I see nothing wrong with McCain statements. on the contrary, he understands whats ahead. if he was a democrat this blunder wouldnt stick to him.
And what's ahead for him is a really bad time in a public debate, a month before the election. A week ago McCain was talking about a fundamentally sound economy. Now he must rush back to Washington for photo ops with the President, while other people deal with an issue most of them had seen coming for months now. Unless someone can think of some reason McCain would suddenly have some potential role in this bailout business besides "defendant" ? He knows almost nothing about the specifics, has little expertise in economics, has no seat on any of the committees involved or role in any relevant agency, and is in the middle of a campaign where he is supposed to be taking every opportunity available to demonstrate his fitness to handle crisis. One primary attribute of those fit to handle crises is adequate preparation - McCain obviously did not have it a week ago, and if he has acquired it in the meantime a debate would be a good chance to show it off. Perhaps he means to put his lobbyists and campaign staff at the disposal of the negotiators. Those guys have plenty of connections on Wall Street.
I agree. But isn't the reason for the rush that the Dems are insistent on closing up shop? I think McCain is sincere in his desire to deal with this crisis. Calling him a pussy for that is ridiculous. Personally, I can't wait to see him debate Obama. Just to show you how fucked up this situation is, I agree with you again. I really don't know if we should do the bail out or not. Ron Paul is (along with our Billy T) predicting a 1989 Soviet collapse type event if this gets out of hand. Many are talking of a depression. It's scary stuff. I really don't relish the thought of an economic collapse because these fucktard son's of bitches made billions giving out loans they had to know could never be repaid. Given the magnitude of the problem, is delaying a debate so much to ask? McCain previously has said he'd rather lose an election than lose a war. I'm also sure he'd rather lose an election than see our economy collapse. Newt Gingerich is a very smart guy, I have great respect for his opinions. Thanks for the link, I'll check out what he had to say. Damn, Tiassa, you're sounding like a conservative. I read a book back in the eighties called The Ominous Parallels by Lenard Piekoff. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! It pointed out the many similarities between modern America and the Weimar Republic. He ended the book noting that, so far, we seemed to be living in a Disneyland version of the Wiemar Republic wherer everything just seemed to go our way. I'm begining to fear we may be moving from the Disneyland version to the rated R version.
as opposed to obama who has a lot of experience. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s2yaFl_CmTE in 2006 McCain said: Sen. John McCain [R-AZ]: Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal. http://www.govtrack.us/congress/record.xpd?id=109-s20060525-16&bill=s109-190 you cant hide the truth forever, sooner or later it will all come out.
No. Taht has nothing to do with it. No doubt. It's significantly his doing, and it makes him look bad. Btu in fact there isn't anything he can do about it. He lacks both the expertise and the common sense, has no relevant authority, and his track record on such matters is terrible. Does he plan to offer advice ? Does he think anyone would listen to it ?
read my post above. McCain was the one who warned on the crisis in the first place almost 2 years ago.
The fact that too many people think two years ago was "in the first place" is one reason McCain has a ghost of a chance of being President today. And the fact that self-serving disingenuous "warnings" delivered by perpetrators about problems they themselves have had significant roles in creating, followed by further contributions to increasing the scale and complexity of those problems through the actions of those self-same perps, are not ridiculed mercilessly in public by all responsible and professional news analysts and contributors to the public discourse, is another.
but he warned of the crisis, obama supported and even was a benefit of the circumstances that brought to the crisis! stop spitting automatic sentences, McCain was wise enough to see two years ahead of his rivals.
So why is McCain refusing to participate in a scheduled debate? Why doesn't he want to tell Americans all about his plan to rescue the economy?
McCain was the one who offered a debate challenge for Obama which Obama declined. WASHINGTON (AP) — Democratic candidate Sen. Barack Obama on Saturday backed away from rival Sen. John McCain's challenge for a series of joint appearances, agreeing only to the standard three debates in the fall. He then wanted to postpone the debate because of the crisis. Obama took the bite by refusing.
Oh, please. He was smart enough, as someone preparing to launch a Presidential campaign, to sign on as belated (the year after its first proposal) cosponsor of a bill that pretended to be a viable reform of a bad situation he himself had helped create, and watched turn ugly for years without lifting a finger. That bill was not only a dubious "reform" (it contained, for example, provisions that would have exempted Freddie and Fannie from certain securities reporting requirements, further deregulating them), not only was already too late to stave off the Phil Gramm (McCain's chief financial advisor) engineered mess, but was unlikely to pass as it had received too little support from McCain or others in the Republican Congress to overcome Presidential and lobbyist opposition. He did so only after it became obvious the bill would die in committee, and so his cheap political grandstand on other people's efforts would not cost him with his financial industry support, as reflected in his close associations with lobbyists hired to guide him in his "reform" efforts (in this case that would have included Rick Davis, soon to be his campaign manager, who kept and simultaneously handled his long time day job as a lobbyist employed by Freddie Mac to influence politicians). That tactic, loudly and publicly espousing fine-sounding legislation that has no chance (some of which he hasn't even bothered to vote on when it hit the floor) while somehow never actually getting any effective reforming done, has been a McCain standard for his entire career.
The flip side of that coin is also to see what the two candidates have to say about the economical fallout that this proposed bailout that will, ultimately, fall to them to deal with in the very near future. I think the American people should have a chance to hear about how the two candidates will handle the economy and what they think should be done in regards to the $7 billion dollar bailout and whether they agree with it or not.. I would suspect that the American public would want to hear solutions and not party rhetoric and the debate is a good chance for them to hear that.. Unfortunately, I suspect the debate will be about the blame game instead of offering solutions. Maybe it might be good to delay the debate but it cannot be delayed until the crisis is over because that will be well until after the election is over.. If it ever does blow over. And the American people deserve answers and discussion now, not later. Can't they do both? Both meet with the President, the leaders of the parties and the Federal Bank as well as debate? Surely that's not too much multi tasking for either of them. McCain is probably reacting to the polls that are blaming his party for the crisis and in a way, quite rightly so. Simply writing a blank cheque may not be the solution.. in fact, it most probably is not the solution. And the American public should be given some idea of how the candidates plan to deal with this crisis and the problems that will arise from it after they take office.
so where were the democrats? they controlled congress in 2006. if McCain is so inexperienced and help create the situation how do you explain this? Sen. John McCain [R-AZ]: Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae's regulator reported that the company's quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal. The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae's former chief executive officer, OFHEO's report shows that over half of Mr. Raines' compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac. The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform. For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac--known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs--and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay. I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole. I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation. The United States Senate May 25, 2006 where was the great reformist Obama all this time? busy smiling?
To split a broad hair In truth, sir, where I differ from conservatives is that conservatives denounce "big government", or whatever, as a generalization. I'm of the opinion that government, of any size, depends on the quality of the governing officers, which in turn depends on the vigilance of the People. Or, in this case, no, I don't trust Congress to write good legislation. But that doesn't mean that, should the People commit themselves to a strong nation and demand quality of their elected officials, Congress can never write good legislation.
Interesting, what if Obama did that before McCain did? Would you think the same thing of him as well? McCain only wanted to postpone the debate until the financial crisis was over can't everyone wait until then?
You must forgive our liberal friends, the pursuit of power, is more important to them than the financial safety of the Citizens of America.
