AM
Anonymous said...: Wow ... when McCain decided to suspend his campaign and go back to Washington to help solve this financial crisis, I thought to myself "Here's a guy who puts America first, and his own political ambitions second." I kind of liked that guy.

Now, come to find out, that was all a hoax. Turns out it was just a political stunt to steal Obama's debating practice time from him (according to McCain supporters previously in this comment thread).

Now, as a concerned Christian and McCain leaner, I'm not sure whether I can vote for someone who said yesterday they'd stay in Washington, D.C. until the J.O.B. got done, but who today, wants to Eject. Eject. Eject.

When the going gets tough, John McCain gets the hell out, it seems.

Which is it? Is the Country First? Because yesterday, it was "This is too important to be spending our time on partisan poiticking."

Or is it "Me, First! Now that Obama doesn't have time to prepare for the debates because I can suspend my campaign and run back to Washington whenever it suits me."

That sounds a lot like the McCain of old. You remember that John McCain ... the guy with no ethics who tried to bail out Charles Keating by pressuring federal regulators. Remember that guy?

Not sure I like that guy.; 9/26/08, 11:42 AM
Anonymous said...: I had forgotten that in Florida there is no real grass. It's all astroturf...; 9/26/08, 11:43 AM
Roberto said...: I realize mot here are supporting McCain, but does it not bother anyone that he continues saying he "suspended" his campaign while the latest strategy was employed...when it's obvious he did not?

He continued to run ads, Palin continued to campaign, his aides continued to appear on every news talk show available to bash Obama, their website continued collecting donations...and at the end of the day, he's now going to be at the debate anyway. (He's also taking tremendous heat from his fellow Republicans and others for stepping into the fray at the last minute, but had nothing to say.)

This does not sound like the kind of man Americans should want as President.; 9/26/08, 11:46 AM
Roberto said...: erniecu73: Where do you come up with these idiotic comments?; 9/26/08, 11:47 AM
Paddy O said...: Michael, why couldn't Obama get a bill passed?

Stop talking about McCain.

Tell us why we should vote for Obama.

That's what the debate is about.

We know you don't like McCain, but it's meaningless to dismiss his leadership or actions without showing some practical leadership on the other side.

What questions did Obama ask, for instance?

They have a majority in both houses. They have the leadership. McCain is in the minority party.

What is being done to show real and active leadership in a way that moves this issue forward.

Or is Obama's chief leadership ability consist of not being McCain?

mcg, I know. I guess I'm hoping for some change. Because I honestly want to know. Is all we have just partisan posturing or is there anything at all to Obama's claims for a change in tone and style?

If all we have is posturing, in this key moment, then that absolutely crushes a key part of Obama's apparent appeal, which has never been purely about his stances on issues.

Where is his leadership? Why wasn't a bill passed? Why are Democrats acting like a minority party still, blaming Republicans for not showing leadership, leadership Republicans don't actually have in Congress?

I think that's what this debate tonight is going to be about.

And both Obama and McCain have to prove if they've been just been tickling ears or if they actually know what is going on and what to do about it.

I'm willing to strongly consider Obama if he shows up tonight in a way that reflects what all his followers say he is about. My opposition to him has been based on me not believing those claims were true. Doubts his followers here have justified.; 9/26/08, 11:48 AM
P_J said...: When the going gets tough, John McCain gets the hell out, it seems.

Again, given that Reid promised yesterday that there would be no votes on anything today -- specifically so that McCain couldn't "dodge" the debate -- it seems a little strange to put all the blame for the failure to get anything done on McCain or to accuse him of "getting the hell out."

What's he supposed to do? Reid begged McCain for help and advice, then spit on him. Now he's supposed to sit around in Washington until Reid stops playing politics or Hell freezes over? There's not telling which comes first.; 9/26/08, 11:49 AM
Roberto said...: Pastor_Jeff said..."Given that Reid begged McCain to tell him what to do..."

What do you base this on?

Do you have a link or reference point to prove such a comment?

Remember now, tell the truth.; 9/26/08, 11:49 AM
Anonymous said...: Not sure I like that guy.

Astroturfers are lower than trolls.

P.S. I told you McCain would be there. The lefties will see it as bad. The righties will see it as good. Neither matters. Some 20 percent of the vote is up for grabs. That contingent matters.

They'll see a debate and decide for themselves. I'm guessing they'll want the devil they know this time around. That, plus they're all racists.

P.S.S. Told you McCain'd show. You should listen to your wise Seven Machos.; 9/26/08, 11:51 AM
Anonymous said...: Because, Pastor Jeff, if you don't have a link, and you don't paste thte actual text in here in clear violation of copyright law, you are obviously wrong.

No one can be correct without a link.; 9/26/08, 11:52 AM
holdfast said...: "The Democrats should fall on a grenade for Bush while the Republicans stand back and kibitz?"

Silly me, I thought this was for the good of the country, not to help Bush get re-elected... wait, he's not running? No way!

Anyway, the Dems are at least as much reponsible for priming this grenade, so they should have to eat some shrapnel too. Besides, if they truly cared, they wouldn't be trying to load it up with pork for ACORN, their pet vote-fraud enabler.; 9/26/08, 11:53 AM
Anonymous said...: I used to see Joe Gallo and his brothers a lot on Union St and President St in those days.

I used to see a lot of Ernst Gallo and his brother Julio Gallo on State St. in Madison in those days.

Barney Frank:
The chairman of the House Financial Services Committee declared Friday that an agreement on legislation to relieve a spreading financial crisis depends on House Republicans "dropping this revolt" against Bush.

If Barney Frank dropped his "revolt against bush", he'd be straight.; 9/26/08, 11:54 AM
Trooper York said...: Hey no one believed in the Mod Squad until they a Linc.

Then he moved to Minnesota and started beating up Prince's mother and shit.; 9/26/08, 11:56 AM
Unknown said...: Michael, I'd say that describing Reid's calls for McCain to get involved as "begging" is artistic license. But let's be clear, Reid has been talking out of both sides of his mouth on this one. Maybe he didn't expect McCain to listen to him.; 9/26/08, 11:56 AM
Anonymous said...: Why do House Republicans need to vote on a bill to get a bill passed in a Democrat-controlled legislature? I'm not mathematician, of course, but this continual claim seems odd to me. A simple demonstration starting using the number 435 and subtracting the number of Republicans and any independents ought to suffice. If that number is bigger than half of 435, well, dumb as I am, I have to question Frank's claim.

I think even you super-jeanyus loons might have to agree here.; 9/26/08, 11:57 AM
Trooper York said...: You know now that I think about it, Barack Obama does kinda remind of Prince.

Black father, white mother. Get's all the girls even though he gives off a slightly fey vibe. He's a lot taller though.; 9/26/08, 11:59 AM
Anonymous said...: Funny, michael, how you appear all the time AlphaLiberal or any very similar "commenter" preceeds you. Then you proceed to lash out at anyone who objects to this "objective statements". How many proxies and shell accounts do you have?

This may not be the kind of man YOU want as president, but that fact does not make it a general feeling. You don't speak for the rest of the country. You do not represent the rest of the country.

You are scared because deep down you feel that this gamble may pay out to McCain, and at the end your Messiah will be made to look like a fool. You cover that with wishful thinking and false manifestations of glee and mockery. No one can predict right now the outcome of all this, but you are obviously really trying to convince yourself that it will be OK. It is pretty trasnparent. I wish you good luck with that.; 9/26/08, 11:59 AM
Anonymous said...: Prince was injured a lot less than Jeremy Shockey.; 9/26/08, 12:00 PM
Sprezzatura said...: a heck of a lot better than McCain does

I think this impression is exaggerated for Althouse readers because we all know McCain's often repeated jokes.

Anyone heard about drunken sailors and Congress?

But, your bigger point is correct. McCain has always been somewhat carried by the media. I remember being at one of his rallies in the 2000 primary where he was really flat. I was struck by the big difference between his "image" portrayed by the media and reality.; 9/26/08, 12:00 PM
Anonymous said...: McCain has always been somewhat carried by the media.

Certainly, no one can make this claim about Obama. No, sir!; 9/26/08, 12:01 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: Remember now, tell the truth.

Reid only does what he is told to do. He is lost in a fog otherwise.; 9/26/08, 12:02 PM
Trooper York said...: "Prince was injured a lot less than Jeremy Shockey."

Oh yeah well what about the time he sprained his dick banging Appolonia.

Man she was hot. Remember her. And Vanity. Ooooohhhh bbbbaaabbbeee!!!; 9/26/08, 12:02 PM
Trooper York said...: Plus Jeremy Shockey is Beth's problem now. Hee hee.; 9/26/08, 12:02 PM
P_J said...: does it not bother anyone that he continues saying he "suspended" his campaign while the latest strategy was employed...when it's obvious he did not?

Well, I guess it's all a matter of interpretation. When McCain said he was suspending campaigning, I took it to mean campaign events and personal campaign stops.

Did people really expect that he would shut down his website and stop taking in donations?; 9/26/08, 12:02 PM
Anonymous said...: I myself liked those two gay women. I mean, addition to the really hot ones. And of course, Shiela E.

Enough with these astroturfers and trolls and copyright violators. We need a Prince post. Prince does not tolerate copyright violation.; 9/26/08, 12:04 PM
Trooper York said...: Dont worry, I wont hurt u
I only want u 2 have some fun
I was dreamin when I wrote this
Forgive me if it goes astray
But when I woke up this mornin
Coulda sworn it was judgment day
The sky was all purple,
There were people runnin everywhere
Tryin 2 run from the destruction,
U know I didnt even care

cuz they say two thousand zero zero party over,
Oops out of time
So tonight Im gonna party like its 1929

(Barry Obama, 1929); 9/26/08, 12:05 PM
Anonymous said...: Luckily, we still have Plaxico Burress to kick around. When did you stop abusing your wife, Plaxico?; 9/26/08, 12:05 PM
Trooper York said...: Allegedly dude allegedly.; 9/26/08, 12:06 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: I wonder if the poltroons are trying to bail out the economy or themselves?

All the biggest whiners, complainers, and protesters are the ones who took money from the institutions and passed the legislation allowing this mess; Frank and Dodd, among others. So, who are we really bailing out here?

No one can explain why ACORN gets a ten cents out of this either? Do we need community organizers in the streets to make this palatable?; 9/26/08, 12:07 PM
P_J said...: Michael -- Here you go. Sorry, I thought this was already well-known:

“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.”; 9/26/08, 12:08 PM
Anonymous said...: Oh boy, I'd better start practicing for the debate.

*Starts video of McCain speeches*

"My friends....."

*Drinks shot of beer.*

*Starts video of Obama answering questions at press conferences*

"Ummm..ahh..."

*Drinks shot of beer*

It will be either a long or a short night. Not sure of which. But I won't be dehydrated.; 9/26/08, 12:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Ask and ye shall receive:

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/24/reid-changes-his-tune-on-mccain-involvement/; 9/26/08, 12:09 PM
Anonymous said...: I love to see a troll get shot down. And Sign O' the Times is the best Prince album, though the 1999 one is my favorite.; 9/26/08, 12:12 PM
P_J said...: Reid: "Help us, Obi-John. You're our only hope."

McCain: "Uh, you guys have a majority in both houses, but okay, here I am."

Reid: "F&%* you, McCain. We don't need your help."; 9/26/08, 12:12 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: Drinks shot of beer

Drinks a shot and a beer. There, that is much better.; 9/26/08, 12:13 PM
Beth said...: Shockey's nobody's problem, not for at least a month, while his hernia heals. I think we're supposed to be all full of awe that he was playing injured last week, but instead, I just wonder why the guy can't play a month without getting injured. He needs to lay off the po'boys and frozen daquairis.; 9/26/08, 12:14 PM
P_J said...: But I won't be dehydrated.

Ironically, alcohol does of course dehydrate you. But beer has plenty of water in it, so you're probably good. Better have another one just to make sure, though.; 9/26/08, 12:16 PM
Anonymous said...: I will be making mojitos and rum and cokes, I need to finish the Bacardi.; 9/26/08, 12:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Its seems clear to me for all his warts McCain got in there and got his hands dirty and for the most part has helped the process along. I think it will atmospherically help his chances but all this partisan ditching on him now makes him sound like Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson "helping" during a racial incident. I don't think the independent voters will see it that way; 9/26/08, 12:18 PM
Roberto said...: According to the source with knowledge of the White House gathering -- which featured both presidential candidates, congressional leaders and the President -- virtually ever key figure in the room, save McCain and GOP Sen. Richard Shelby, were in agreement over a revised version of Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson's plan.

Towards the end, McCain finally spoke up, mentioning a counter-proposal that had been offered by some conservative House Republicans, which would suspend the capital gains tax for two years and provide tax incentives to encourage firms that buy up bad debt. McCain did not discuss specifics of the plan, though, and was non-committal about supporting it.

Paulson, however, argued directly against the conservative proposal. "He said that he did not think it would work," according to the source. At another point in the meeting, President Bush chimed in, "If money isn't loosened, this sucker could go down" -- and by sucker he meant economy.

ABC News reported that, following the meeting, Paulson "walked into the room where Democrats were caucusing...at the White House and pleaded with them 'please don't blow this up.'" But this story isn't incomplete, according to sources.

Democrats stayed talking in the Roosevelt room and Paulson approached them. After his comment, Speaker Pelosi and Rep. Barney Frank shot back that the real problem was with House Republicans. Paulson replied, "I know, I know," as he got down on one knee to lighten the mood. Pelosi joked back, "I didn't know you were a Catholic."; 9/26/08, 12:28 PM
Anonymous said...: Whoa! I'm listening to the first hour of Limbaugh. You might want to get the podcast. Rush's describing in detail how a Goldman-Sachs staffer got a copy of the Republican proposal and emailed it to Obama.

Obama read it, went into the meeting at the White House and began tearing the proposal to shreds, not knowing that Reid, Pelosi, Bush, et. al. had already agreed to it.

Bush was furious. It wasn't McCain's fault, but Obama's; 9/26/08, 12:32 PM
Asante Samuel said...: Hey Beth, did you go to the Tulane game last night? They managed to hang on June Jones and the Mustangs.; 9/26/08, 12:34 PM
Alex said...: Looking at RCP, it's over. McCain can't even get a sizable lead in sure red state like Missouri. That is a joke.; 9/26/08, 12:42 PM
Alex said...: michael said:

Remember now, tell the truth.

11:49 AM

Oh that's rich coming from you.; 9/26/08, 12:43 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael_H, quick question since I can't listen to that right now. How did this Wall Street staffer get a hold of a copy of this document?; 9/26/08, 12:44 PM
Paddy O said...: the real problem was with House Republicans.

So, the problem is that the Republicans can not offer enough leadership for the Democrats to follow? The Democrats need the Republicans to lead? Obama needs McCain to lead better or otherwise he will get feisty? Is that the actual argument here?

That's a problem for both parties. And for both candidates, though it says a lot more about the leadership qualities of the majority party in my opinion.; 9/26/08, 12:47 PM
Revenant said...: The Democrats have a majority in the Senate. The Democrats have a majority in the House. The President is waiting to sign the bill.

But it is the fault of the Republican Congressional minority that no bill has passed.

Hope that clears everything up.; 9/26/08, 1:04 PM
Beau said...: In my mind, this is the absolutely perfect time for a debate. There is a national crisis that most people do not really understand, and now polarized political stances that seem resistant to bipartisan action.

In a way the crisis is less emotional than say, 911, but as catastrophic. With neither side really knowing what to do, nor trusting Paulson's suggestion, the debate field in a weird way is sort of 'balanced' in that no-one is sure what the correct action is. This makes the debate more interesting.

As more and more opinions pour in saying no to the bailout it makes any statements either of them make tonight political suicide or great call.

McCain however, has announced he's won already. Was it good?; 9/26/08, 1:05 PM
Anonymous said...: Has he? Where? Source?

I thought the debate was tonight?

Are you writing from the future??; 9/26/08, 1:07 PM
Bob said...: There is an Army saying: "no good deed goes unpunished". McCain's a Naval aviator so maybe it won't apply but with this morning's Democratic spin I'm afraid John may have taken one for the team.; 9/26/08, 1:08 PM
Beau said...: I thought the debate was tonight?

Are you writing from the future??

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/images/26Sep_Friday_WSJ.JPG; 9/26/08, 1:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Well, that is indeed a pretty silly ad. However, is the candidate himself acting as such? Or is it someone in the campaign acting "inartfully" as The One (MPBUH) would put it?; 9/26/08, 1:17 PM
Beth said...: dr k - no, I didn't go but it was a good win. Except they had a big lead early and it closed up tight. I haven't been to the new stadium yet.; 9/26/08, 1:17 PM
Beth said...: Meant to add - I'm more of an LSU fan than a Greenie.; 9/26/08, 1:17 PM
Beth said...: Love that cheesy, shit-eating grin McCain has in his "I WON!" ad.

It goes well with the unbearable "My friends..."; 9/26/08, 1:19 PM
Shanna said...: I don't think he ever meant not to show up for the debate. He wanted the drama.

I always thought the debate would happen, but I don’t think it was about drama or show. I mean maybe it was dramatic, but that wasn't the most important reason. I think it may have been an attempt to a) show how serious this whole thing is b) show how seriously he is taking it and c) possibly push the different sides to a deadline.

I think Obama could have handled it better by saying that he is joining McCain in this and they should all rally blah, blah, blah but that he thinks with their leadership they can get a deal hammered out in time for the debate to go one where they could present stuff to the american people. I was really, really put off by the “I know how to multi-task line”. I continue to think that was idiotic.; 9/26/08, 1:21 PM
Trooper York said...: Itchy Balls come from sycamore trees. It's the seed pocket that looks like ball and is all fuzzy and is very itchy against your skin. You are supposed to collect them and then peg them as hard as you can at the face of the people you don't like.; 9/26/08, 1:23 PM
Anonymous said...: beau, are you then a writer at the WaPo, just a web designer...? Just curious.; 9/26/08, 1:24 PM
Beau said...: beau, are you then a writer at the WaPo, just a web designer...? Just curious.

Neither of those two occupations, Ernie.; 9/26/08, 1:28 PM
PogoПОССУМ said...: Fear not, братья brothers.

The Bail Out Plan is true Five Year plan under Premiere Obama.

You ask if this is социализм socialism. Yes! But only if there is death by the cuts of thousand.

отвергнуть Reject the advice of Queen Bunny of the Dust. нет! No! The State becomes the Party by growing ever more its hold on the economy.

Hurrah for moneys to ACORN, a most glorious vote gatherer.
Hurrah for moneys for Biden mark of the ear, slipped into the bailout.
Heroes!

метр Meter by meter it blurs the line between free and Party until All is Party, Nothing Outside the Party.

The Second большой депрессия Great Depression will be long and hard, but just recall Lenin:
"мир земле хлеб".
Peace, land, bread.

The shortages will be divided equally among the people.; 9/26/08, 1:29 PM
Beth said...: So, hold on. McCain suspended his campaign and said "I ain't debatin' till the crisis is solved."

There's no deal on the table, but now he's debating again.

And, somewhere in the time frame where he was selflessly, honorably, dramatically putting aside his personal ambition to solve the problem that isn't solved, his campaign came up with the "I won!" ad for the debate he wasn't going to participate in.; 9/26/08, 1:31 PM
MikeR said...: So much talk about a "political stunt". Brilliant, stupid, effective, ineffective. Seems to me that McCain is just doing his job. Too bad that there are so many who will attack whatever he does.

Remember when the liberals all loved him, back when he was running against Romney? I think then that even the New York Times would have agreed that McCain was the one conservative they would pick to try to do his job, even if it cost him.

Makes sense for him to do the debate; it will only be a few hours. I expect he'll do okay, even if he can't spend a week cramming for it.; 9/26/08, 1:39 PM
Anonymous said...: Beath and Beau, sorry, but I have recycled through all the ads on that article at the WSJ, and the ad has not come up. They are all ads for financial institutions.

Maybe someone pulled it off.

Maybe it had been designed beforehand.

Now, didn't the left want McCain to debate? Why are you sneering at him for attending the debate although no deal has been reached?

¿Palo porque bogas and palo porque no bogas...?*

* It's a Cuban saying that goes something like: You get with with a stick because you do, and you get hit with a stick because you don't.; 9/26/08, 1:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Пого, Вся власть к Советам, tovarich!; 9/26/08, 1:46 PM
former law student said...: The aide, Kevin Smith, said Republicans revolted, in part, because they were chafing at what they saw as an attempt by Democrats to jam through an agreement on the bailout early Thursday and deny Mr. McCain an opportunity to participate in the agreement.

McCain denied himself the opportunity when he stayed in New York to give a speech to the Friends of Bill.

So, the problem is that the Republicans can not offer enough leadership for the Democrats to follow? The Democrats need the Republicans to lead? Obama needs McCain to lead better or otherwise he will get feisty? Is that the actual argument here?

That's a problem for both parties. And for both candidates, though it says a lot more about the leadership qualities of the majority party in my opinion.

The Democrats are the party of Main Street, not Wall Street. If the party of Wall Street is not willing to help out, why should the Democrats? If we're going to give $1 trillion away, why not use it to bail out improvident homeowners rather than improvident investment bankers?; 9/26/08, 1:46 PM
chickelit said...: I love these partisan times. It's like a big game of chicken . Enjoy

So is everybody up to speed on their foreign policy talking points? Barry-tone is already doing sound checks.; 9/26/08, 1:50 PM
walter neff said...: The Democrats are the party of Easy Street.

Just vote their way and the government will give you everything you want.

Look at how they are trying to bail out the guy with the top hat and monocle from Monopoly.; 9/26/08, 2:00 PM
Beau said...: Beath and Beau, sorry, but I have recycled through all the ads on that article at the WSJ, and the ad has not come up. They are all ads for financial institutions.

Maybe someone pulled it off.

Maybe it had been designed beforehand.

I suspect it was a junior mistake and was removed immediately.

Now, didn't the left want McCain to debate? Why are you sneering at him for attending the debate although no deal has been reached?

Huh? I'm not sneering at him for debating. I think he must...especially after the drama about not debating until there is a solution on the table. You don't go 'all in' unless you've got a decent hand and you can only make that sort of dramatic move once.; 9/26/08, 2:01 PM
Roberto said...: Wall Street Journal:

Presidential campaigns live in fear of a Dukakis-in-the-tank moment. The question is whether John McCain just had his.

Sen. McCain's decision to rush to Washington for bailout negotiations, to suspend his campaign, and to issue a bipartisan statement with Barack Obama, has been spun by his team as an example of putting "country first." Mr. McCain's fellow Republicans have latched on to that theme.

Out in the real world -- that is, everywhere other than in Washington -- the view may be different.

The nation is in the middle of a financial meltdown. Voters want to know how, why and what the presidential candidates propose to fix it.

What they've instead seen from Mr. McCain is alternating anger and vagueness, capped this week by an impulsive call to delay the first presidential debate. He wants to portray all this as rising above politics.

It could look instead as though he's trying to escape it.; 9/26/08, 2:11 PM
Roberto said...: erniecu73: You mean "all power" to the morons.; 9/26/08, 2:12 PM
Brian Doyle said...: Why are you sneering at him for attending the debate although no deal has been reached?

Um, because he said he wouldn't?; 9/26/08, 2:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Michael_H, quick question since I can't listen to that right now. How did this Wall Street staffer get a hold of a copy of this document?

Ernie - Here are the details, per the American Spectator blog.

When Sen. Barack Obama was given the floor to speak during White House negotiations, according to White House aides, he did so raising concerns about a House Republican alternative to the Paulson/Bernanke $700 billion bailout. But those concerns weren't necessarily his, as he was not aware of the GOP plan before reviewing notes provided him by Paulson loyalists in Treasury prior to entering the meeting.

According to an Obama campaign source, the notes were passed to Obama via senior aides traveling with him, who had been emailed the document via a current Goldman Sachs employee and Wall Street fundraiser for the Obama campaign. "It was made clear that the memo was from ‘friends' and was reliable," says the campaign source.

The memo allowed Obama and his fellow Democrats to box in Republican attendees and essentially took what President Bush had billed as a negotiating meeting off the rails.

"Paulson and his team have not acted in good faith for this President or the administration for which they serve," says a House Republican leader who was not present at the White House meeting, but who instead is part of the team hammering out the House GOP alternative. "We keep hearing about how Secretary Paulson is working with Democrats on this or that, yet he never seems to consider working with the party that essentially hired him. Perhaps he's auditioning for a Democratic administration job. Our proposal didn't just spring forth fully formed; we've been working on this for several days, and Treasury staff has known about it."; 9/26/08, 2:15 PM
Roberto said...: MikeR said..."Seems to me that McCain is just doing his job. Too bad that there are so many who will attack whatever he does."

Is lying through his teeth about suspending his campaign "part of his job?"

Using the crisis to further a political pandering ploy "part of his job?"

The reason he's being criticized by damn near everybody is that NOBODY believes the man.; 9/26/08, 2:15 PM
P_J said...: The Democrats are the party of Main Street, not Wall Street.

Nice try. You mean the Democrats who are awash in Fannie & Freddie and Goldman Sachs money, or the ones who actually ran the GSEs, cooked the books, lined their pockets and then ran off to advise the Democratic presidential candidate?

Is there some course in class warfare rhetoric that you have to take to become a Democrat?

If we're going to give $1 trillion away, why not use it to bail out improvident homeowners rather than improvident investment bankers?

Wow, I didn't hear about the plan to "give away" 1 trillion. Which Congress is working on that one? Or did you mean the plan to purchase decreased-value investments and pump liquidity back into the market?

But don't worry. There's little doubt that you and I will be covering the bills for greedy, irresponsible morons who took out more personal debt than they could afford.; 9/26/08, 2:16 PM
Paddy O said...: why not use it to bail out improvident homeowners

Why not indeed? They're the majority.

Why not do what they want to do?

If they're the party of Main Street, then why should Main Street trust them for leadership.

Why not write a bill, pass a bill?

Why not lead? If they are the leaders of hope and change?

Where is it?

Show me the money.; 9/26/08, 2:16 PM
Ruth Anne Adams said...: Pastor Jeff wrote: Reid: "Help us, Obi-John. You're our only hope."

And, upon returning to the Capitol, Obi-John Can-no-be replies: Never was there a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.; 9/26/08, 2:16 PM
P_J said...: It could look instead as though he's trying to escape it.

I'm sure it does to a media that's in the tank for Obama and conveniently forgets to mention that McCain called for 10 town hall meetings, all of which Obama ran away from.; 9/26/08, 2:18 PM
Unknown said...: Thank God Bill Clinton is out there to remind people of that!; 9/26/08, 2:19 PM
Roberto said...: Paster, your links says noting about Read calling McCain, only that he was assured McCain would support the bailout plan.; 9/26/08, 2:20 PM
Unknown said...: Well, here is probably the reason why neither party is in any hurry to pass the bailout.; 9/26/08, 2:21 PM
Unknown said...: Actually, looking at that poll a bit closer it looks like it's pretty suspect. It's one of those polls where they call people and then get them on the Internet to actually ask the questions. Probably some serious selection bias going on there.; 9/26/08, 2:23 PM
Roberto said...: 1. The House Republicans blow up a rare, and necessary, moment of true bipartisanship to make it look like McCain, who has no expertise in this area, has come to the rescue.

2. McCain sits mute in the White House summit arranged for his benefit. He doesn't even ask Paulson what he thinks of the House Republican plan.

3. He refuses to take a stand, one way or another, on the Republican plan.

http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/what_actually_happened_yesterd_1.html; 9/26/08, 2:26 PM
David53 said...: Michael said,

What they've instead seen from Mr. McCain is alternating anger and vagueness....

I guess it's all in one's perception of the event isn't it?

While I'm playing the Michael question game I'll go ahead and throw out some more.

Michael,

Why are you such a tool?

Have you ever read a book?

Is it hard to be such a moron?

What kind of meds are you on?

Why do you call yourself a German valise?

Have you ever been doyled by German Shepard?

OK, I'm done playing.; 9/26/08, 2:27 PM
Anonymous said...: I wasn't talking about you and your clones, michael.

Michael_H, that's really interesting, and revealing. I wonder if people will know about these details. Thanks for digging them up.; 9/26/08, 2:27 PM
Roberto said...: paster: "I'm sure it does to a media that's in the tank for Obama."

Yeah, that damn media.

Has nothing to do with McCain's ineptitude or his inane choice of Sarah Palin or his pandering over the past 3 days.

It's the MEDIA.; 9/26/08, 2:28 PM
Roberto said...: David, Get back to what's in your hand.; 9/26/08, 2:29 PM
Roberto said...: Paster: Here's something from the pesky "liberal" media you whine about:

Wall Street Journal:

The nation is in the middle of a financial meltdown. Voters want to know how, why and what the presidential candidates propose to fix it.

What they've instead seen from Mr. McCain is alternating anger and vagueness, capped this week by an impulsive call to delay the first presidential debate. He wants to portray all this as rising above politics.

It could look instead as though he's trying to escape it.; 9/26/08, 2:30 PM
David53 said...: Or doyled by A German Sheppard?

Have you ever have to proofread what you write?

Please don't ask me any questions right now Michael, I'm to doyled up to do much right now. My dog just found a dead rat in my yard so I have to get my gun and kill all his brothers I can find. I'm very excited.; 9/26/08, 2:33 PM
Beau said...: Actually, looking at that poll a bit closer it looks like it's pretty suspect.

Maybe so, but regardless all house and senate members are taking a ton of heat from their constituents. One report (radio) this morning stated that Pelosi received 17,000 letters and faxes against the deal. Ouch, that's gotta hurt. She's still pushing for the deal to go ahead but she might find that she's been keeping the seat warm all this time only to give it up to Cindy Sheehan.

To make it worse the report stated that Pelosi's husband has huge investments in the bank(s) that will be saved by the bailout. What to do, what to do?; 9/26/08, 2:35 PM
David53 said...: Michael,

I hear the crickets chirping, they may be yours, I don't know, I'll kill them anyway.

You never answer any questions. I don't expect you to.

Please tell me what's in my hand.; 9/26/08, 2:37 PM
Fen said...: Michael said [...]

Sorry, what was that? You were about to condemn Obama for trying to shut down a media station that won't play ball?

http://www.thebitchgirls.us/?p=9252; 9/26/08, 2:38 PM
P_J said...: your links says noting about Read calling McCain, only that he was assured McCain would support the bailout plan.

Did you watch the video? 0:37-0:45 has Reid asking McCain for his input and direction. I helpfully provided the exact quote from Reid, which I now reproduce:

"We need the Republican nominee for president to let us know where he stands and what we should do."; 9/26/08, 2:38 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: Hey Mikey,
Why don't you provide the links to the articles you supposedly quote? It is just a little code.

Or do you get them from your paymasters and just pass them along?; 9/26/08, 2:43 PM
Alex said...: michael is an uber-troll. I can't understand why Ann doesn't ban him.; 9/26/08, 2:43 PM
P_J said...: Michael @ 2:30.

Uh, thanks, I guess? That's the exact quote I was already referencing.

I pointed out the the WaPo is eager to portray McCain as "running from" politics, when I don't recall any similar portrayal of Obama when he said he would debate McCain "anytime, anywhere" then refused 10 town hall meetings.

No, there's no media bias for Obama.

OLBERMANN: For 42 minutes not a sour note and spellbinding throughout in a way usually reserved for the creations of fiction. An extraordinary political statement. ... I'd love to find something to criticize about it. You got anything?

MATTHEWS: No. You know I've been criticized for saying he inspires me and to hell with my critics!

Nope. None at all.; 9/26/08, 2:44 PM
Alex said...: What time does the debate start?; 9/26/08, 2:44 PM
Beth said...: Now, didn't the left want McCain to debate? Why are you sneering at him for attending the debate although no deal has been reached?

I'm "sneering" at him because he never was actually going to miss this debate. I sneer at his drama queen bullshit.; 9/26/08, 2:45 PM
Beth said...: What time does the debate start?

As soon as our financial crisis is resolved.; 9/26/08, 2:46 PM
Alex said...: I'm "sneering" at him because he never was actually going to miss this debate. I sneer at his drama queen bullshit.

2:45 PM

The left sure loves to sneer a lot.; 9/26/08, 2:47 PM
P_J said...: I'm "sneering" at him because he never was actually going to miss this debate.

Well, that's assuming that McCain had prior knowledge that Reid was going to be such a dishonest, backstabbing, vindictive little prick.

I'll admit he could have guessed as much, but still...; 9/26/08, 2:48 PM
Beth said...: jeff, McCain appearing to debate tonight has nothing, nothing to do with Reid. He never, ever, not for one moment, didn't plan to show up in Oxford. This is all just smoke and mirrors. He would never have bailed on the debate in Mississippi, he would not have dissed a GOP leader like Haley Barbour.; 9/26/08, 2:52 PM
Brian Doyle said...: Can any McCain sycophant tell me what McCain's position is on the bailout? Because his Maverickness hasn't made it remotely clear that I can tell.; 9/26/08, 2:54 PM
P_J said...: So when the Senate Majority Leader says "This is a crisis and we need you here," you think McCain should have blown him off and said the debate was more important?

You know what? Based on his response, I bet that's what Reid was counting on. He was looking for a chance to call McCain a selfish bastard for not showing up, then McCain called his bluff and Reid called him a coward instead.

Nice.; 9/26/08, 2:56 PM
P_J said...: Can any McCain sycophant tell me what McCain's position is on the bailout?

I heard it's based on Obama's.; 9/26/08, 2:56 PM
Anonymous said...: Beth, so by contrast, should one sneer at The One for insisting on the debate even in the middle of an economic crisis?; 9/26/08, 2:57 PM
Unknown said...: I hear McCain had a plan, but between Harry Reid's manipulations and House Republican obstructionism it got all doyled up.; 9/26/08, 2:58 PM
Brian Doyle said...: So mcg how badly did Megan's Law cripple your social life?; 9/26/08, 3:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Jeff, you got it.; 9/26/08, 3:02 PM
Beth said...: Goodness.

They can do both. They can fill their role as senators and work with the Administration and Congress, and they can debate. It's that simple. They can do more than one important thing over a period of days. In fact, that's just what they're doing, despite McCain's pretense.; 9/26/08, 3:03 PM
Brian Doyle said...: Aren't you guys embarrassed that you don't know where McCain stands on this issue that he suddenly decided was so crucial he couldn't debate?

Will you really not be embarrassed until the inevitable thrashing on 11/4?; 9/26/08, 3:03 PM
Anonymous said...: You asked sycophants, and unless you answer yourself, I doubt anyone will. Now go back to playing with your matches and the voodoo doll.; 9/26/08, 3:07 PM
Roberto said...: More bullshit from McCain:

McCain is running a series of upbeat ads designed to appeal to workers, but it sounds pretty fishy.

In one McCain says that “John McCain and his congressional allies” have a plan including “loans to upgrade assembly lines.”

The ad calls this “their plan.”

But this is false – McCain supports such loans. But he didn’t come around to that way of thinking until late August, and before then, he was opposed to the idea.

He wants credit for a plan he didn’t support until a month ago.

He also says he has assistance from his “congressional allies,” authorizing funding for loans...that was actually sponsored by a Democrat...and by the time it passed, 200 cosponsors had signed on – 197 Democrats and three Republicans.

McCain was not among them.

McCain says he and his congressional allies will help those states create jobs with tax cuts as a way to make that happen and “investments in renewable energy,. but McCain hasn’t proposed new spending on renewable energy.

His campaign’s says he plans to lower the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent, but those both apply to ALL corporations and aren’t specific to renewable energy.; 9/26/08, 3:07 PM
Matt said...: pastor_jeff
The reason Reid and some others want McCain is to help in getting the Republicans on board with the plan. This is a bipartisan plan, you know.
However McCain sort of did a little theatrics, which didn't really help. In fact it took time away from real issue solving.
The House Republicans don't want this bill at all. They don't like Bush or McCain much.; 9/26/08, 3:09 PM
Roberto said...: Paster: Town hall meetings aren't "debates."

At this stage of the game, how could you possibly not know that?; 9/26/08, 3:10 PM
Roberto said...: David: Your dick...if you have one.; 9/26/08, 3:11 PM
Roberto said...: How many of the McCain sycophants here think he really "suspended" his campaign?; 9/26/08, 3:12 PM
Unknown said...: So mcg how badly did Megan's Law cripple your social life?

Yeah, it's just not been the same since you were forbidden from leaving the state without notifying the authorities, dearie. I miss you.; 9/26/08, 3:16 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: Doyle said...
Aren't you guys embarrassed that you don't know where McCain stands on this issue that he suddenly decided was so crucial he couldn't debate?

Aren't you embarrassed that your guy, not the junior senator Messiah, but the senior senator powerhouse has not been in DC helping out during this crisis?

Of course having him and Harry Reid in the same room could be problematic. How does one deal with two powerhouse idiots?; 9/26/08, 3:18 PM
Unknown said...: The reason Reid and some others want McCain is to help in getting the Republicans on board with the plan. This is a bipartisan plan, you know.

Yeah. So what? It doesn't have to be bipartisan to pass. If they're so sure it's the right plan for the American people they can load it up with all the Christmas presents they want, pass it, let Bush sign it, and take credit for it.; 9/26/08, 3:18 PM
Roberto said...: Michael_H said..."Whoa! I'm listening to the first hour of Limbaugh...."

Every time I throw the factthat Rush is nothing more than a right wing mouth piece for many here...they say "we NEVER listen to Rush."

And, really...using Rush Limbaugh as a source??

What?

Sean Hannity playing golf? Or, hey...where's Karl Rove?; 9/26/08, 3:18 PM
Brian Doyle said...: Schumer?

Hey I'm glad the Democrats are so amenable to any bailout at all! I'm pleasantly surprised it's the Boehner-Cantor axis of evil that's doing all the posturing.; 9/26/08, 3:20 PM
Roberto said...: mcg: "It doesn't have to be bipartisan to pass."

Sure...but why not put something together EVERYBODY can live with? Isn't that the point?

And, of course Bush could then veto it, and there aren't enough votes to override.

Forget about that?; 9/26/08, 3:23 PM
Roberto said...: Again: How many of the McCain sycophants here think he really "suspended" his campaign?; 9/26/08, 3:24 PM
Unknown said...: Sure...but why not put something together EVERYBODY can live with? Isn't that the point?

It would be nice, yes! So why not just give in to Boehner and Cantor's demands?

Of course I'd like to see Cantor get a bunch of concessions out of this before it passes. But the point is it's only obstructionism if the Republicans can prevent passage, and indications are they can't. They have explicitly admitted as much in press conferences today.

And, of course Bush could then veto it, and there aren't enough votes to override.

Has Bush given any indication whatsoever that he'll veto? He is claiming this is extremely urgent. He isn't offering any concrete criticisms about the current bill. I don't think he is. I think this is like comprehensive immigration reform redux, where Bush and the Dems are closer together than the House Republicans. Only this time, the urgency of the situation saps the House Republicans' power.

No, any time the Dems want to end this, they can. They're just politicking.; 9/26/08, 3:29 PM
P_J said...: Town hall meetings aren't "debates."

Wow, that's a ringing defense! So when Obama said "anytime, anywhere" there was an implied asterisk!

(* "anytime, anywhere" except town hall meetings); 9/26/08, 3:30 PM
Brian Doyle said...: So why not just give in to Boehner and Cantor's demands?

Because if those (ridiculous, frivolous, unserious) demands were agreed to, then Boehner and Cantor would change their minds and want something completely different.

They don't actually care what the legislation is, they just want to oppose it.; 9/26/08, 3:31 PM
Unknown said...: Fine. Then the Dems should just pass it. Like I just said, the Republicans have said the Dems have the votes; they can end this any time they want. Prove to the American people that the Dems care and the Reps don't, Pelosi! Go for it!; 9/26/08, 3:33 PM
Roberto said...: mcg, Just because the Dems have a majority doesn't mean every single Dem will vote yea.

Why do you think that's the case??; 9/26/08, 3:40 PM
P_J said...: They can fill their role as senators and work with the Administration and Congress, and they can debate.

Actually, Beth, when Obama said he's meet with McCain "anytime, anywhere" and McCain called him on it, Obama's campaign responded that there simply wasn't time to have the town hall meetings.

Before this week, how many days has Obama or McCain been in Washington? These guys are campaigning full time. I think you're oversimplifying.; 9/26/08, 3:41 PM
Unknown said...: The Dems had better hurry, or more quotes like this are gonna come out (this one from Rep. Shadegg):

“For the first time since the potential crisis confronting our nation’s banking system arose, I am cautiously optimistic. The proposal initially offered by Secretary Paulson was irresponsible and woefully lacking in safeguards for American taxpayers. Thanks to intervention by Senator McCain, both the White House and Congressional Democrats appear to be moving toward a more responsible rescue plan.”

Too many of those and the unwashed masses might actually start believing McCain's stunt was helpful.

Hurry up, Dems, pass the bill!; 9/26/08, 3:41 PM
Roberto said...: Paster, Town Hall meetings are not debates.

Have you ever attended a debate?

There is no comparison at all.; 9/26/08, 3:41 PM
Roberto said...: mcg, You appear to under the impression that this crisis is some kind of "Democratic Party" crisis.

It's an American crisis, and unless there is some kind of bi-partisan agreement, along with the White House, we could be in big trouble.

Why are you trying to put the onus on the Democrats when all reports lend to the opinion that it's the Republicans who are holding things up.

Even Bush is pushing the Republicans so I think your comments are nothing more than the standard right wing silliness.; 9/26/08, 3:44 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: There must be something we are missing here. Pelosi mandated that she wanted at least 100 Republican votes for cover.

There must be things in that bill that are unexplainable or pork. So far, the only unexplainable fact is the money for ACORN.

There has to be other stench in this legislation or she would have rammed it through. She does not want to be the only one taking the blame.; 9/26/08, 3:45 PM
Brian Doyle said...: Too many of those and the unwashed masses might actually start believing McCain's stunt was helpful.

Yeah if even Republican John Shadegg is giving McCain credit...

Jesus can you even dress yourself in the morning?; 9/26/08, 3:46 PM
Unknown said...: mcg, Just because the Dems have a majority doesn't mean every single Dem will vote yea. Why do you think that's the case??

I'm not saying they all will. Like I said, I've seen multiple reports that they have the votes. This is not necessarily because all Dems will vote for it---one figure I saw suggested up to 40-45% of House Republicans already will, too. But at current numbers that's not at the 100-Rep level that Pelosi is aiming for.

I'm baiting you and others by proposing the Dems pass. I'll give you the answer: because the bill as is is a stinker, and she knows it. She wants a majority of Republicans to vote for it so that when people complain later, she can point the finger at them.

If that's what she wants, that's fine, but that means she'll actually have to accept some Republican cleanup.; 9/26/08, 3:47 PM
P_J said...: So again, your defense of Obama backing out of "anytime, anywhere" is that he only meant a certain kind of meeting?

You should check with the campaign. They didn't even try that kind of parsing, but simply pleaded there wasn't enough time to have town hall meetings.; 9/26/08, 3:47 PM
Unknown said...: Jesus can you even dress yourself in the morning?

Barely. Life has been so hard since you left. I mean, I understand, being a fugitive and all.; 9/26/08, 3:47 PM
Bob said...: Michael, a town hall is not a debate? Maybe yes and maybe no. Wouldn't that depend on the format of the townhall? Of course if you want something stilted then by all means use the debate format from the primaries.

I always thought it was a huge mistake McCain didn't insist on one joint townhall.; 9/26/08, 3:47 PM
KCFleming said...: "Paster, Town Hall meetings are not debates."

Presidential debates are not debates, either.; 9/26/08, 3:49 PM
Roberto said...: Paster: You're beating a long dead horse.

There won't be Town Hall meetings, there will be debates.

Painting Obama as you are is disingenuous and irrelevant at this point in time.

And we already who you're voting for anyway so what's the difference?; 9/26/08, 3:51 PM
Unknown said...: Yeah if even Republican John Shadegg is giving McCain credit...

If enough of the House Republican reforms make it into the Dem bill, then it won't take a partisan like Shadegg to suggest McCain had something to do with it.

Pelosi had better hurry...; 9/26/08, 3:53 PM
Unknown said...: There won't be Town Hall meetings, there will be debates.

Too bad the MSM disagrees with you. CNN, FoxNews, HuffPo, NewsDay, HotAir, ABC News, IHT, etc. etc. have all discussed McCain's Town Hall debate proposal.; 9/26/08, 3:55 PM
Brian Doyle said...: Hey wasn't Shadegg the one who helped cover for Mark Foley?

Cute little butts bouncing in the air :-); 9/26/08, 3:56 PM
Unknown said...: Town halls can't be debates? Tell that to Bush and Kerry:

IHT Opinion: The town hall debate
October 11, 2004.

HuffPo: Obama Should Do the Town Hall Debates with McCain
September 20, 2008.

CNN: McCain challenges Obama to town hall debates

Calling for "no process questions from reporters" and "no spin rooms," the presumptive Republican presidential nominee proposed one debate a week from now until the Democratic party convention in August.; 9/26/08, 3:59 PM
P_J said...: Painting Obama as you are is disingenuous and irrelevant at this point in time.

I'm willing to hear how I'm being disingenuous. Please explain.

And I happen to think Obama's backing out of his boast to meet McCain "anytime, anywhere" is very relevant, since the lefties here are claiming McCain is somehow trying to avoid Obama and this debate.

And we already who you're voting for anyway so what's the difference?

And I'm sure you're approaching the campaign with no preference.

What difference does it make anyway? Are you saying that people with a political preference can't be objective or be trusted? That would ecclude pretty much everyone at Althouse, yourself included.; 9/26/08, 4:01 PM
Beth said...: Actually, Beth, when Obama said he's meet with McCain "anytime, anywhere" and McCain called him on it, Obama's campaign responded that there simply wasn't time to have the town hall meetings.

Jeff, I don't argue with that. My point, though, has nothing to do with that, so you're changing the subject. My assertion is simply that McCain's big dramatic gesture of "suspending his campaign" was pure bullshit. Not for one second was it in doubt that he would be debating in Oxford. He was about as convincing as a child threatening to hold his breath until he turns blue.; 9/26/08, 4:01 PM
Brian Doyle said...: since the lefties here are claiming McCain is somehow trying to avoid Obama and this debate.

Well he was the one who wanted it postponed, not Obama.; 9/26/08, 4:02 PM
Roberto said...: Pogo says: "Presidential debates are not debates, either."

And of course, you're wrong...again.

There are all kinds of debate "formats.," numbnut.

There are Team Policy Debates, and of course, the Lincoln-Douglas Debate format, along with a number of what are referred to as "college" debates, but most have a judge moderating the procedures.

Just like what you'll see tonight.

If you own a TV.; 9/26/08, 4:03 PM
P_J said...: Bill Clinton is more honest and honorable than you blind Obama defenders.

He publicly stated this week that McCain obviously wasn't trying to dodge Obama since he'd suggested 10 town halls that Obama wouldn't agree to.; 9/26/08, 4:03 PM
former law student said...: Bush and the Dems are closer together than the House Republicans. Only this time, the urgency of the situation saps the House Republicans' power.

When I consider that Republicans vastly preferred Bush to McCain back in 2000, Obama looks better and better. How will McCain command the respect of his own party members when Bush cannot?

Bush and McCain: Too wussy to lead.; 9/26/08, 4:04 PM
P_J said...: Why do you insist on trying to portray McCain as running away from Obama or the debate when Bill Clinton says that's a load of BS?; 9/26/08, 4:04 PM
Unknown said...: 8/14/1998, Washington Post, discussing the debate idea that McCain used to inspire his challenge:

"Goldwater's eyes remain fixed on the window. 'I would have enjoyed it very much. I even talked to him one day about using the same airplane, going to the same places. He'd get out in one place and start to debate and I'd rebut him. Then we'd turn it around in the next place. It was the Uncle Morris fantasy, and it probably wouldn't have happened. But he liked the idea. It would have saved a lot of money, we'd have had a good time, and it would have done the country a lot of good.'"; 9/26/08, 4:05 PM
Brian Doyle said...: Bill Clinton is an undermining SOB, and anyway of course he's not going to call McCain a grandstanding clown even though he is.; 9/26/08, 4:06 PM
P_J said...: And Clinton did argue that there might be a way to do all the things you're saying McCain should be doing, but he was a hell of a lot more gracious about it than the people on this board, and he never questioned McCain's motives.

It's pretty sad when Democrats have to be told to take lessons in adult behavior from Bill Clinton.; 9/26/08, 4:07 PM
Beth said...: Jeff, I'm not arguing that McCain is trying to dodge the debate. (Also, why would I use Bill Clinton as a benchmark for my own judgement? just asking).

McCain never intended to miss this debate. He made a big dramatic gesture and it fizzed. The debate was never in doubt. He was blowing smoke. Bullshitting. Flailing for attention. Trying out another of his Great Man Sacrificing All gestures. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't.; 9/26/08, 4:08 PM
P_J said...: Bill Clinton is an undermining SOB

Yeah, Clinton isn't acting like the petty, vindictive jerk you think he should be because he wants to sabotage Obama.

You're so childish you can't recognize adult behavior when you see it.

ZOMG! Clinton had something nice to say about McCain? Treachery!!!; 9/26/08, 4:10 PM
KCFleming said...: There are all kinds of debate "formats.," numbnut.

"There are all kinds of debate "formats," numbnut."
Including formats that are not actual 'debates', like the Presidnetial "debates", which are not debates at all.

"numbnut"??
No, not since taking Lyrica. But I appreciate your concern. It was the left one. The left is always numb, and a nut.

If you own a TV.
Having only recently discovered the secret of fire, I am taking this 'technology' thing one step at a time.; 9/26/08, 4:10 PM
Roberto said...: Paster, You're being disingenous by suggesting Obaba should have automatically accept McCain's Town Hall format for appearing together.

This is a campaign and campaigns have all kinds of strategies attached.

McCain feels more comfortable in Town Hall meetings, Obama apparently feels more comfortable in a debate format.

And Town Hall meetings are almost impossible to control, considering no one knows exactly who the people are who are asking the questions, who they already support or if they're tied toa specific agenda.

*In one of the McCain Town Halls the son of Steve Doocy, a Fox News talking head, asked McCain about Hillary's drinking, a reference to her having a shot of whisky...which o course got a huge laugh from the partisen audience.

Is this the kind of Town Hall Meeting silliness you're hoping or?

Do you think that's fair?; 9/26/08, 4:10 PM
Brian Doyle said...: If McCain cares so deeply about these bailout negotiations, you'd think he'd voice an opinion one way or another about how it should be resolved.

Instead he just parachuted in to sit there quietly and hope to the credit shoveled into his lap when a deal was reached before the debate. Oops!; 9/26/08, 4:13 PM
Unknown said...: Do you think that's fair?

No more or less fair than a different debate format. Several of the primary debates were heavily criticized for their perceived bias towards one candidate or the other.; 9/26/08, 4:14 PM
former law student said...: And I happen to think Obama's backing out of his boast to meet McCain "anytime, anywhere" is very relevant

Obama said he was ready to debate McCain's foreign policies anywhere, anytime. Oxford, Mississippi is the "where"; tonight at 8pm CDT is the time.

Construing his offer to debate foreign policy one time as some sort of implicit agreement to go barnstorming in McCain's bus, meeting in high school gyms and K of C Halls once a week for ten weeks is a bit far-fetched.; 9/26/08, 4:15 PM
Unknown said...: If McCain cares so deeply about these bailout negotiations, you'd think he'd voice an opinion one way or another about how it should be resolved.

Ah, so you were present when he spoke with the "obstructionist" members of the House Republicans? Please, do tell!; 9/26/08, 4:15 PM
P_J said...: Beth,

No, unlike others, you're not claiming he's running away; you've just decided that it was all just dishonest and cynical grandstanding -- regardless of the fact that Reid asked him to come and tell him what to do.

It's a free country so you're entitled to psychoanalyze McCain all you want. I don't see things that way myself, but I suppose an outside party would say we're both reading events through our preconceptions.; 9/26/08, 4:15 PM
P_J said...: why would I use Bill Clinton as a benchmark for my own judgement?

Well, in most cases, I admit it would be a disastrously bad idea, but in this case Clinton has managed to show more maturity and grace than the commenters here.; 9/26/08, 4:17 PM
P_J said...: Paster, You're being disingenous by suggesting Obaba should have automatically accept McCain's Town Hall format for appearing together.

So, again, when Obama says, "anytime, anywhere" and McCain suggests a perfectly reasonable option with historical precendent which Obama rejects out of hand because he's too busy, I'm being disingenuous.

Hmmmm. I think there's a flaw in that logic somewhere.; 9/26/08, 4:21 PM
Peter V. Bella said...: If McCain cares so deeply about these bailout negotiations, you'd think he'd voice an opinion one way or another about how it should be resolved.

What is Obama's opinion? What is Biden's opinion?; 9/26/08, 4:23 PM
P_J said...: Do you think that's fair?

Do you think Bernard King asking Michael Dukakis what he'd do if Kitty were raped and murdered was fair? There's BS in any format.

Bottom line -- Obama made a stupid boast, McCain called his bluff, Obama backed out, and the media have continued to give him a pass for it ... just like they continue to give Biden passes for his continuing string of embarrassingly out-of-touch, goofy, disjointed gaffes an flat-out lies.; 9/26/08, 4:25 PM
P_J said...: And since we're approaching the 200 comment mark which will kick off a new page, we're simply talking past each other, and I have to go home to take care of the kids, I'll say goodbye.

do svidanya, comrade Pogo.; 9/26/08, 4:28 PM
Trooper York said...: Bernard King? Jeeez is that why he didn't show up for the whole season. I thought he just blew out his knee.; 9/26/08, 4:30 PM