Third Party & Independents Archives

September 24, 2008

Unbelievable McCain

Sen. McCain, unprepared for the debate on Friday given Obama’s rise in the polls, has decided to “suspend” his campaign and rush to Washington on his white steed to rescue the nation from its financial crisis. Never mind that he doesn’t have a clue as to the economics of the potential remedies, and leaves the money issues to his wife Cindy to handle through accountants and lawyers overseeing their 7 homes and 13 cars.

McCain has NOT suspended his campaign, he has just switched campaign tactics in light of his drop in the polls. This is what McCain has always done when faced with defeat, shift position, shift tactics, shift principles, shift targets, until something improves. Is this the kind of hit and miss problem solver voters want rushing to D.C. to offer Bernanke, Paulson, and Congressional leadership advice?

Relax everyone, it is just politics. No one in D.C. wants to hear what McCain's 2 cents are. Everyone has heard McCain confess to a lack of education and understanding in economics. McCain is not going to pull a rabbit out of the hat that awes Fed Chief Bernanke and Treasury Sec'y. Paulson, or the majority and minority leaders of the finance committees in Congress. It is just grandstanding politics.

Politically, however, it had potential. If McCain's move could force Obama out of the debates, and cast Obama as taking advantage on the campaign trail while McCain heroically charges to D.C. to save the nation, McCain could score political points. It would also take the intensity off the growing questions regarding the hiding of Gov. Palin from investigations and journalistic tough questions.

But, are the independent voting public and Obama/Biden ticket so gullible as to fall for this political stunt with Rovian halos surrounding it? We will see. My bet is, the ruse will end up appearing like, well, a ruse, a feint, a dodge, a one day case of pneumonia on the big quiz day, which is precisely what it is.

Nothing sobers voters like a real threat to their jobs, their 401K's and their pensions and savings. And that threat is very real. Voters will, and polls are showing this, going to be taking a far more sober view of the election now, putting fluff, looks, skin color, political oneupmanship, quips and barbs, hairdos and eye wear style aside as deciding factors. It is crunch time, and McCain's contradiction: economic fundamentals are strong, and I have to suspend my campaign to save the economy, is not going to pass unnoticed.

Posted by David R. Remer at September 24, 2008 03:56 PM
Comments
Comment #264168

David

I think this makes him look elusive. It is nothing more than patriotism when convenient. Now that the debate is looming, his numbers are dropping and his party is being held in contempt by the American people he sees fit to run to Washington as if he has a clue, and conveniently avoid the debate. It is just all too obvious. Our war hero is using this situation to go awol from the debate.

Posted by: RickIL at September 24, 2008 04:58 PM
Comment #264170

David,

God, how I hate to agree with you. This is not a good move no matter how *brilliantly* it may have been considered. It looka and smells like rashness and/or panic.

This is such a funny election. On either ticket the guy at the top is just not a winner. On one side we have a chamelion trying not to look like a Republican. On the other side you have Jimmy Carter in a not-Baptist, half-not-white, lawyer suit.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at September 24, 2008 05:01 PM
Comment #264177

This is, of course, supposed to be a brilliant and mavericky move, but it comes after months of not doing a single damn thing (No votes cast since April), and only after the Bush Administration pushed a last-minute massive bailout on Congress.

With due credit to the perversity of political outcomes possible, this is a stupid move. Hell, I could very easily say that it is symbolic of Republican regulation: stall and stall and stall again, and then rush a hurried proposal through trying to stay ahead of the public’s displeasure when everything goes to tell.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 24, 2008 05:12 PM
Comment #264179

To Hell. Sorry.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 24, 2008 05:15 PM
Comment #264185

Given that Friday’s debate was on Foreign Policy, it’s uncharitable to imagine McCain was unprepared.

More likely, he took stock of the situation, and realized that winning a battle on foreign policy would be a complete waste at this time: most Americans aren’t real worried about Georgia right now. If he can postpone that until a more opportune time, it’ll be more valuable to him.

As far as McCain lacking economic bona fides, of course he lacks them. So does Obama. So did both Bushes, both Roosevelts, and almost every other president. The exception would be Herbert Hoover, our one truly technocratic president. Remember how well that worked out?

Economists can’t understand what’s going on (I work in a department of a few dozen economists; we don’t know), let alone politicians! What politicians can understand - and must enforce - is that any solution is transparent and is funded responsibly. Paulson’s original proposal completely lacked Congressional oversight of a taxpayer investment of 5% of GDP. That’s unthinkably enormous!

McCain, Obama and the rest of our legislators are not geniuses chosen to manage the economy for us. They’re representatives of the people, and they owe it to us to be diligent. If McCain believes that doing his job as a senator is the best way to earn a promotion to president, it’s fair game for him to try. If he does a lousy senator’s job, this will backfire (as well it should).

Posted by: Chops at September 24, 2008 05:34 PM
Comment #264187

McCain might not have a clue as to what’s going on but at least he’s gonna vote. It might be wrong but he’ll be on record a shaving voted on a tough issue. Obama on the other hand is doing what he does best. Avoiding the though votes.
But then I can’t blame him. This vote is damned if ya do vote for it. Damned if ya don’t vote for it. And heaven knows we sure don’t want Obama looking decisive do we?
Personally I think it’s a pity they don’t have a none of the above box on the ballot.

Posted by: Ron Brown at September 24, 2008 05:37 PM
Comment #264189

A quick poll by Survey USA indicates that the vast majority of Americans think McCain’s idea is lousy. Hell of a bad first impression.

Chops-
A tactical retreat from the field is hardly ever a good starting point for an upcoming battle.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 24, 2008 05:39 PM
Comment #264190

Stephen,

Please correct the link. I’d like to see the poll.

Posted by: LawnBoy at September 24, 2008 05:41 PM
Comment #264191

Sorry. Here’s the link.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 24, 2008 05:42 PM
Comment #264192

New name for John McCain’s bus is called for:
The Confused, Mostly Silent Except For Absurd Grandstanding Pronouncements, Express.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at September 24, 2008 05:58 PM
Comment #264194

Chops, as I wrote in the article: “Sen. McCain, unprepared for the debate on Friday given Obama’s rise in the polls,”

That’s the point of retreat by McCain. That debate on national security and foreign affairs was not going to alter the polls, and McCain was not prepared and could not prepare to make Obama appear to be a dunce in that debate. There was nothing to be gained by McCain in entering that debate and running the risk of Obama holding his own.

Because that is ALL Obama would have had to do, hold his own, not beat McCain in the debate, in order for McCain to lose ground on the economic front. In fact, if there appeared to be little difference between McCain and Obama in Friday’s debate, Obama wins by default due to the economic situation being the focus of voters, which McCain can’t compete with Obama on.

Obama is a quick study and fast learner of new material. His academic record and political career evidence this. McCain is not. Obama has been and is learning economics in a months long crash course. McCain reads what his economic advisers write for him, without much comprehension of what he is reading.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 24, 2008 05:59 PM
Comment #264200

McCain’s Economic Plan: Blurt Out Random Crap

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at September 24, 2008 06:18 PM
Comment #264203

If the vote in the Senate was going to be close, they should cancel the debate. However, Reid has already let them know their presence will not be required. They can do more good by making a standing together and supporting the final version of the legislation in a show of bipartisanship, and then using debate time to discuss the economy.

McCain is getting scorched for attempting to cancel. Somehow he managed to find time this morning to do an interview with Katie Couric, and meet with Lady Lynn de Rothschild. Ducking and running. Mmm mmm. Dumb move.

Posted by: phx8 at September 24, 2008 06:35 PM
Comment #264205

Chops wrote; “Given that Friday’s debate was on Foreign Policy, it’s uncharitable to imagine McCain was unprepared.”

Well said Chops as was the rest of your piece.

David, the last paragraph of your response above to Chops implies intimate knowledge How would you have any direct knowledge of either candidates activities done in private?

As for wearing your strategist hat, sure hope you have a day job.

Posted by: Jim M at September 24, 2008 06:43 PM
Comment #264208

It gets worse. McCain wants the debate rescheduled in place of the VP debate on October 2nd, with the VP debate rescheduled at some later date. Is Palin that weak? How lame.

Posted by: phx8 at September 24, 2008 06:53 PM
Comment #264209

Considering the given that McCain is on home turf when debating or in a town hall type meeting, and also considering the fact that Obama is practically lost without his teleprompter…it does indeed seem odd that McCain would bypass the chance to play to his strength in the only debate that really, really matters. Winning…or doing very well…in the first debate is essential to both campaigns.

Odd indeed.

Posted by: Jim T at September 24, 2008 06:53 PM
Comment #264213

VV

From your link at #264200. What’s next, McCain campaign? A Mogwai ate a sandwich after midnight; morphed into a Gremlin; then caused the economic crisis? Or will it be Marty McFly’s sports almanac screwing up the space-time continuum? Or will it be Reverend Wright putting a curse on the banks? Whatever is next is bound to be crazier than what’s already been said.

This one paragraph aptly describes McCains campaign thus far. I saw another work in the article that is kind of a cover all. “farcical”

Anyone who could use a laugh right now should read the entirety of the article at VV’s link.

Posted by: RickIL at September 24, 2008 07:05 PM
Comment #264221

My favorite:

A man (Gramm) who said that the economic crisis is mostly a figment of our whiny imagination. A man who could be our next Treasury Secretary and steward of the economy.
Posted by: womanmarine at September 24, 2008 08:01 PM
Comment #264224

Hey Rick, and womanmarine, glad you liked that link! (Always glad when anyone follows my links!) I can’t help but love Bob Cesca because he never fails to totally crack me up — and do so while making several excellent points in the process. A man with brains and a killer sense of humor is always irresistible to me.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at September 24, 2008 08:27 PM
Comment #264230

Chops, Jim M -

Foreign policy is NOT McCain’s strong suit. If you’ll recall, even after THREE wars in the region he STILL didn’t know the significance of the Sunni/Shi’a split and how it affects the area, he STILL didn’t know that Iraq does NOT share a border with Pakistan, he STILL didn’t know that Czechoslovakia didn’t exist anymore, he STILL didn’t know that Spain is NOT in Central America!

Come to think of it, economics isn’t his strong suit…and neither is domestic policy…what IS McCain’s strong suit?

Is it defense and support of our veterans? His voting record says he is NOT.

Ah, that’s IT! McCain’s strong suit is PATRIOTISM…and that’s all the Republicans want to see is someone all wrapped up in the flag, because that means they will automatically do what’s good for America!

So…is the McCain camp going to delay the debates until there’s one on patriotism? I can see it now: “I support the creation of a new department, and it will be headed by Jack Abramoff, my new Secretary of Patriotism!”

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at September 24, 2008 09:16 PM
Comment #264236

Glenn,

You realize that McCain was one of the ones who went after Abramoff, right?

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/reed_reality.html

In fact, there is so much disinformation, innuendo and outright lies going on in these comment sections recently, it makes me sad for what this blog used to stand for.

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 24, 2008 09:42 PM
Comment #264242

Rhinehold,
You do realize McCain kept a vast amount of material from the Abramoff investigation hidden, right? Abramoff was nicking the Indian casinos, McCain’s clients, and in the election four years earlier, Abramoff really teed off McCain by helping Ralph Reed to defeat him in South Carolina. McCain had it in for Abramoff, but McCain had no intention of nailing Republican allies. Abramoff was the biggest fish in the scummy pond of the lobbying world, with ties to Bush, Cheney, and others, documented examples of many, many visits to the White House, yet the investigation never really delivered any of the big players. Of course, a few people, like Ney, were so stupid and corrupt that they couldn’t be saved. All in all, McCain bagged his man with minimal collateral damage to the party.

I don’t think anyone would dispute what I just said. If you will pardon some speculation, I think the GOP owed McCain, big time, and his performance in the Abramoff investigation had a lot to do with his winning the GOP nomination… That, and the rest of the field was pathetically weak…

Posted by: phx8 at September 24, 2008 10:18 PM
Comment #264244

Rhinehold, McCain HAD to go after Abramoff to compensate for his complicity in the Keating 5 Savings and Loan Debacle brought down by Keating’s Lincoln Savings & Loan which cost tax payer’s 3 billion dollars alone.

McCain is political, if he is nothing else. Image is everything in politics. Abramoff provided an opportunity to wipe clean the stain of the Keating 5 Congressional reprimands, McCain being one of those 5.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 24, 2008 10:20 PM
Comment #264245

EVERYONE, the reason for McCain’s announcements today now becomes clear. Only about 35-40% of Republicans in the House are willing to vote for the Bailout measure. Which means their aren’t enough votes to pass the bill even if every Democrat votes for it.

McCain knows if this bill fails because of Republicans, and the economy melts down thereafter and before the election, McCain has NO CHANCE IN HELL of winning on Nov. 4.

McCain is going to D.C. to put the question to House Republicans, do you want to give this election to Obama, or do you want to keep the potential for a Republican president alive?

McCain really doesn’t have much choice in what he is doing given the politics of the situation in the Congress. About 60% of House Republicans at the moment, would rather kill the economy than vote with Democrats on allowing government to take more tax dollars from Americans on the eve of an election.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 24, 2008 10:26 PM
Comment #264246

Rhinehold -

ONE - I notice you focused on Abramoff…and IGNORED the rest of McCain’s problems with reality.

TWO - To fulfill a promise I made on your blog, thank you for correcting me on what is apparently one of the major causes (and perhaps THE major cause) of the Great Depression. You were right and I was wrong. You see, I have no problem with people being wrong. I DO have a problem with those who, after they are shown they are wrong, REFUSE to correct themselves.

THREE - Speaking of which, I think it was you who, when I pointed out the endemic election fraud being perpetrated by the Republicans and their supporters, inferred that the Democrats are doing the same, that it’s not ‘just a Republican thing’. I asked you if you had found ANY evidence of Democratic election fraud (not simply individual voter fraud, mind you). Have you found any?

Or is it ‘just a Republican thing’?

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at September 24, 2008 10:31 PM
Comment #264247

Jim M, I don’t have to sleep with the candidates to know that Obama is a quick study, evidenced by his never touching the subject of economics during his campaign until about 4 months ago, and observing his speeches’ grasp of the complexities in the last two.

McCain was asked point blank, will you vote for or against this bail out bill if it hinges on your vote. McCain refused to answer the question. He can’t speak about economics without a prompter, and there is absolutely no doubt that Obama is going to make Friday’s debate about economics. One can’t have a foreign policy without a sound economic base from which to conduct a foreign policy. McCain is now ducking the debate just as he ducked the question.

McCain is a politician, and very good at guerilla style politics. But he is now boxed into discussing a subject way beyond his academic abilities and which never interested him until a couple months ago. Given McCain’s academic records and his own admission to not being a very good student, there just isn’t enough time for McCain to become versed in the complexities of an economic debate with the likes of the more adept and academically agile, Obama.

So, ducking and setting up another tactical attack on another battlefield of his own choosing is what McCain is doing, completely consistent with the one area of human knowledge he IS versed in, military history.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 24, 2008 10:38 PM
Comment #264248

One thing is for sure, BHO told McCain he wasn’t going to DC and was continuing to campaign. Oh, wait a minute, he changed his mind when invited by President Bush. Well, that shouldn’t surprise us, he changes his mind all the time. What’s another changed mind?

Posted by: Oldguy at September 24, 2008 10:40 PM
Comment #264250

What I wish Obama would say:

“I don’t know what John’s afraid of, but I’ll be at the debate on Friday. True, the financial crisis is serious, but so is the war on terrorism and the war in Iraq - in fact they’re even more serious. So don’t use this current crisis to run away from me and from exposing yourself to the American people. They deserve this debate. “Politics” is not a bad thing - that is the bedrock of our Democracy. Pres. Bush let the terrorists win a partial victory by illegally suspending our Constitution (yes Bush did that) and now you want the Financial crisis to win a victory by suspending the campaign - suspending helping the American people make the most important decision they will make this year. Don’t listen to the pundits who say you’ll do poorly in a debate against me.

Sen. McCain, please reach down into your inner self and find the courage to show up on Friday - courage I know you have somewhere in there.”

Obama can win this thing if he tells it like it is and get tough. McCain is using the Rove strategy to redirect and change the argument to be where you want it. Sometimes Obama falls for it.

Posted by: Dr Tom at September 24, 2008 10:49 PM
Comment #264252
ONE - I notice you focused on Abramoff…and IGNORED the rest of McCain’s problems with reality

I really could care less about liberal positioning and characturization. If I don’t comment about it it usually means I don’t care much about talking about it…

when I pointed out the endemic election fraud being perpetrated by the Republicans and their supporters, inferred that the Democrats are doing the same, that it’s not ‘just a Republican thing’. I asked you if you had found ANY evidence of Democratic election fraud (not simply individual voter fraud, mind you). Have you found any?

There is lots of evidence of it out there, especially around Chicago if you want to get into it. I’m not sure the comments of this article is the time or place…

Maybe you should check out a copy of ‘Stealing Elections:How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy’ from the library for a starter look?

Or you could read through:http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/09/democratic-voter-fraud-real-picture-of.html

Here are a few of the more memorable stories:

In Washington State, the blog Sound Politics reported that election officials knowingly and unlawfully counted ballots from ineligible voters in 2004 and then modified computer records to cover it up.

Democrats took the governor’s office on the third recount, by 129 votes.

In New Jersey… Dead people cast more than 4,000 votes in 2004, and nearly 11,000 people appear to have voted twice.

In West Virginia At least ten democrats entered guilty pleas for voter fraud in Logan and neighboring Lincoln County. Votes were bought in these West Virginia counties with booze, cash, payment of college tuition, and promises of gravel roads!

This brings us to St. Louis where Convicting Democrats has become the new Pastime. At least 16 local Democrats were convicted of election crimes in the last two years.

-In December 2004, Six volunteers for “Operation Big Vote” entered guilty pleas to dozens of election law violations for filling out the cards with names of the dead and other bogus information at a local McDonalds. Election officials launched an investigation after noticing that among the new voters registered was longtime Alderman Albert “Red” Villa, who died in 1990.

-In February 2005, Democrat Nonaresa Montgomery who ran Operation Big Vote, was found guilty of perjury in the St. Louis Circuit Court in her voter fraud trial.

This leads us to one of the most shocking and the largest voter fraud cases in the region’s history.

The story starts on October 31, 2004 at the East St. Louis VFW Hall…

Illinois State Board of Elections records reveal that 40 (of 44) ESL democratic precinct committeemen have received nearly $230,000 (collectively), over the past four years, for their ‘political activism’ in ESL elections.

Sources also stated that, on October 31, 2004 just days before the national elections over $80,000 was distributed to ESL politicians, at the East St. Louis VFW Hall, for the purpose of “getting out the vote”.

Around this time, Illinois State Treasurer, Republican Judy Topinka, who is currently running for governor of Illinois, traveled to East St. Louis to question absentee ballot procedures.

A boarding house came into question at 1232 Cleveland Avenue. Oliver Hamilton, a Democratic precinct committeeman, owned the boardinghouse.

It is a home for the mentally ill in East St. Louis. Eleven of the voters at this address requested absentee ballots for the 2004 election.

Another questionable registration was a woman who listed her home address as 200 S. Front St. This, of course, happens to be the address of the Casino Queen!

This is about 10 minutes of searching, if you like I can look for more?

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002530

http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009189

The last one is interesting in that it deals with convicted workers of ACORN who Obama did some work for when working with Ayers.

I used to live in Chicago, I’ve seen voter fraud… It wasn’t a republican thing there :(

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 24, 2008 10:56 PM
Comment #264254
ONE - I notice you focused on Abramoff…and IGNORED the rest of McCain’s problems with reality

I really could care less about liberal positioning and characturization. If I don’t comment about it it usually means I don’t care much about talking about it…

when I pointed out the endemic election fraud being perpetrated by the Republicans and their supporters, inferred that the Democrats are doing the same, that it’s not ‘just a Republican thing’. I asked you if you had found ANY evidence of Democratic election fraud (not simply individual voter fraud, mind you). Have you found any?

There is lots of evidence of it out there, especially around Chicago if you want to get into it. I’m not sure the comments of this article is the time or place…

Maybe you should check out a copy of ‘Stealing Elections:How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy’ from the library for a starter look?

Or you could read through:http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/09/democratic-voter-fraud-real-picture-of.html

Here are a few of the more memorable stories:

In Washington State, the blog Sound Politics reported that election officials knowingly and unlawfully counted ballots from ineligible voters in 2004 and then modified computer records to cover it up.

Democrats took the governor’s office on the third recount, by 129 votes.

In New Jersey… Dead people cast more than 4,000 votes in 2004, and nearly 11,000 people appear to have voted twice.

In West Virginia At least ten democrats entered guilty pleas for voter fraud in Logan and neighboring Lincoln County. Votes were bought in these West Virginia counties with booze, cash, payment of college tuition, and promises of gravel roads!

This brings us to St. Louis where Convicting Democrats has become the new Pastime. At least 16 local Democrats were convicted of election crimes in the last two years.

-In December 2004, Six volunteers for “Operation Big Vote” entered guilty pleas to dozens of election law violations for filling out the cards with names of the dead and other bogus information at a local McDonalds. Election officials launched an investigation after noticing that among the new voters registered was longtime Alderman Albert “Red” Villa, who died in 1990.

-In February 2005, Democrat Nonaresa Montgomery who ran Operation Big Vote, was found guilty of perjury in the St. Louis Circuit Court in her voter fraud trial.

This leads us to one of the most shocking and the largest voter fraud cases in the region’s history.

The story starts on October 31, 2004 at the East St. Louis VFW Hall…

Illinois State Board of Elections records reveal that 40 (of 44) ESL democratic precinct committeemen have received nearly $230,000 (collectively), over the past four years, for their ‘political activism’ in ESL elections.

Sources also stated that, on October 31, 2004 just days before the national elections over $80,000 was distributed to ESL politicians, at the East St. Louis VFW Hall, for the purpose of “getting out the vote”.

Around this time, Illinois State Treasurer, Republican Judy Topinka, who is currently running for governor of Illinois, traveled to East St. Louis to question absentee ballot procedures.

A boarding house came into question at 1232 Cleveland Avenue. Oliver Hamilton, a Democratic precinct committeeman, owned the boardinghouse.

It is a home for the mentally ill in East St. Louis. Eleven of the voters at this address requested absentee ballots for the 2004 election.

Another questionable registration was a woman who listed her home address as 200 S. Front St. This, of course, happens to be the address of the Casino Queen!

This is about 10 minutes of searching, if you like I can look for more?

:http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002530

:http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009189

The last one is interesting in that it deals with convicted workers of ACORN who Obama did some work for when working with Ayers.

I used to live in Chicago, I’ve seen voter fraud… It wasn’t a republican thing there :(

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 24, 2008 10:57 PM
Comment #264256

Oldguy, what a retarded comment. Obama said he wouldn’t suspend his campaign. Obama continues to say he won’t suspend his campaign. When the President calls upon a citizen to come to the aid of their country, would ask them to do less than to at least show up to hear the details of the request?

Obama doesn’t dance to McCain’s tune. McCain is just a political opponent. But, when your president asks you to consult with him for the sake of the country, you go, if you possibly can.

Your comment completely misses any grasp of the import of what is taking place here. Obama can be a politician and a loyal citizen at the same time. McCain can’t seem to campaign and contemplate the bailout bill at the same time. One or the other, but not both, for McCain. Pretty much captures what most people are going to make of what is happening, I suspect.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 24, 2008 11:05 PM
Comment #264259

now who is making retarded comments, David?

Do you really think it is NECESSARY to do the two things at the same time?

There is a difference between being able to do something while doing something else and whether you SHOULD.

Apparently you find no issue with Obama being out of Washington during the negotiations are going on regarding such an important issue, saying to ‘give him a call if you need him’. Didn’t you have a problem when Bush did this while being at his ranch?

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 24, 2008 11:09 PM
Comment #264260

Rhinehold,

The difference is that Bush had only one job at the time, and when he was at the ranch, it was questionable whether he was doing his job.

In contrast, Obama has two jobs, “Presidential Candidate for the Democratic Party” and Senator. While there are 98 other people (not counting McCain) who also have the latter job and are capable, he’s the only one with the former job. When he’s campaigning, he’s doing one of his jobs.

Big difference.

Posted by: LawnBoy at September 24, 2008 11:13 PM
Comment #264262

Lawnboy,

And he can’t not do that for a couple of days so he can be there while the negotiations are going on so that he can effectively represent his constituents?

That’s his decision. But I think that it tells what his priorities are. Certainly not his constituents, after breaking his promise not to run for another office while being senator for Illinois…

But, he and McCain will not be responsible for the economy in 40 days as he said today. It will be a couple of months after that before one of them takes office…

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 24, 2008 11:19 PM
Comment #264265

McCain has missed 411 votes in the past year or so, why all of a sudden does he feel the urge to run back to his day job now? Thats not leadership thats fraud.

Hopefully the repubs will acknowledge the McCain campaign was suspended because McCain chose to. This isn’t a reason to call the election nor is it a reason to suspend the election.

What we need to do is suspend the “financial crisis” until after the election. Why would anyone think the people responsible for the “financial crisis” should be the ones to dole out $700billion on a “maybe it will fix it” from the same minds that caused the problem. In fact the very same minds that earlier said the $200 billion bailout would solve the problem. How foolish do we have to be. As soon as Congress caves in to this administration and it’s bailout of the finance companies watch the speculators start raking in billions. Then watch as GM and others start the drum beat for more bail outs.

If this is a real “crisis” which I doubt, Why not use the reverse logic with a trickle up theory. Let the feds give the money to those in trouble with their mortgage and pay the house off. The problem goes away. OR if credits still tight, give money to small business and the unemployed. It will get the economy rolling and avert the crisis.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 24, 2008 11:26 PM
Comment #264268

Keating 5? Really David?

I mean, Glenn and McCain where exonerated from any wrongdoing…

McCain said, “One of our jobs as elected officials is to help constituents in a proper fashion. ACC [American Continental Corporation] is a big employer and important to the local economy. I wouldn’t want any special favors for them…. I don’t want any part of our conversation to be improper.”

The regulators then revealed that Lincoln was under criminal investigation on a variety of serious charges, at which point McCain severed all relations with Keating.

Democrat Robert S. Bennett, who was the special investigator during the scandal, suggested to the Senate Ethics Committee that it pursue charges against neither McCain nor Glenn, saying of McCain, “that there was no evidence against him.” The Vice Chairman of the Ethics Committee, Senator Warren Rudman of New Hampshire, agreed with Bennett

Back Obama and argue against McCain all you want, but let’s try to keep reality and facts in the discussion…

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 24, 2008 11:34 PM
Comment #264271
And he can’t not do that for a couple of days so he can be there while the negotiations are going on so that he can effectively represent his constituents?
Actually, I don’t think he can. But it’s not for the reasons that you imply. Instead, it’s that the two Presidential candidates jumping into the process at this point would detract from the solution instead of helping it. Neither is primarily an expert on economic and financial issues, so I think their sudden presence on the issue would be more of a distraction than a help. Too much of the focus would go to the political horse-race and posturing instead of staying with problem-solving.
But I think that it tells what his priorities are.
I think his priorities were clear when he called McCain this morning to suggest the campaigns work together to craft a joint statement of support for their colleagues. That would be more useful than parachuting in and politicizing the process even more.
But, he and McCain will not be responsible for the economy in 40 days as he said today. It will be a couple of months after that before one of them takes office
Yeah, that was a gaff. Posted by: LawnBoy at September 24, 2008 11:36 PM
Comment #264273
McCain has missed 411 votes in the past year or so, why all of a sudden does he feel the urge to run back to his day job now? Thats not leadership thats fraud

Of all of those votes, wouldn’t you say that THIS one is the most important, much more than a congressional proclamation, etc?

I would think that making sure to be a part of the what may be the most important legislation in a long time might be seen as a good thing.

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 24, 2008 11:37 PM
Comment #264275
Instead, it’s that the two Presidential candidates jumping into the process at this point would detract from the solution instead of helping it. Neither is primarily an expert on economic and financial issues, so I think their sudden presence on the issue would be more of a distraction than a help.

We should get rid of all of them then, how many of them are ‘economic experts’ again?

Shouldn’t they be there to ensure that proper regulations are put in place, that oversight is enacted, to just represent the people who voted for them to do just that?

As for ‘taking away from the negotiations’, you’re kidding, right? You don’t think Reid is being POLITICAL by telling McCain not to do his job? I don’t think this could become MORE politicized. Surely McCain being there among other senators while not out making stump speeches and getting airtime every time would lesson it, not increase it.

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 24, 2008 11:41 PM
Comment #264276
If this is a real “crisis” which I doubt, Why not use the reverse logic with a trickle up theory. Let the feds give the money to those in trouble with their mortgage and pay the house off. The problem goes away

Actually, immediately fixing the Fair Value Accounting rules would minimize the issue pretty quickly. But that’s not very progressive…

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 24, 2008 11:43 PM
Comment #264277

Rhinehold,

I’m pretty sure that I’d be calling this idea stupid if Obama had proposed it instead of McCain. Do you really think that you’d be defending it if it went the other way?

And no, I’m not kidding. I don’t think turning tense and crucial negotiations into a circus would be a good thing.

Posted by: LawnBoy at September 24, 2008 11:45 PM
Comment #264279

McCain’s numbers are sliding and the debate Friday wasn’t going to help. Time for McCain to launch another gimmick since the effect of the first gimmick, Palin, has worn off.

This is another glaring example of McCain’s impulsive decision-making. Again, he exhibits a disturbing inability to think things through.

Here’s some comic relief (the song starts at about the 1:20 mark):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFRSawe33sA

Posted by: pianofan at September 24, 2008 11:46 PM
Comment #264280
I don’t think turning tense and crucial negotiations into a circus would be a good thing.

When has anything that congress has done not been a circus, exactly? Certainly nothing it has done this week for sure.

As for supporting Obama if he had done the same thing, I would have. I don’t see why that is so hard to understand?

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 24, 2008 11:49 PM
Comment #264281

And all this talk of jumping back into the Senate (and even into unrelated committees) ignores the part about trying to cancel a debate 56 hours in advance. That’s just ridiculous.

My alma mater is hosting one of the debates, and it’s a huge endeavor. For McCain to just presume that these things can be changed on a whim is ridiculous.

Posted by: LawnBoy at September 24, 2008 11:50 PM
Comment #264282
McCain’s numbers are sliding and the debate Friday wasn’t going to help

Starting out on an assumption, usually means the rest of the argument is going to be shaky….

And it was!

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 24, 2008 11:51 PM
Comment #264283

Rhinehold, NEITHER Obama NOR McCain have been in D.C., and neither has any influence on the Committees which will put together the bills for a vote. Do you not understand how the legislative process works? I am surprised.

McCain is going to D.C. to rally Republican support in the House for the bail out, because if Republicans cause the ‘rescue’ to fail, and the economy sours before the election, McCain loses. It is just that simple.

Obama is going to D.C. at the request of his President. Obama is not letting McCain dictate his actions. Leadership leads, it doesn’t follow. If McCain needs to recuse himself from the debates and the campaign trail, fine. But, that is a political calculation of McCain’s. McCain’s thimble full of knowledge of economics is neither needed nor wanted in D.C. in terms of putting together a bill that can be passed.

Your partisan lean is showing. Even Reason magazine is hammering McCain’s shifting political tactics as having no principle or anchor. And you call yourself a Libertarian. How on earth could a Libertarian play defense for McCain?

Is Bob Barr so disappointing that you now have to rush to McCain’s defense as McCain “rushes” to defend an American economy he doesn’t even comprehend?

What we are witnessing in our economy is the full fruit of Trickle Down Economics. The capitalists reap the wealth and rewards, and the costs trickle down to every worker and tax payer in America to underwrite their plunder. And your defending this staunch 26 year backer of trickle down economics?

WoW~!!!

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 24, 2008 11:52 PM
Comment #264284
I don’t see why that is so hard to understand?
Because you consistently defend what the GOP does and decry what Democrats do. Your knee jerks. Posted by: LawnBoy at September 24, 2008 11:53 PM
Comment #264285

Maybe he should send Palin in his stead, Obama and Palin have been pretty much running against each other the past few weeks anyway…

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 24, 2008 11:53 PM
Comment #264286

LawnBoy, if McCain cancels the debate in Old Miss, he will be the first Republican to ever lose Mississippi to the Democrats. He will show up.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 24, 2008 11:54 PM
Comment #264287

Lawnboy,

Ridiculous on its face. Perhaps you should take an unbiased look at what I say here?


Posted by: Rhinehold at September 24, 2008 11:54 PM
Comment #264288

David,

Here’s a quick summary of McCain’s shifting tactics. It’s not pretty:

First, he declared that the fundamentals of the United States economy are strong. The next day he called for a 9/11-style commission to examine the crisis…Later Mr. McCain announced that Christopher Cox, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, should resign, which led even the conservative Wall Street Journal editorial page to push back against the G.O.P. nominee. Now, Mr. McCain believes the financial crisis is so serious that he announced his leave from the campaign trail to shepherd a bailout plan through Congress.
Posted by: LawnBoy at September 24, 2008 11:56 PM
Comment #264289

Rhinehold said: “Actually, immediately fixing the Fair Value Accounting rules would minimize the issue pretty quickly. But that’s not very progressive…”

To profit whom, Rhinehold? When it comes to money, what is fair to one, is often unfair to others.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 24, 2008 11:56 PM
Comment #264290

David,

You assume that this strategy isn’t going to work. A lot of people said that Palin wasn’t going to work either, but it did. Maybe he is a little smarter at this than people give him credit for? In trying to make him Bush it seems many of his opponents forget that he is a lot smarter than Bush is… I know, not hard, but true…

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 24, 2008 11:56 PM
Comment #264291

oldguy-

Oh, wait a minute, he changed his mind when invited by President Bush.

Nope. He was invited to a meeting in Washington, not to suspend his campaign. And as I hear it, since McCain isn’t on the committees in question, all he’s going to be doing tomorrow is that damn meeting with Bush.

As for voting fraud, The measures meant to prevent it have disenfranchised people more than they’ve guaranteed the sanctity of their votes. Research the Attorneys Firing Scandal. Part of the whole controversy there was that Attorneys weren’t finding the evidence of voting fraud the Bush Administration wanted to find, but they wanted the Attorneys finding them anyways.

It’s a political strategy more than any honest attempt to ensure the integrity of the process.

As far as handling more than one thing at once, when the next president gets into office, they will have an economic crisis, two wars, three french hens, two turtle doves, and a partridge in a pear tree. We need somebody who can handle that, because reality will not allow us those kinds of breaks.

As for leaving oneself out of a negotiation, let me ask you a question: as a libertarian, aren’t you in favor of Government leaving itself out of the equation until its needed? Or do you prefer micromanagement?

Concerning the timing of when the candidates who win will be president, officially they will be in charge on January 20th of next year, but unofficially, the President Elect’s going to be making plenty of choices and plans before they move in completely.

As for how many votes he’s missed? I believe he missed a number of important bills. I think he even missed FISA!

Man, you’re bringing more apologetics here on McCain’s behalf than most Republicans are willing to.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 24, 2008 11:59 PM
Comment #264292

It will more accurately value those assets that are considered worthless now, even though they aren’t. Just because the market today says that something is worthless doesn’t mean that they are.

Former FDIC Chairman William M Isaac explains it well here:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178603685354943.html?mod=special_page_campaign2008_mostpop

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 25, 2008 12:00 AM
Comment #264293

Rhinehold,

I’m not going to get into a meta-argument or flame war about all of your various comments over the years. My perception is that you’ve been consistent in a way you deny. Maybe I’ve just seen only the exact half of your comments that would support my impression and missed the other half. I don’t know. Maybe it’s all my bias.

But McCain’s announcement was so ludicrous that your defense of it does little to dissuade me from my impression.

Posted by: LawnBoy at September 25, 2008 12:00 AM
Comment #264294

Rhinehold said: “I mean, Glenn and McCain where exonerated from any wrongdoing… “

Once again, your command of made up history is remarkable. McCain and Glenn received a reprimand. And McCain said in a taped interview of his part in the scandal, it was the lowest point in his life. Note: Lower than than his Hanoi Hilton experience by his own words. Check the record Rhinehold. He was NOT exonerated.

His and Glenn’s reprimands were lighter than the other 3, and one can argue till the cows come home whether that was due to his their Hero Status or other factors. But, McCain was the only one of the 5 with direct personal financial transactions with Lincoln Savings and Keating.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 25, 2008 12:03 AM
Comment #264295

McCain wants to postpone the debtate?

Very strange.

McCain goaded Obama for not wanting to debate, and now McCain wants to postpone the debate because there is no consensus on the potential $700 Billion bail-out?

What does John McCain hope to offer to change that?

OHHHHhhhhhhh … that’s right - John McCain said:

    “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should. I’ve got Greenspan’s Book”.

That’s nice.
Barnes and Noble has that book too - perhaps they should run for office too?
So, I wonder what McCain learned from Greenspan’s book?
After all, from what I’ve heard, Greenspan’s book tries to blame everything on Bush.

Good. So John McCain “got Greenspan’s Book”.

Therefore, I’d like to ask John McCain one simple question:

Where? Borrow and create more money out of thin air?

Not only will this bail-out not work, because it is too late, and the debt is too large.
This debt is double or triple (or more) than the Savings and Loan bail-out.
Why do we have to bail-out Wall Street to save ourselves?
I’m not buying it.
I don’t know why Congress didn’t laugh Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke right out of the room.
Both of them, along with G.W. Bush (43) were telling us for years that everything was fine (rosy, in fact).
Well, it wasn’t was it?
But you don’t have to be a rocket scientist or a master economist to see this coming for a long time.
It’s not possible to spend, borrow, and waste trillions per year without some painful consequences.
There are things that can be done to mitigate damages, but a bail-out is not the solution.
More borrowing and creating more money out of thin air will make the situation worse, by crashing the U.S. Dollar completely.
While there will a lot of pain, a lot of jobs lost, a lot of wealth lost, etc., etc., etc., there will be MORE pain if there is a run on the U.S. Dollar.
Remember, a lot of foreigners are holding U.S. Dollars.
If inflation gets worse than it already is, the U.S. Dollar will become worthless, and the damage will be worse.

Any sort of bail-outs will make things MUCH worse, because:

  • (1) no one knows how much bad debt there is.
    The list below (bankimplode.com/blog/category/writedowns-and-distress/) comes to about $1.2 Trillion in losses, and the FDIC won’t reveal their list of 117 banks on their secret watch list (which IndyMac wasn’t even on when it failed):
    • HBOS PLC - $19.0 Billion (http://bankimplode.com/blog/2008/09/19/hbos-plc/) Posted on September 19, 2008 7:45 PM

    • Merrill Lynch >$83.5 Billion (http://bankimplode.com/blog/2008/09/15/merrill-lynch/) Posted on September 15, 2008 8:49 AM

    • Washington Mutual $28.6 Billion Posted on September 9, 2008 10:35 AM

    • National City $14.9 Billion Posted on September 4, 2008 8:00 PM

    • CIBC $10.7 Billion Posted on August 27, 2008 11:44 AM

    • Bank of Montreal $1.2 Billion Posted on August 26, 2008 1:02 PM

    • Deutsche Bank $155.1 Billion Posted on August 25, 2008 10:02 PM

    • Goldman Sachs $84.2 Billion (http://bankimplode.com/blog/2008/09/23/goldman-sachs/) Posted on August 25, 2008 5:15 PM

    • JP Morgan Chase $20.1 Billion Posted on August 25, 2008 2:15 PM

    • Morgan Stanley $24 Billion Posted on August 15, 2008 1:38 PM

    • Bank of America $51.3 Billion Posted on August 14, 2008 11:16 PM

    • Wachovia $50.5 Billion Posted on August 13, 2008 3:05 PM

    • UBS $92.5 Billion Posted on August 12, 2008 11:22 AM

    • Royal Bank of Scotland $41.7 Billion Posted on August 10, 2008 5:34 PM

    • Citigroup $144.5 Billion Posted on August 7, 2008 3:43 PM

    • BNP Paribas $3.3B Posted on August 6, 2008 11:01 AM

    • Commerzbank $1.06B Posted on August 6, 2008 10:08 AM

    • Societe Generale $30.1B Posted on August 5, 2008 10:08 PM

    • HSBC Bank $27.7B Posted on August 4, 2008 1:12 PM

    • Credit Suisse $94.5 Billion Posted on August 3, 2008 12:20 PM

    • Fifth Third Bancorp $3.6 B Posted on July 22, 2008 5:01 PM

    • SunTrust $2.0B Posted on July 22, 2008 3:33 PM

    • Wells Fargo $27.4 B Posted on July 16, 2008 12:40 PM

    • US Bancorp $2.2B Posted on July 15, 2008 12:13 PM

    • Barclay’s PLC > $15.0 B Posted on June 30, 2008 6:02 PM

    • Royal Bank of Canada $1.4B Posted on May 29, 2008 6:07 PM

    • IKB $14.3 B Posted on May 27, 2008 8:13 PM

    • Mizuho MFG $5.4B Posted on May 22, 2008 2:09 PM

    • Bayern LB $9.8B Posted on May 19, 2008 7:42 AM

    • WestLB AG $4.8B Posted on May 19, 2008 7:35 AM

    • Natixis $3.4B Posted on May 19, 2008 7:31 AM

    • Credit Agricole SA $13.8B Posted on May 12, 2008 5:18 PM

    • Mitsubishi Financial Group $760 Million Posted on April 23, 2008 12:54 AM

    • Bank of NY Mellon $118 Million Posted on April 9, 2008 11:19 AM

    • Sovereign Bancorp $1.580 Billion Posted on April 8, 2008 1:29 PM

    • DZ BANK AG $2.1 Billion Posted on March 7, 2008 9:52 PM

    • HSBC $26.5 Billion Posted on March 5, 2008 5:25 PM

  • (2) Also, look this list of 186 troubled banks: bankimplode.com/list/troubledbanks.htm .
    Look at how many have negative net assets, or close to it. Is $700 Billion enough? Probably not.

  • (3) Has McCain (or anyone in Congress) looked at the U.S. Dollar lately, relative to other major international currencies for the past 8 years? If the debt is allowed to grow much larger (if it isn’t too late already), the U.S. Dollar is going to be so worthless, it will require a wheelbarrow full of U.S. currency to buy a loaf of bread.

  • (4) Remember these crooks from year 1999 and 2000:
    • Ken Lay (ENRON)

    • Bernard Ebbers (WorldCOM)

    • David Myers (WorldCOM)

    • Dennis Kozlowski (Tyco)

    • Mark H. Swartz (Tyco)

    • John Rigas (Aldelphia)

    • Timothy Rigas (Aldelphia)

    • Scott Sullivan (WorldCOM)

    • Burford Yates (WolrdCOM)

    • Jeff Skilling (ENRON)

    • Andrew Fastow (ENRON)

    • Lea Fastow (ENRON)

    • Samuel D. Waksal (ImClone Systems)

    • David Duncan (Arthur Andersen)

    • E. Kirk Shelton (Cendant)

    • Ben Glisan Jr. (ENRON)

    • Dan Boyle (ENRON)

    • Weston Smith (HealthSouth)

    • Aaron Beam (HealthSouth)

    Well, here we are again.

  • (5) Congress is already too corrupt. Congress will pervert this bail-out. Congress carries the water for their big-money donors. There will be massive corruption all throughout any bail-out (based on track records and recent events).

  • (6) Some people are trying to use fear to panic Congress into this $700 Billion bail-out. That does not mean we don’t have a huge problem, but they didn’t magically come about overnight and, Congress and voters must understand that there will be no easy or quick fixes. This bail-out still won’t avoid a lot of pain and misery. That sort of mentality helped get us where we are today. These 17+ economic conditions didn’t get this way overnight: One-Simple-Idea.com/NeverWorse.htm . Throwing $700 Billion at the problem will not fix the problem. And $700 Billion is probably not enough. More borrowing, spending, and money-printing is riskier than working through the debt with corporations filing bankruptcy, and using their assets to pay off creditors to the extent possible. That’s what any individual would be forced to do, so the same process should apply to Wall Street.

  • (7) The Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury should not be the flunkies for Wall Street. There is an obvious conflict of interest.

  • (8) It is socialization of debt. That is un-American. It is screwing tax-payers, via inflation and debt heaped on future generations. It’s time for this generation to bite the bullet, and take its medicine. Perhaps this is what voters need to open their eyes to their own irresponsibility by repeatedly rewarding bad politicians with perpetual re-election, despite 9% approval ratings for Congress. Regardless, the voters are going to get their education, and trying to avoid it with a bail-out will simply make it more painful. All of this bad debt needs to stay with those that created it. No one should be getting a bail-out. Especially not Wall Street, banks, and corporations! If those corporations fail, then that’s too bad, because trying to keep them all afloat won’t work, and will simply make the problem worse. Yes, there will be pain and misery, but it wasn’t like we were not warned over and over and over.

  • (9) Everyone and their dog will be lining up for a bail-out. And many people will be demanding that their mortgage be paid down. The auto-makers and airlines will be lining up for more bail-outs.

  • (10) Even if the bail-out worked, what lesson would be learned? There were a lot of things that could have avoided the problem we have today, but none of them happened, time after time. Since no lesson is learned, it will probably be a very short time before we discover we are still in deep trouble, because no one will have learned anything. Unfortunately, pain is sometimes necessary. A bail-out will simply encourage more fiscal irresponsibility. And there will be a lot of people getting bailed-out that do not deserve it, and a lot of people who were victims of fraud who will get none. Besides, the bail-out will simply make the debt problem worse, and erode the U.S. Dollar, in which case, it won’t matter how big the bail-out is.

If the government wants to do something constructive, how about enforcing existing laws?
How about putting some real crooks behind bars?
How about stopping rampant usury and predetory loan practices (perhaps limits on some interest rates?)?
How about fixing the dishonest, usurious, inflationary, predatory monetary system (nothing more than a pyramid scheme used to extract wealth from the unwitting)?
How about making the tax system fair and less regressive?
How about upholding the U.S. Constitution?
How about a BALANCED BUDGET amemdnent, since 38 states (only 34 required) have submitted 136 BALANCED BUDGET/General Call for Article V Convention applications.
How about not starting wars based on false intelligence?
How about stopping illegal immigration that is costing tax-payers an estimated $70 Billion to $327 Billion in annual net losses (One-Simple-Idea.com/BorderSecurity.htm)?
How about not continuing the occupation of Iraq, since there are probably better ways to make the U.S. safer?
How about stopping the rampant pork-barrel, subsidies, waste, and welfare for the wealthy?
How about stopping these 10 abuses: One-Simple-Idea.com/DisparityTrend.htm ?
How about doing something worth while for a change?
How about doing something to keep honest people and business running, instead of some huge, nebulous bail-out for banks and corporations and giving yourself another raise?
And voters, how about doing your part, and stop repeatedly rewarding bought-and-paid-for, corrupt politicians with 85%-to-90% re-election rates?

Or don’t.

Perhaps the voters aren’t feeling enough pain yet?

Perhaps enough voters will be less apathetic, complacent, and blindly partisan when enough of the voters are deep in debt , jobless , homeless , hungry , and , the U.S. Dollar isn’t worth the paper it is printed on ?

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at September 25, 2008 12:04 AM
Comment #264296

“Starting out on an assumption, usually means the rest of the argument is going to be shaky….

Rhinehold, what’s the assumption? McCain’s numbers are sliding and he doesn’t think well on his feet, which doesn’t translate into stellar debating.

Even the latest Fox poll has Obama leading McCain by six points now:

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/24/fox-news-poll-obama-reclaims-lead-over-mccain-45-to-39/

Posted by: pianofan at September 25, 2008 12:04 AM
Comment #264297
We need somebody who can handle that, because reality will not allow us those kinds of breaks.

And I hope that they don’t do things that they don’t have to do to focus on those. In fact, if the president were running for office right now and this was going on, I would HOPE that they would suspend their campaigning for a few days as well…

As for leaving oneself out of a negotiation, let me ask you a question: as a libertarian, aren’t you in favor of Government leaving itself out of the equation until its needed? Or do you prefer micromanagement?

I don’t support the bailout. That doesn’t mean that I don’t think McCain is a bad person for suspending his campaign for a couple of days to be involved in this solution. I don’t think Obama is evil or wrong for not following suit.

I suppose I should just not defend people I disagree with from dishonest attacks… After all, this is a liberal blog, isn’t it? What am I doing here anyway?

Man, you’re bringing more apologetics here on McCain’s behalf than most Republicans are willing to.

Whatever. Excuse me for trying to have some some sort of reasonability on these comment pages.

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 25, 2008 12:07 AM
Comment #264299
But McCain’s announcement was so ludicrous that your defense of it does little to dissuade me from my impression.

Color me surprised.

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 25, 2008 12:08 AM
Comment #264300

Rhinehold-
It might work, but it’s off to a fairly rocky start. He told David Letterman he had to go right to Washington. But then he stayed behind and did an interview with Katey Couric.

That didn’t go over well. McCain’s impulsiveness makes it difficult for his stunts to be taken seriously. It also makes people doubt his sincerity, his straight talk. McCain’s worst enemy is himself. Obama, I think, just has to stand out of the way and make appropriately observant, witty comments about McCain’s debate with himself.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 25, 2008 12:09 AM
Comment #264301

Rhinehold, no one is saying the value of those defaulted and defaulting securities is zero. Only that the there is no way to value them at this time. If the government (tax payers) buy them at x price today, there is no way of determining if they are now, or will be in the future, actually worth x. Many of these vacated mortgage properties were trashed and gutted by the owner as they abandoned the property. Leaving them in a horribly reduced value status from what even their square footage and neighborhood paramaters would indicate.

There is also no guarantee that the housing market will rebound. This ‘fix’ doesn’t fix the underlying economic fundamentals of a slowing economy and contracting middle class consumer demand nor the inflation situation eating at disposable income which Bernanke continues to remind folks is the other negative side of this bailout.

It could literally be a decade or more, if ever, that these most of these properties recover their mortgage value on the actual market of the future.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 25, 2008 12:11 AM
Comment #264302

Rhinehold said: “You assume that this strategy isn’t going to work.”

Where did I assume that? Please quote the words. Seems you are the one assuming here that I was assuming.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 25, 2008 12:16 AM
Comment #264303
McCain and Glenn received a reprimand. And McCain said in a taped interview of his part in the scandal, it was the lowest point in his life.

“Senators John Glenn and John McCain were cleared of having acted improperly but were criticized for having exercised “poor judgment”.”

Yes, being attached to that scandal and being involved with someone who he didn’t know was under investigation for illegalities was a pretty low point, I am sure. But he did nothing wrong other than being involved with others who were clearly doing something dishonerable.

Please please please tell me exactly what McCain did in this scandal that was wrong other than being with the wrong people at the wrong time? You know, like consorting with Democrats in a bi-partisan manner and it getting him tied to this scandal. And then still working with Democrats in the future as if he didn’t learn his lesson?

The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the scheme was also minimal, and he too was cleared of all charges against him.[29][28] McCain was criticized by the Committee for exercising “poor judgment” when he met with the federal regulators on Keating’s behalf.[7] The report also said that McCain’s “actions were not improper nor attended with gross negligence and did not reach the level of requiring institutional action against him….Senator McCain has violated no law of the United States or specific Rule of the United States Senate.”[31] On his Keating Five experience, McCain has said: “The appearance of it was wrong. It’s a wrong appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators, because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. And it was the wrong thing to do.”
Posted by: Rhinehold at September 25, 2008 12:17 AM
Comment #264305
Rhinehold, no one is saying the value of those defaulted and defaulting securities is zero. Only that the there is no way to value them at this time.

At market value. That is what is wrong with the law put in place, it does not allow for situations like this when the market is dropped on these assets. There are other ways to attribute a value to them, but it is illegal to do so under the current law.


Posted by: Rhinehold at September 25, 2008 12:21 AM
Comment #264306

For you Naderites, here is what Ralph has to say:

Senator John McCain’s decision to suspend his campaign and participation in the first presidential debate is pure and simple showboating. The Washington DC bailout by Bush and his Congressional allies of the Wall Street crooks and speculators is not dependent on Senator McCain’s return to Washington.

He has been an advocate of the deregulation that caused this debacle and offers nothing significant to address it. However, tens of millions of Americans depended on Senator McCain to show up at Friday’s debate in Old Mississippi.

They expected him to do so and have arranged their plans to watch him interact with Barack Obama. By turning his back on at least 50 million American voters anticipating Friday’s debate, he has dishonored his commitment and undermined the respect which he hoped the American people would accord him during his presidential campaign.

I urge him to restore his honor and self-respect by ending this political stunt and maturely fulfilling his commitment on the presidential debate stage this Friday.

Should he choose to maintain his present, impulsive course and leave an empty chair on the stage, I would be most pleased to take his place as the number three Presidential candidate in the race.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 25, 2008 12:23 AM
Comment #264307
Rhinehold said: “You assume that this strategy isn’t going to work.”

Where did I assume that? Please quote the words. Seems you are the one assuming here that I was assuming.

Well, in your article you said:

My bet is, the ruse will end up appearing like, well, a ruse, a feint, a dodge, a one day case of pneumonia on the big quiz day, which is precisely what it is.

I guess you are saying then that this will be seen as a ruse, but will still work! That’s McCain is pretty impressive to do that, IMO.

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 25, 2008 12:23 AM
Comment #264308

Stephen,

I would have to look at the itinerary, but I am pretty sure he left before Letterman started filming, usually occurring after 5:00pm EDT. Getting a 10 minute interview in before he leaves town is a little different than staying long enough to make an appearance on a show that he has been on DOZENS of times and tapes later in the day…

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 25, 2008 12:25 AM
Comment #264309

SD
“As far as handling more than one thing at once, when the next president gets into office, they will have an economic crisis, two wars, three french hens, two turtle doves, and a partridge in a pear tree…”

BHO will continue to let Barney Frank and Chris Dodd handle the economic crisis, he will turn tail and run on the wars, and he will send the 3 french hens, 2 turtle doves, and the partridge to his half brother, in Africa, who is living on a dollar a month. Problem solved

Posted by: Oldguy at September 25, 2008 12:26 AM
Comment #264310

“Of all of those votes, wouldn’t you say that THIS one is the most important, much more than a congressional proclamation, etc?”

Well if he wasn’t involved in the AIG issue, The Freddie and Fannie issue, the Bear Stearns issue etc. why now? The first $300 billion doesn’t count? He is saying that by Friday morning the House doesn’t have a bill passed then he needs to skip out of a Friday night debate- for what? Is Congress in session Friday night? How do you spell phony -McCain.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 25, 2008 12:29 AM
Comment #264311

Rhinehold, Rhinehold, Rhinehold, suddenly you trust the judgment of Democrats and Republicans on that ethics committee to have rendered a fair, and just and non-political non-partisan judgment on the many years long VERY CLOSE relationship between Keating and McCain after McCain’s many trips to Keating’s Bahama’s resort on Keatings private jet, after McCain cast votes and lobbied for legislation beneficial to the deregulation of the Savings & Loan industry?

Wow~!!! Now your comments are even beginning to flip-flop like McCain’s. I am impressed with your talent for mimicry.

Do some research, Rhinehold. There is a whole history behind the Keating 5 story that is not reflected in the political damage control ruling of the ethics committee.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 25, 2008 12:30 AM
Comment #264312

Rhinehold, a bet is an assessment of odds.

We will see if the bet is won by the polls in this coming week.

Posted by: David R. Remer at September 25, 2008 12:34 AM
Comment #264313

I posted this comment in the Blue Column thread, but since it applies here too, I thought I’d repost it:

David,
You might be right about McCain going to DC to save his campaign, but that still doesn’t explain the need for McCain to have totally suspended his campaign, or try to cancel this debate, or push back or eliminate the VP debate entirely.

Obama obviously doesn’t think those steps were at all necessary. He made this statement directly:

“I believe we should continue to have the debate. I believe it makes sense for us to present ourselves to the American people. Obviously if it turns out that we need to be in Washington, we’ve both got big planes, we’ve painted our slogan on the side of them. They can get us from Washington to Mississippi pretty quickly.”

Also another statement from his campaign:

“A few moments ago, President Bush called Senator Obama and asked him to attend a meeting in Washington tomorrow, which he agreed to do. Senator Obama has been working all week with leaders in Congress, Secretary Paulsen, and Chairman Bernanke to improve this proposal, and he has said that he will continue to work in a bipartisan spirit and do whatever is necessary to come up with a final solution. He strongly believes the debate should go forward on Friday so that the American people can hear from their next President about how he will lead America forward at this defining moment for our country,” said Obama-Biden spokesman Bill Burton.

Bush is calling Obama because he’s been working on this issue. As late as yesterday, McCain still hadn’t even read the administration’s vague three-page bailout proposal (which sounded exactly like it was set up to become another one of their trademark fascistic abuses of power).

Don’t you agree that while McCain’s presence on The Hill might seem necessary to the GOP and himself, there was no rational reason to have suspended his campaign, or cancel the debate?
To me it seems transparently clear that he is ridiculously grandstanding on the one hand, and running away in fear — both of his unpreparedness to debate Obama on the economy, and due to a clear desire to allow Palin’s programers to try to cram a bit more info into that empty head of hers.

Btw, it sounds like Obama is going to show up with or without McCain. And maybe this is because Ole Miss Officials: Debate Cancellation Would Be $5.5 Million Loss.

Posted by: Veritas Vincit at September 25, 2008 12:35 AM
Comment #264315

“What we are witnessing in our economy is the full fruit of Trickle Down Economics. The capitalists reap the wealth and rewards, and the costs trickle down to every worker and tax payer in America to underwrite their plunder. And your defending this staunch 26 year backer of trickle down economics?”

“There is also no guarantee that the housing market will rebound. This ‘fix’ doesn’t fix the underlying economic fundamentals of a slowing economy and contracting middle class consumer demand nor the inflation situation eating at disposable income which Bernanke continues to remind folks is the other negative side of this bailout.”

Thank you DRR, you are exactly right this $700 billion plan is an expensive band aid that doesn’t take into account the total problem. To turn the money over to those that caused the problem will only ensure more problems.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 25, 2008 12:39 AM
Comment #264316

David,

I’ve done the research and there is nothing there. McCain was Keating’s senator and was representing him in congress. And they were friends until McCain found out he was crossing the line and cut all ties with him immediately and without question.

Is that not good enough now? Should he have known that Keating was breaking the law before then and avoided representing him when he was Keating’s senator? Is Cindy not allowed to invest in a shopping mall that Keating was involved in because John was a senator?

Do we really want to bring up questionable business deals and wives in these comments, David?

There is every evidence that he didn’t do anything wrong nor did he think he was doing anything wrong until he got caught up in the ‘scandal’ and realized that even the appearance of impropriety was as politically damaging as actually doing something wrong.

And no, I don’t expect you to buy any of that. But I expect you do defend Obama against worse appearances of impropriety.

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 25, 2008 12:40 AM
Comment #264318
Rhinehold, a bet is an assessment of odds.

We will see if the bet is won by the polls in this coming week.

And that was your opinion, that it wouldn’t work…

So, are you admitting that I wasn’t misrepresenting your assessment of the situation?

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 25, 2008 12:53 AM
Comment #264322

Rhinehold-
Should she be careful about her investments? You’re damn right she should be. At best, it creates an impression of corruption, at worst it creates a reality of it.

Ethics are not optional. I know the Republicans and the Right Wing like making excuses about how it’s nothing, but that’s what got them in trouble with all that corruption in the first place. It’s what’s getting McCain in trouble concerning his advisors and everything. McCain seems to care about ethics and conflicts of interest only in front of cameras.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 25, 2008 07:25 AM
Comment #264323

Rhinehold:

Just because the market today says that something is worthless doesn’t mean that they are.

Rhinehold defending Republicans: 2 cents

Rhinehold capitulating capitalism: priceless

Posted by: googlumpugus at September 25, 2008 08:08 AM
Comment #264324

googlumpugus,

It’s a shame all you have is critiquing me, not my message…

I would suggest actually reading and understanding what I am writing before you try to be cute in the future, it might not make you look like you don’t know what you are writing about.

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 25, 2008 08:11 AM
Comment #264327

Maybe if McCain knew how to use a cellphone he wouldn’t have to run off to Washington.

Posted by: Schwamp at September 25, 2008 08:21 AM
Comment #264329

Tell me, Rhinehold:
When is the suspension of a campaign not really the suspension of a campaign?

McCain, in my opinion, is jumping on the bandwagon playing an electric guitar. He weathervanes on issues, and then makes all the noise he can to make himself look serious.

America doesn’t need his help in this, and he can’t even really give much. He’s like the king at the end of Dragonslayer who shows up at the corpse of the dragon the heroes just killed to claim credit for what everybody else worked and sacrificed for. This, after five months of not showing up to deal with the crisis or any other thing, this after believing, nearly a hundred percent of that time, that the fundamentals of the economy were sound (or at least saying that.)

This isn’t a profile in courage. This is him, once again, pulling political stunts to make himself look good. This is Republican politics nowadays: months, if not years of denying there’s a problem followed by a frenzied period of legislation or regulation during which political panic is the name of the game.

We need a steady hand in government. We need somebody who’s got an interest in getting it right. We need somebody who can multi-task calmly. We need somebody who knows where their leadership is needed and where it is not. We need judgment. Experience without judgment is worthless. That’s the whole point of being experienced. If I have a choice between a senior senator with plenty of experience but poor impulse control, and one with less experience, but who does better with it, why should I pick the guy whose experience hasn’t blessed him with wisdom?

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 25, 2008 08:27 AM
Comment #264330

Rhinehold:

Reading is fundamental. Criticizing you: not there.

Criticizing your defense of stupid Republican tactics and fiat revaluation of assets is there.

Some might say your retort is on the level of Sara Palin’s avoidance of issues. If the mean old press would just stop attacking her she’d appear competent.

Posted by: googlumpugus at September 25, 2008 08:39 AM
Comment #264333

Glenn Contrarian, you wrote-

“I asked you if you had found ANY evidence of Democratic election fraud (not simply individual voter fraud, mind you). Have you found any?

I was a Texas election judge in the last presidential election. During that election there was a concerted bogus push by Democrats to convict Republican precincts, in the eyes of the general public, of attempting to violate citizens’ voting rights. I had as many as four Democrat observers in the precinct at one time and one so-called voter attempted to cast a ballot though there was no record that she had ever registered to vote, not only in my precinct, but even in any other part of Walker County. Her I.D. showed her to be a resident of Harris County.

As I went through the process of preparing her provisional ballot she went outside and called a Houston radio call-in show (standing within 100 feet of the polling place, a violation of Texas election law) to launch into a tirade about how a Republican pricinct judge was denying her right to vote in the presidential election.

The Democrat observers, local college professors, were mortified, by the way.

There is no question whatsoever that some Democratic circles were trying to intimidate Republican election judges into permitting fraudulent voters to simply pass.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at September 25, 2008 08:53 AM
Comment #264336

Another note on my previous post- I have spoken with other election judges who had similar experiences which, like mine, coincided with the after-work rush and evening drive time.

Most honest provisional ballots are cast, not by young people like my antagonist, but by older people who have failed to vote for such a long period of time (usually about ten years) their names have been purged from voter rolls for inactivity.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at September 25, 2008 09:12 AM
Comment #264339

Rhinehold,

Here’s another analysis that agrees with mine:

McCain has been in the Senate 25 years. He knows precisely what will happen if he barges into the office of Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), chairman of the Senate banking committee and announces: “OK, Outta here, I’m taking over now. Dodd’s reaction would not be printable on a family Website like this one and McCain would be instantly and unceremoniously shown the door. There are two people responsible for writing banking bills: Dodd and his House counterpart Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA). If Dodd wants input from the Republicans on this, he will ask the ranking member on his committee, Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL). McCain and Obama play no role and McCain knows that very well.

So why did McCain propose cancelling the debate? In a word: politics. By flying into D.C. as the savior he might appear as a man of action to people who don’t know how the Senate works. The reality of course, is that Obama and McCain’s appearance in Dodd’s office would instantly turn the entire event into a political circus. If left alone, Dodd can come up with a bill a lot faster than with McCain, Obama, and the entire national press corps in the room “helping.”

If McCain wants to fly back to Washington to not be part of the solution (since he’s not on the right committees anyway), he’s welcome to. But to say that he’s doing it for the good of the nation, and that Obama should be doing the same is just pretending.

Hail Marys sometimes work. But three Hail Marys in a month give the impression that he’s impetuous, reckless, and unserious.

Posted by: LawnBoy at September 25, 2008 09:41 AM
Comment #264343

Lee Jamison-
Some idiots always try something. The question is how highly placed the idiots are. McCain’s campaign is trying to yank the voting rights of those whose homes just got foreclosed. Talk about adding insult to injury.

The right to vote is more important than preventing fraud. You can always prosecute those who commit it. You can’t give back somebody their vote in an election.

Besides, the irony of all this is that this push has come in the wake of the 2000 election, where the problem was absolutely not about voter fraud, but rather the voter’s ability to see their votes properly registered as they cast them.

On that count, The GOP’s substituted one bad voting system for another, undependable electronic replacements for undependable mechanical voting machine.

Republicans should really stop using these crisises as an excuse to go off on some separate tangent of an agenda. All they’re going to do is motivate people to deep-six them.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 25, 2008 10:13 AM
Comment #264349

McCain wants to postpone the debtate?

Very strange.

McCain goaded Obama for not wanting to debate, and now McCain wants to postpone the debate because there is no consensus on the potential $700 Billion bail-out?

What does John McCain hope to offer to change that?

OHHHHhhhhhhh … that’s right - John McCain said:

    “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should. I’ve got Greenspan’s Book”.

That’s nice.
Barnes and Noble has that book too - perhaps they should run for office too?
So, I wonder what McCain learned from Greenspan’s book?
After all, from what I’ve heard, Greenspan’s book tries to blame everything on Bush.

Good. So John McCain “got Greenspan’s Book”.

Therefore, I’d like to ask John McCain one simple question:

Where? Borrow and create more money out of thin air?

Not only will this bail-out not work, because it is too late, and the debt is too large.
This debt is double or triple (or more) than the Savings and Loan bail-out.
Why do we have to bail-out Wall Street to save ourselves?
I’m not buying it.
I don’t know why Congress didn’t laugh Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke right out of the room.
Both of them, along with G.W. Bush (43) were telling us for years that everything was fine (rosy, in fact).
Well, it wasn’t was it?
But you don’t have to be a rocket scientist or a master economist to see this coming for a long time.
It’s not possible to spend, borrow, and waste trillions per year without some painful consequences.
There are things that can be done to mitigate damages, but a bail-out is not the solution.
More borrowing and creating more money out of thin air will make the situation worse, by crashing the U.S. Dollar completely.
While there will a lot of pain, a lot of jobs lost, a lot of wealth lost, etc., etc., etc., there will be MORE pain if there is a run on the U.S. Dollar.
Remember, a lot of foreigners are holding U.S. Dollars.
If inflation gets worse than it already is, the U.S. Dollar will become worthless, and the damage will be worse.

Any sort of bail-outs will make things MUCH worse, because:

  • (1) no one knows how much bad debt there is.
    The list below (bankimplode.com/blog/category/writedowns-and-distress/) comes to about $1.2 Trillion in losses, and the FDIC won’t reveal their list of 117 banks on their secret watch list (which IndyMac wasn’t even on when it failed):
    • HBOS PLC - $19.0 Billion (bankimplode.com/blog/2008/09/19/hbos-plc/) Posted on September 19, 2008 7:45 PM

    • Merrill Lynch >$83.5 Billion (bankimplode.com/blog/2008/09/15/merrill-lynch/) Posted on September 15, 2008 8:49 AM

    • Washington Mutual $28.6 Billion Posted on September 9, 2008 10:35 AM

    • National City $14.9 Billion Posted on September 4, 2008 8:00 PM

    • CIBC $10.7 Billion Posted on August 27, 2008 11:44 AM

    • Bank of Montreal $1.2 Billion Posted on August 26, 2008 1:02 PM

    • Deutsche Bank $155.1 Billion Posted on August 25, 2008 10:02 PM

    • Goldman Sachs $84.2 Billion (bankimplode.com/blog/2008/09/23/goldman-sachs/) Posted on August 25, 2008 5:15 PM

    • JP Morgan Chase $20.1 Billion Posted on August 25, 2008 2:15 PM

    • Morgan Stanley $24 Billion Posted on August 15, 2008 1:38 PM

    • Bank of America $51.3 Billion Posted on August 14, 2008 11:16 PM

    • Wachovia $50.5 Billion Posted on August 13, 2008 3:05 PM

    • UBS $92.5 Billion Posted on August 12, 2008 11:22 AM

    • Royal Bank of Scotland $41.7 Billion Posted on August 10, 2008 5:34 PM

    • Citigroup $144.5 Billion Posted on August 7, 2008 3:43 PM

    • BNP Paribas $3.3B Posted on August 6, 2008 11:01 AM

    • Commerzbank $1.06B Posted on August 6, 2008 10:08 AM

    • Societe Generale $30.1B Posted on August 5, 2008 10:08 PM

    • HSBC Bank $27.7B Posted on August 4, 2008 1:12 PM

    • Credit Suisse $94.5 Billion Posted on August 3, 2008 12:20 PM

    • Fifth Third Bancorp $3.6 B Posted on July 22, 2008 5:01 PM

    • SunTrust $2.0B Posted on July 22, 2008 3:33 PM

    • Wells Fargo $27.4 B Posted on July 16, 2008 12:40 PM

    • US Bancorp $2.2B Posted on July 15, 2008 12:13 PM

    • Barclay’s PLC > $15.0 B Posted on June 30, 2008 6:02 PM

    • Royal Bank of Canada $1.4B Posted on May 29, 2008 6:07 PM

    • IKB $14.3 B Posted on May 27, 2008 8:13 PM

    • Mizuho MFG $5.4B Posted on May 22, 2008 2:09 PM

    • Bayern LB $9.8B Posted on May 19, 2008 7:42 AM

    • WestLB AG $4.8B Posted on May 19, 2008 7:35 AM

    • Natixis $3.4B Posted on May 19, 2008 7:31 AM

    • Credit Agricole SA $13.8B Posted on May 12, 2008 5:18 PM

    • Mitsubishi Financial Group $760 Million Posted on April 23, 2008 12:54 AM

    • Bank of NY Mellon $118 Million Posted on April 9, 2008 11:19 AM

    • Sovereign Bancorp $1.580 Billion Posted on April 8, 2008 1:29 PM

    • DZ BANK AG $2.1 Billion Posted on March 7, 2008 9:52 PM

    • HSBC $26.5 Billion Posted on March 5, 2008 5:25 PM

  • (2) Also, look at this list of 186 troubled banks: bankimplode.com/list/troubledbanks.htm .
    Look at how many have negative net assets, or close to it. Is $700 Billion enough? Probably not.

  • (3) Has McCain (or anyone in Congress) looked at the U.S. Dollar lately, relative to other major international currencies for the past 8 years? If the debt is allowed to grow much larger (if it isn’t too late already), the U.S. Dollar is going to be so worthless, it will require a wheelbarrow full of U.S. currency to buy a loaf of bread.

  • (4) Remember these crooks from year 1999 and 2000:
    • Ken Lay (ENRON)

    • Bernard Ebbers (WorldCOM)

    • David Myers (WorldCOM)

    • Dennis Kozlowski (Tyco)

    • Mark H. Swartz (Tyco)

    • John Rigas (Aldelphia)

    • Timothy Rigas (Aldelphia)

    • Scott Sullivan (WorldCOM)

    • Burford Yates (WolrdCOM)

    • Jeff Skilling (ENRON)

    • Andrew Fastow (ENRON)

    • Lea Fastow (ENRON)

    • Samuel D. Waksal (ImClone Systems)

    • David Duncan (Arthur Andersen)

    • E. Kirk Shelton (Cendant)

    • Ben Glisan Jr. (ENRON)

    • Dan Boyle (ENRON)

    • Weston Smith (HealthSouth)

    • Aaron Beam (HealthSouth)

    Well, here we are again.

  • (5) Congress is already too corrupt. Congress will pervert this bail-out. Congress carries the water for their big-money donors. There will be massive corruption all throughout any bail-out (based on track records and recent events).

  • (6) Some people are trying to use fear to panic Congress into this $700 Billion bail-out. That does not mean we don’t have a huge problem, but they didn’t magically come about overnight and, Congress and voters must understand that there will be no easy or quick fixes. This bail-out still won’t avoid a lot of pain and misery. That sort of mentality helped get us where we are today. These 17+ economic conditions didn’t get this way overnight: One-Simple-Idea.com/NeverWorse.htm . Throwing $700 Billion at the problem will not fix the problem. And $700 Billion is probably not enough. More borrowing, spending, and money-printing is riskier than working through the debt with corporations filing bankruptcy, and using their assets to pay off creditors to the extent possible. That’s what any individual would be forced to do, so the same process should apply to Wall Street.

  • (7) The Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury should not be the flunkies for Wall Street. There is an obvious conflict of interest.

  • (8) It is socialization of debt. That is un-American. It is screwing tax-payers, via inflation and debt heaped on future generations. It’s time for this generation to bite the bullet, and take its medicine. Perhaps this is what voters need to open their eyes to their own irresponsibility by repeatedly rewarding bad politicians with perpetual re-election, despite 9% approval ratings for Congress. Regardless, the voters are going to get their education, and trying to avoid it with a bail-out will simply make it more painful. All of this bad debt needs to stay with those that created it. No one should be getting a bail-out. Especially not Wall Street, banks, and corporations! If those corporations fail, then that’s too bad, because trying to keep them all afloat won’t work, and will simply make the problem worse. Yes, there will be pain and misery, but it wasn’t like we were not warned over and over and over.

  • (9) Everyone and their dog will be lining up for a bail-out. And many people will be demanding that their mortgage be paid down. The auto-makers and airlines will be lining up for more bail-outs.

  • (10) Americans are addicted to credit and borrowing. That’s why some businesses will fail. Too many Americans spend too much time and energy trying to make money by playing with money, instead of using that time and energy to create real value. And inflation fuels it. Everyone is running around like a chicken with its head cut-off, trying to avoid the erosion of their money due to incessant inflation for the last 52 consecutive years. By the way, inflation, based on the 1983 measurement methods, is 15.6% (One-Simple-Idea.com/CPI1.jpg)

  • (11) Even if the bail-out worked, what lesson would be learned? There were a lot of things that could have avoided the problem we have today, but none of them happened, time after time. Since no lesson is learned, it will probably be a very short time before we discover we are still in deep trouble, because no one will have learned anything. Unfortunately, pain is sometimes necessary. A bail-out will simply encourage more fiscal irresponsibility. And there will be a lot of people getting bailed-out that do not deserve it, and a lot of people who were victims of fraud who will get none. Besides, the bail-out will simply make the debt problem worse, and erode the U.S. Dollar, in which case, it won’t matter how big the bail-out is.

If the government wants to do something constructive, how about enforcing existing laws?
How about putting some real crooks behind bars?
How about stopping rampant usury and predetory loan practices (perhaps limits on some interest rates?)?
How about fixing the dishonest, usurious, inflationary, predatory monetary system (nothing more than a pyramid scheme used to extract wealth from the unwitting)?
How about making the tax system fair and less regressive?
How about upholding the U.S. Constitution?
How about a BALANCED BUDGET amemdnent, since 38 states (only 34 required) have submitted 136 BALANCED BUDGET/General Call for Article V Convention applications.
How about not starting wars based on false intelligence?
How about stopping illegal immigration that is costing tax-payers an estimated $70 Billion to $327 Billion in annual net losses (One-Simple-Idea.com/BorderSecurity.htm)?
How about not continuing the occupation of Iraq, since there are probably better ways to make the U.S. safer?
How about stopping the rampant pork-barrel, subsidies, waste, and welfare for the wealthy?
How about stopping these 10 abuses: One-Simple-Idea.com/DisparityTrend.htm ?
How about doing something worth while for a change?
How about doing something to keep honest people and business running, instead of some huge, nebulous bail-out for banks and corporations and giving yourself another raise?
And voters, how about doing your part, and stop repeatedly rewarding bought-and-paid-for, corrupt politicians with 85%-to-90% re-election rates?

Or don’t.

Perhaps the voters aren’t feeling enough pain yet?

Perhaps enough voters will be less apathetic, complacent, and blindly partisan when enough of the voters are deep in debt , jobless , homeless , hungry , and , the U.S. Dollar isn’t worth the paper it is printed on ?

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at September 25, 2008 10:45 AM
Comment #264352

Polls show most Americans are against this bail-out, yet Congress seems likely to do it anyway.

But why not, when most voters repeatedly reward bad politicians with perpetual re-election?

Some say this toxic debt isn’t worthless, and some profit may still be made.

HHHHhhhmmmm … and do you think tax-payers will get any of that supposed profit?

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at September 25, 2008 11:05 AM
Comment #264411

Stephen Daugherty, You wrote-

“Besides, the irony of all this is that this push has come in the wake of the 2000 election, where the problem was absolutely not about voter fraud, but rather the voter’s ability to see their votes properly registered as they cast them.”

This statement is wrong on two counts. First, voter fraud, while a felony in most states, is virtually never prosecuted. I even recall, but can’t pull up on the spur of the moment, a leader of one voter registration drive calling illegally registering voters a “victimless crime” on the grounds that everyone, regardless of legal status, should have a “right” to vote. That right, as I explain below, arises from the states, and thus it is defined by the states. Voter fraud is not, however, a victimless crime. In fact, as we saw in 2000, when voters in Florida’s more conservative panhandle counties were persuaded, by new bureaus calling the state for Gore immediately after the portion of the state that was in the Eastern time zone closed polling, not to vote, very small differences in vote totals can make a huge difference in a national election.

Remember, that had ANY state Bush won gone to Gore he would have won the Electoral College. It was, also remember, ONE AND ONLY ONE illegally rigged precinct box that launched the career of Lyndon Johnson and bequeathed to history the legacy of the Viet Nam war.

Secondly, prior to the notes on the “right” to vote, let’s also explore what the Constitution says about disputes over presidential elections WITHIN states. Article 2, Section 1, paragraph 2 states the following-

“Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.”

In other words the authority for choosing electors in a state falls to the state legislature.

People who claim the Supreme Court was wrong to intervene in the election of 2000 are correct, but only to the extent that NO COURT is authorized to intervene in the choosing of electors. The Florida Supreme Court also had no jurisdiction, so actions pre-empting their intrusion into the election process were, on technical grounds, correct. Had the Florida Legislature chosen to intervene in the election they could literally have chosen whomever they wished.


The U.S. Constitution does not specifically grant the right to vote. It specifies how people shall be represented and that the STATES shall choose how their representatives shall be elected. (Art. 1 Sect.4)

The election of presidents is controlled by Article 1, section 1, and by the 12th Amendment, neither of which directs the states HOW they shall choose their electors.

The 14th amendment, section 2, requires that states HOLDING ELECTIONS to choose their electors shall not discriminate against voters for any reason other than the conviction for the commission of a crime or rebellion, lest the state’s representation be reduced in proportion equal to that of the population disenfranchised.

Nowhere in the Constitution is any state required to hold elections to choose electors. If you have a right to vote it came from your state constitution. The relative EQUALITY of your vote and anybody else’s comes from the U.S. Constitution.

Numerous other areas of the Constitution address the application of voting rights, but none specifically define them.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at September 25, 2008 01:34 PM
Comment #264425
when voters in Florida’s more conservative panhandle counties were persuaded, by new bureaus calling the state for Gore immediately after the portion of the state that was in the Eastern time zone closed polling, not to vote

How stupid, to be persuaded not to vote if voting is not yet over nor counted. I believe this is an assumption, not a reality. Anyone who doesn’t vote because of some prediction in the press is REALLY stupid. And I just don’t buy it.

Posted by: womanmarine at September 25, 2008 02:26 PM
Comment #264431
when voters in Florida’s more conservative panhandle counties were persuaded, by new bureaus calling the state for Gore immediately after the portion of the state that was in the Eastern time zone closed polling, not to vote

I’ve heard about this before, but is there any reason to think this happened? If I were a conservative in the panhandle and had heard that Gore won, I would have been more focused on getting to the polls to try to change the initial result.

This argument seems to have become gospel on the right, but it doesn’t seem plausible to me that the anti-GOP effect would be especially stronger than the pro-GOP effect.

Posted by: LawnBoy at September 25, 2008 02:36 PM
Comment #264443
I’ve heard about this before, but is there any reason to think this happened?

It’s not that only Republicans went home, but once the state was called everyone started to go home. Why spend the time at the polling places when you’ve already been told that your vote isn’t going to count.

Add in that the panhandle is heavily Republican…

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 25, 2008 03:02 PM
Comment #264445

Any citation for that? It just doesn’t make sense to me.

Posted by: LawnBoy at September 25, 2008 03:10 PM
Comment #264446

Yeah, there was a lot… You can find a copy of the book ‘At Any Cost:How Al Gore Tried To Steal The Election’ or check out the Wikipedia link.

All five major networks made the incorrect assumption that all of Florida’s polls closed at 7:00 p.m. EST, which was not the case. All five of them reported this incorrect statement at the top of the 6:00-7:00 hour. Westernmost counties in Florida had polls open until 8:00 p.m. EST, as they were part of the Central Time Zone, so were open for one additional hour. This region of the state traditionally voted mostly Republican. Because of the above mistaken assumption, some media outlets reported at 7:00 p.m. EST that all polls had closed in the state of Florida. Also, significantly, the Voter News Service called the state of Florida for Al Gore at 7:48 p.m. EST. A survey estimate by John McLaughlin & Associates put the number of voters who did not vote due to confusion as high as 15,000, which theoretically reduced Bush’s margin of victory by an estimated 5,000 votes;[7] a study by John Lott found that Bush’s margin of victory was reduced by 7,500 votes.[8] This survey assumes that the turnout in the Panhandle counties (which was 65% of the electorate) would have equalled the statewide average of 68% if the media had not incorrectly reported the polls’ closing time and if the state had not been called for Gore while the polls were still open. This opens the possibility that Bush would have won by a larger victory margin and controversy would have been avoided if the networks had known and reported the correct poll closing times, and called the state after all polls were closed. Some individuals made public statements to the effect that they would have voted for Bush, but did not vote because of the poll close time confusion, or the Gore call.
Posted by: Rhinehold at September 25, 2008 03:15 PM
Comment #264447

Rhinehold,

Those claims are based on assumptions: “This survey assumes that…”

I’m looking for actual evidence, not assumption and conventional wisdom.

Oh well.

Posted by: LawnBoy at September 25, 2008 03:21 PM
Comment #264458

Then I can’t help you. If you can’t take the fact that there was a markedly lower turnout in the panhandle, as well as statements by voters that they went home after learning of the state being called, as evidential facts, one has to wonder what exactly you are looking for?

What ‘evidence’ would you accept? If even *1* person didn’t vote because the state was called, doesn’t that make it an issue? And why are the media outlets not supposed to call states until the polls close again? If it doesn’t matter, if no one can see how it could cause a change in the vote, then we do we even have rules against such things?

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 25, 2008 03:46 PM
Comment #264472
If you can’t take the fact that there was a markedly lower turnout in the panhandle

“lower”? Lower than what? Lower than what some people assume it might have been? That’s no more evidence that people didn’t vote than it’s evidence that the assumption is wrong.

Now this part might be useful:

Some individuals made public statements to the effect that they would have voted for Bush, but did not vote because of the poll close time confusion, or the Gore call.
Unfortunately, it’s not sourced, so I’m not sure it’s real.

If it doesn’t matter, if no one can see how it could cause a change in the vote, then we do we even have rules against such things?
I think it does matter - I think it shouldn’t have happened. However, I’m challenging the assumed conventional wisdom that the mistake had a particular effect when the complete opposite effect is also possible. Posted by: LawnBoy at September 25, 2008 05:35 PM
Comment #264498
“lower”? Lower than what?

Than the turnout of the rest of the state…

There are sourced comments, I just don’t have immediate access to them. I know they are in the book I recommend (I read it).

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 25, 2008 08:56 PM
Comment #264504
Than the turnout of the rest of the state

Yes, the turnout in one place is lower than the turnout in another place. And why should we make the assumption that they should be the same?

Posted by: LawnBoy at September 25, 2008 09:08 PM
Post a comment