Maybe It Wasn’t Sarah’s Fault
I’m beginning to think I may have seriously slandered Sarah Palin. I’m serious about this. Let me explain.
Although I watched the Katie Couric interviews and cringed, I was willing to give Palin a chance in the debate. After all, I supported her before she was picked. I know she’s a bright woman who has a solid record of accomplishment in Alaska. And I know she knows how to debate. So, unlike the rest of the country, I didn’t expect her to fall on her face. I wanted to see her go in there and kick Biden’s rear end.
I was terribly disappointed at the beginning of the debate, when she gave tepid responses to Biden’s outrageous statements blaming the current financial crisis on Bush and McCain. As I said:
[S]he was too wedded to talking points and consequently missed several opportunities. She let Joe Biden hang the financial crisis around the Republicans’ neck, when there is ample evidence that Democrats enabled a corrupt Fannie and Freddie. She let Biden paint McCain as a deregulator, when he fought to regulate Fannie and Freddie while Obama took money from those entities.
Every Republican watching that part of the debate should have been furious. She had so many shots she could take, and she almost completely passed on them. For me, it was just about the last straw. The economy is such a huge issue, I thought. How could she drop the ball so badly?
But now I’m wondering:
What if that’s the campaign’s fault?
What if the campaign told Palin not to hit back hard on Fannie and Freddie?
It seems like a crazy theory at first. After all, there’s so much to hit back with. Just look at this video:
The video is just the beginning of what Sarah Palin should have said at the debate. When Barney Frank was telling America:
”These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis.”
John McCain was supporting legislation to regulate Fannie and Freddie, as he told America:
If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie and Freddie pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.
Meanwhile, Obama was busily on his way towards being the second biggest recipient of Fannie and Freddie donations in the Senate. And what does Bill Clinton say about all of this?
I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was President to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Yup, there’s plenty there to hit Democrats with. So why in the world didn’t Sarah Palin bring any of this up? When Joe Biden was pretending that the financial crisis was brought on by Republicans, why wasn’t Sarah Palin throwing the quotes I just gave you right back in his face? Why wasn’t she cramming the Democrats’ past words down their collective throat? I don’t mind telling you I was frustrated.
But I’m starting to think maybe she didn’t do any of this, because McCain’s handlers told her not to.
I have evidence to support my theory. McCain himself, when Barack Obama pretended that he himself had been a visionary on this issue, McCain responded with a tepid “I warned the public too.” And the ad I gave you was from the NRCC, not McCain’s campaign.
Michelle Malkin has expressed the same sentiment:
One of the most glaring failures of both John McCain and Sarah Palin in their debates has been their failure to pound Obama/Biden/the Dems on the Fannie/Freddie/Community Reinvestment Act debacles.
Why? Why? Why are they passing up a golden opportunity to expose the disastrous consequences of decades of Democrat social engineering, minority-mau-mau-ing, and crony pseudocapitalism?
Apparently, the campaign is worried about being called racists, and thinks the argument is too complicated.
Nonsense. It’s a simple argument. Every American paying attention knows that Fannie and Freddie contributed significantly to this problem. All you have to do is play the videos quoting Republicans worrying about Fannie and Freddie, as contrasted with the quotes from Democrats claiming there was no crisis.
If they couldn’t see this crisis coming, how are they going to see an Al Qaeda attack coming?
If the McCain campaign handlers are the reason that Sarah Palin (and John McCain) didn’t hit back hard in the debates on Fannie and Freddie, then they have to be the most stunningly incompetent bunch of campaigners in history. This crisis is the biggest thing going. McCain and Palin have a great argument to make.
LET THEM MAKE THAT ARGUMENT.
Or we’re going to lose.
It’s just that simple.
UPDATE: Oh, Good Lord. Now we’re being told that it’s racist to make the Ayers connection.
It’s really very simple, and depends on what the market does on Monday. If it rallies, then McCain says that he took time off from politics and finger pointing to get the job done, and now that it’s done let’s point out that the Democrats are primarily responsible for the whole mess. If it tanks, then McCain says that he’s the Maverick and that the conventional wisdom espoused by Bush and the Democrats is contrary to the expressed wisdom of the market.
cthulhu (4ff663) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:12 amThis crisis is the biggest thing going.
Yes, and Palin’s background is incredibly impressive given her past record against corruption in Alaska. She beats them all to hell, including McCain.
It is a massive mistake to not point out:
Obama hails from a hotbed of politics as usual. (ex. Forrest Claypool travesty)
This crisis is the result of corruption inbred in DC and Wall Street
Palin brings an outside voice that isn’t afraid to fight her own party to take on corrupt officials.
This is what Americans want.
Apogee (366e8b) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:42 amAlso Patterico, don’t worry about having slandered Palin. Compared to everything else she’s gone through lately from the media, it’s really nothing.
Apogee (366e8b) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:44 amI’m willing for the sake of argument to accept that this is a bipartisan mess, that Messrs Frank, Dodd et al had at least a few enablers on the GOP side of the aisle.
If that’s the case, take a few of their heads off too. This mess is far too big to allow Nancy and Barney to sweep it under the rug. Bipartisanship in reckless indifference ought not bring immunity.
It’s time for anger now, time for the ‘rasoir national’, there’ll be time for ‘healing’ later.
mrkwong (a0f32a) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:45 am“If they couldn’t see this crisis coming, how are they going to see an Al Qaeda attack coming?”
Is that an issue ? I mean, ignoring warnings about something like that then handing out medals after the failure seems to have gone down just fine in the past.
It’s notable that Palin having a few seconds of a deer-in-headlights moment during an interview is somehow worthy of mention when there is the possibility she may have to take over the CinC role.
Those non-hypothetical 7 minutes after the words “America is under attack”, not so much. Crap like that’s excusable after the fact ain’t it.
So, you know, just remember what your standards are for this stuff if the thought of Democrats not taking threats to the country serious enough is a concern, or not being able to handle them when they do concerns you.
I’m sure if a lot of Americans die on the watch of the next president, there WILL be a nobodys-to-blame report, some medals to go around and a refusal to testify on the record. Phew.
Kilo (374f84) — 10/5/2008 @ 2:20 amOr we’re going to lose.
Perfect Sense (9d1b08) — 10/5/2008 @ 3:31 amBingo.
For some reason McCain wants to kowtow to the Teddy Kennedy wing of the Democrat party.
Democrats and the MSM have already painted this as failure of capitalism when it is the opposite – a failure of government mandates.
Darn tootin’.
They have a lot of great arguments to make, and they need to pull the gun covers and let loose.
EW1(SG) (84e813) — 10/5/2008 @ 4:03 amHere’s my theory. Despite a good start at the convention, Sarah Palin was not up to snuff for the interviews. A change in tactic, the campaign needed to get through the VP debate. Now that she has proven she can go toe to toe with the big boys, I think we will (or I hope) more Palin jabs in the traditional VP candidate attack mode.
The first couple, he doesn’t think of America as we do, and the palling around with terrorists. I think all but the hard core partisans think she has been mistreated by the MSM, personal attacks, etc, so as long as she does not return it in kind (get personal), she can say most anything factual and get into the discussion.
We shall see if the tactic changes. She can get it out, probably building up to the debates, McCain can use it in the debates without being the attack dog at the debate.
Andy (943e43) — 10/5/2008 @ 5:11 amPretty much the conclusion I arrived at on Friday – Maverick, I’ve got tone
Wind Rider (22ee44) — 10/5/2008 @ 5:15 amThe Bob Dole-like tone of this campaign is not due to the lack of substantive issues, or weak advisers. It’s McCain’s innate inability to play hardball from those years he’s spent in the Senate. They breed “comity” into Senate Republicans. Well, he can go back there with all his “good friends”.
Tim (cb62c4) — 10/5/2008 @ 5:16 amThere are only 2 choices as to why McCain is Doing what he is doing. McCain’s timidity is misdirection. Remember what he did in announcing Palin. Leaks of Lieberman, Pawlenty, etc. And remember it effect. It’s a great plan if he sprung it at the debate: 1) no media filters 2) Obama stuttering and sputtering before everyone’s eyes.
The other choice is that McCain is so vain that he would sit by and watch his country be destroyed so that he would be thought to have been a fair and honorable person. That Obama is a Marxist radical and that the Republican party is being forever saddled with this mess cannot
have escaped the notice of McCain and his handlers. One would have to imagine McCain weighing the destruction of his country against his view of honor and choosing McCain’s honor.
If that is the case, I wish Shakespeare were still around. Here would be a guy who sold out generations of his countrymen so that he would be thought of as honorable. In this warped view of honor, letting a lie become the truth is more honorable than telling the truth and suffering the personal consequences if any. And it’s not as though anyone is asking him to lie. Far from it. He owes people the truth of why we are where we are. If the truth is complicated, which I don’t think it is in this case, it’s his duty as a leader to give it to them and try to make them understand; What happened to the McCain that told people in Michigan that their jobs were not coming back?
casel21 (42fffb) — 10/5/2008 @ 5:22 amYou’re wrong. There’s no magic bullet here. McCain can minimize the damage, but he can’t turn it back on the Dems, because opinion has solidified, and because yes, it’s walking a tightrope wrt racial issues.
And here’s something few have thought of, that the Dems would immediately hit back with. If everybody knew this was a powder keg, why didn’t the GOP do something about it when we had solid majorities in Congress?
Does anybody know the answer to that question? It’s a valid question. Was it because they were too busy expanding the power of federal government in other areas? Was it because they didn’t care? Was it because it would screw with Bush’s ownership society message?
Once again, McCain went against his own party, and once again, he was right, and the party was wrong, just like the surge and Putin. Sorry, but from what we’ve seen over the last 8 years, McCain has far better judgment than the party, whatever his faults may be.
He can hammer Obama on doing nothing at all, and he can hammer Obama on taking all that money from Fannie Mae, and he can hammer home that he tried to fix this in 05 and the Democrats blocked him, and he can hammer home Barney Frank claiming that there was nothing wrong with Fannie Mae, but he can’t go near the CRA.
rightwingprof (fbb932) — 10/5/2008 @ 5:34 amWell, he has to, and it’s about time, too.
Following the ‘conventional wisdom’ of not broaching the subject because it will get messy or offend touchy feely sensibility is exactly the wrong strategy to take at this point – it plays the game in exactly the same manner the Democrats expect and hope him to play it.
The focus needs to be on the policy, not the personalities, other then to clearly identify which side of the policy debate those personalities solidly stand. Doing so will clarify, for the American people, exactly what this election represents. To do so turns the Democratic talking point about ‘failed policies’ into an Albatross. It may not do some Congressional republicans much good, but then again, if it doesn’t, that’s not necessarily a bad thing, depending on the republican. Further, this issue is tailor made to fit perfectly with, and drive home the “reform” aspect of the McCain campaign – with a rather stark score card to allow the voters to use to choose sides – a choice then made on something more substantive than the skills or transitive impressions that might assure success on American Idol.
Wind Rider (22ee44) — 10/5/2008 @ 5:52 amI would agree and you certainly have picked on her in most of your earlier comments on her. Your following comment and the explanation I agree with completely. “I’m beginning to think I may have seriously slandered Sarah Palin. I’m serious about this. Let me explain”.
Zim (ecff53) — 10/5/2008 @ 6:12 amPossibly timing is the reason and McCain intends to use a better time or opportunity. As you indicate they maybe a risk harping on it at all opportunities and his coming debate would be the best with a clear point of view.
I say hit the Fannie/Freddie corruption hard. The best thing that could happen is Obama responding with charges of racism, because McCain could then say these threats of being called racists is what prevented reforms from happening years ago.
gregg (ed20e6) — 10/5/2008 @ 6:24 amThis whole racism thing is what got us in this crap to begin with. Clinton put the screws to the financial community to commit financial suicide or else they’d face criminal and civil sanctions and business operations problems if they didn’t. When Repubs warned and held hearing on the matter the democraps played the race card and said everything was great and it was just mean evil Repubs wanting to screw minorities. Then when it blows up the dems say it was because the mean repubs’ economic policies. McCain puts out two ads on Obama’s economic advisors, someone calls one racist and they’re scrubbed and he’s back to Mr. Nice Guy who finishes last. He should recognize this losing strategy and prepare his surge strategy pronto.
eaglewingz08 (98291e) — 10/5/2008 @ 6:29 amIn reference to many of the comments above-
-Patterico, we visit here not because we expect perfection, but because we count on intellectual honesty and a fair-handed discussion. Of course, if you didn’t have that day job occupying so much of your energy, we would expect perfection. 😉
– I agree with rightwingprof in not taking on the CRA itself. Like many things in government, there is a problem, but the unintended consequences of an action plus corruption (which includes not being truthful so you can get re-elected) often make things worse (I have my own experience with “Redlining” that I won’t elaborate at the moment).
– I second the main thesis of the thread, including with mrkwong at #4. “We” need to let McCain know that we will not be satisfied with playing nice and sweeping things under the rug. Hold our elected officials accountable! Otherwise, even if McCain wins and is in excellent health 4 years from now we’ll work for Palin or someone else to kick out the incumbent republican in the presidency just as she did the governorship in Alaska.
– Of course, we can’t read minds, and McCain and Co. may just have their own ideas on the timing, especially if McCain thinks a deal needed to get done for the sake of the economy not collapsing.
– Reason to hope!! (I think). I haven’t heard any more details, but as I posted briefly last night on the “debate-post-mortem” thread, yesterday the Pit Bull growled and brought Obama’s history with Ayers up in an appearance, perhaps the equivalent of a volley ball “set” for McCain to spike at the next debate, along with fannie and freddie.
Oh yeah, bring it on!! People talk about McCain’s temper, but I bet Obama will flip out first. He is convinced that he is destined to be king/ president/ czar/ premier/ whatever- after all, he is the one that at least he has been waiting for. He and Ayers thought his time had come and won a seat in the Ill. state senate even if it meant back-stabbing a Democrat mentor, getting her thrown off of the ballot at the last minute. He and the Dems made sure he won the US Senate seat by smearing Ryan in getting divorce proceedings made public. (I wish the Repubs would have drafted Mike Singletary to run). And he and whoever is behind him saw to it that he beat Hillary- even if it meant keeping quiet about Edwards’ scandal for months and months so he could continue in the race to siphon votes off of Hillary. Make a serious threat to what destiny owes him and stand back.
McCain needs to be as disarming as possible, such as, “My life and activities have been open to scrutiny by the US public for 40 years. The American people have the right to know the details of your last 40 years as well. You’ve taken pride in being a community organizer, very good. Don’t be so bashful and let the people know what you did with your law degree during those years. I myself have criticized you for having no executive experience, but you’ve had executive experience in a position of authority with a non-profit foundation that distributed well over 100 million dollars for educational reform in the Chicago area. Why haven’t you been more eager to tell the American people of your accomplishments there?”
Whether it is electing someone with Obama’s baggage or defeating Obama even though it’s politically dangerous to put the truth out so McCain doesn’t, it’s a bad spot to be in. That’s what we get I guess when the responsibility to inform the public turns into an opportunity to manipulate the public. Just think, during the childhood of many of us we routinely invited Walter Cronkite into our homes, implicitly trusting him as a wise and benevolent grandfather figure, when he was lying about Vietnam and who knows what else.
Herein ends my quota of blogging time for the week.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/5/2008 @ 6:31 amAlright Patterico.
This is my last comment here.
The worst news I heard for your side last night was that SNL is going prime time on thursday nights.
Fey’s knockoffs of Palin are devasting and now more people will see them.
She is going to be a national punchline.
Fey’s spoof of the depate Palin brought howls of laughter from the audience.
And if SNL can spoof the debate they can spoof a stumpspeech.
You have to choose if McCain gets to sacrifice Palin. What is best for her at this point?
Also, Mccain is going to lose.
Those idiots Rove and Bounds broadcast the character strategy.
No one wants to talk about character.
I think Mccain lost this election when he made it all about teh stupid vs. teh smart.
Sadly for you, there are still more smart people in America than stupid people.
Its the bellcurve, stupid.
Best witches.
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 6:40 amkate
I don’t know that “slander” is the right word. You sound like a Cubs fan to me.
nk (77debb) — 10/5/2008 @ 6:43 amjust in case you dont get it, we cant have a president that is an infinite vein of comedic material sometimes using her exact words.
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 6:43 amafter a month of primetime SNL Palin will simply be a joke.
pull her back is my advice.
or forget 2016
Considering the problems this site has had with server/bandwidth capacity, do we need griefer/nishi/kate drooling out every second comment on every thread?
nk (77debb) — 10/5/2008 @ 6:50 amim sowwy, i have one more thing to say.
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 6:52 amthe main reason Team McCain cant hammer on the freddie/fannie thing is that it all happened a decade ago….and that just gives Team Obama an opening to say, “well why didnt you fix it?
you had 8 years.”
Patterico….McCain is the one that doesnt get strategy.
all he has is tactics.
he used Palin as cannon fodder before she was ready to get a bump for HIS campaign.
last, last comment
wth its the weekend
😉
i can visualize a spoof of Palin’s interview with Carl Cameron coming thursday nite in prime time.
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 6:56 ammockery is the most potent weapon.
This site is drawing ever bigger assholes lately.
Who gives a feck what Tina Fey lampoons. Why do SNL and the various so-called “comediansd” fear making fun of the magic negro? The race card or fact that they are in the tank for him?
McCain appears to emulate Bob Dole with the senate comity bullshit. He may have been quite brave at the Hanoi Hilton, but why in heaven’s name is he such a pussy about calling out Obama’s record and associations? We get stuck with marxist and Daley’s corrupt machine running things because Republicans are worried about a corrupt media that loathes them in any case?
Freudian slip on part of Kate, ending with best witches? Another so-called sensitive, intellectual lib who needs a douche badly.
madmax333 (0c6cfc) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:02 amnk- No, we don’t, I agree with you.
Hopefully the blip on the radar screen will keep his promise.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:04 amSadly for you, there are still more smart people in America than stupid people.
Its the bellcurve, stupid.
Since a bellcurve is symmetric, it does not say what you say it says, griefer, which also appears to indicate just where you lie within it.
J. Peden (6296db) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:06 ambefore national pulls it
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:10 amyou should watch
queen latifah was awesome
😉
haha, j.peden
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:19 amit depends if u use the mean or the median 😉
nonparametrics FTW!!!!
what you dont unnerstand about comedy, is that w/e is funniest gets the most air.
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:25 amSNL plays Palin straight in spots.
Fey’s send up of her is hilarious.
right now Palin is being branded as a doofus.
is it fair to her political future?
Patterico
I hear you but the fix is in n that the media is letting the Dems blame it all on the mtg lenders (which is correct in a stupid sort of way) and then saying it was the republicans and their love of deregulation
Got us cold on that one
The way to counter it is to beat them over the heat with weath redistibution making matters worse and more taxes and spending – McCain has to reset the agenda by explicitly putting parts of the government up on the chopping block – th ridiculous programs – let the dems play more defense and play catchup
EricPWJohnson (ca64bf) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:36 amThere is another possibility, although I probably won’t convince anyone of it. McCain’s purpose has been to be a subverter of the Republican Party and his intention all along has been to help the Democrats. The Democrats felt that Palin was a threat to them so they instructed McCain to choose her as his running mate so that he could drag her down and undermine her future in politics.
McCain’s chief media advisor quit when the most radical leftist politician in Washington was nominated by the Democrats. Imagine, if you can, what would happen if a Democrat nominee’s main advisor quit when the most conservative Republican in Washington became the Republican’s presidential nominee. It would be a beyond belief absurdity for something like that to ever happen but it apparently seems natural when it happens in the other direction.
j curtis (3c4f3b) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:42 amawww
Allah missed the wink.
it must have been too painful to watch.
the problem with talking about the bailout is that you cant put all the blame on the dems.
in 1999 mccain supported a bill that removed barriers between banking and the mortgage industry. teh deregulators.
so it opens a can of whuppass on both sides.
ayers doesnt, but ppl want to talk about the economy, not character.
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:44 amWould that it were so.
EW1(SG) (84e813) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:45 amWe must first remember that Obama’s supporters in the House voted NO on Monday. This left the sore open and if Palin had responded as she should have, McCain Campaign would have been blamed for causing the bill to blow up in the House.
Citizen K (a32e03) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:45 amPatterico, you REALLY need to get yourself a better class of commenters. Serious people are not going to hang around here an comment if they are going to be surrounded by slavering ObamaFools.
John Steele (44f0bd) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:50 amAll you have to do is play the videos quoting Republicans worrying about Fannie and Freddie, as contrasted with the quotes from Democrats claiming there was no crisis.
And then Palin blaming the crisis on “predatory lenders?”
Bush promoting expanded home ownership as an economic panacea?
Rick “This Election is Not About Issues” Davis heading the Homeownership Alliance, the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac advocacy group?
Barney Frank isn’t the only one lacking the integrity to take ownership of the downside of his philosophy. There were calls in 2003, 2005, 2006 to clean up Freddie and Fannie and they didn’t. And the CRA came into being 25 years before subprime loans came into vogue.
steve (472f17) — 10/5/2008 @ 8:23 amIt’s over, folks. McCain’s speaking out about the real cause of the finacial mess and the Democrats’ responsibility for it is the only hope for this election.
He won’t do it though. He is too worried about alienating his buddies on the left. He thinks this is all about him. He is being cavalier and is ignoring the fact that this is affecting the House and Senate races as well.
It is plausible that the Dems will pick up enough Senate seats for a vetp-proof majority. What this all means is that we will have a radical left president, with a House run by a radical leftist, a veto-proof senate run by a total idiot who is being manipulated by the far left.
Perhaps the worst part of this scenario is that we have two SCOTUS justices who are ready to retire. That means we will have an extreme radical left president who will nominate judges who share his views and values, who then will sail through senate confirmation giving the far left control of the SCOTUS. These will be people who do not believe in the Constitution, but rather the primacy of their own ideology.
The effects of this will be severe and entrenched.
Speak your piece now, people, because Obama has no problem with shutting down dissent…and the MSM will go along with him at every turn.
I am not prone to hyperbole…but yeah…this situation really is that bad. I am seriously looing at property in AK right now.
The AIP doesn’t look so radical to me now.
fred (fcf819) — 10/5/2008 @ 8:27 amOf the things I am not, “market analyst” ranks very high.
But.
I noticed that the Israeli market seems to be tanking this (Sunday in the Flatlands).
McCain has shown examples of being able to get well inside Obama’s OODA loop. I would like very much to believe that he has done it again.
But this is scary. Very scary.
Especially when you consider that some (how many? I have no idea.) people have already voted.
Add to that a deeply held conviction that the voting is and will be irrelevant. What is relevant is what is on the tally sheets when they are certified.
And John Fund has me scared sh*tless–and I don’t see anything to suggest that he is wrong about anything. I fear that he understated the case.
Larry Sheldon (86b2e1) — 10/5/2008 @ 8:50 amIn Alaska we take pride in Independent thinking. When will the rest of America get over its idea of being totally sold out to any party.
Ed Brown (47d713) — 10/5/2008 @ 9:08 amMake the turkeys earn your vote.
Therefore Mr. Patterico, make up your own mind and share that with others. Admit your mistakes and move on. Sarah told ol Joe he was looking back and she is not.
griefer = nishi = Kate
Hi Kate, I see you’re still jealous of Palin.
Darleen (187edc) — 10/5/2008 @ 9:17 amI have been emailing NRO authors and putting comments on hot-air saying exactly the same thing. I’ve also emailed Malkin. I’ve also emailed the McCain campaign.
BUT.
I have been suggesting that the time to launch this is McCain’s wrap-up at the end of the third debate.
In the first debate, BO did not hesitate to interrupt and McCain was not shy about talking over him. So it’s feasible that McCain might do as I suggest.
At the end of the third debate with an ad campaign ready to roll, is, IMO, the best time tactically to hit them.
Am I dreaming ?
gh (785437) — 10/5/2008 @ 9:55 amLook, nobody cares about the markets. If McCain is planning his Monday on what the markets do then he is the fool many accuse him of being. The reason is simple, the markets are completely volatile right now. Monday can be up, Tuesday down. Who gives a rat’s ass at this point. I work at a hedge fund on Wall St. I know how this works. McCain has to stop watching markets, if he is at all, because the average American isn’t glued to a Bloomberg terminal.
For G-d’s sake, make the point already and stop this nonsense. If he does this again on Tuesday, I will hang it up. Obama can have this country as his toy for four years and we can run Palin or Jindal in 2012.
But please heaven, don’t tell me McCain is waiting to see what the freaking markets do on Monday. Jeebus, please you must be kidding.
/rant
CJ (908d93) — 10/5/2008 @ 9:59 amDarleen – I suspect nishi/griefer is a fat ugly computer geek who can’t get a date. NTTAWWT. Which explains why she’s obsessed with sex and its consequences and reading science fiction. Her real world sucks.
YMMV
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:00 amMcCain is never going to get either the black vote or the guilty white vote, and he needs to understand that if he somehow wins the election, he’ll be branded a racist anyway, just by virtue of that “R” after his name. He better suck it up and start fighting this fight, or he will deserve to lose. I’m serious, if he doesn’t engage the larger Democratic Party on this issue, I think the Republican Party will be better off without him leading the country. You don’t reward cowardice, and it’s ironic that it’s the war hero that is currently displaying it.
holygoat (0f0c64) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:07 amThat’s not the famous “Fat Lady” you hear singing, it’s Tina Fey!
The Republicans had their chance at explaining this disaster (ie. shifting the blame) and they have failed.
Massively.
Too late for a “do over.”
Especially now as Sarah has become Tina’s bitch. She owns her.
Outright.
Not a word can gurgle out of Palin without the voters thinkiing of Fey.
Tina Fey is the greatest thing to happen to poiltical satire since the original Chicago Second City (ie. Barbara Harris, Alan Arkin, Severn Darden, Paul Sand, Tony Holland, Andrew Duncan, Eugene Troobnick, Mina Kolb.)
David Ehrenstein (06e7fb) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:07 amI doubt that McCain wants Barny Frank to remain the Fannie Mae Queen and will work hard to tie this fiasco to Obama and the democrats starting this week.
McCain, like others wanted the the bailout to pass
smith (03852f) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:07 amI’ve been saying this all along. The DemocRats are vulnerable on this issue. They could lose the election because of this. And McCain can win it for the same reason. But he has failed to say ANYTHING about it. Right now he is losing and he will lose, unless he hammers the DemocRats on this. It’s his ONLY chance.
As of right now, he’s done.
From the beginning, I’ve said that it’s McCain’s race to lose. It appears he’s intent on doing so.
thebronze (90b755) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:08 amYeah, that Obama has this election in the bag!
Governor Tom Bradley (799ce0) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:19 amIf the McCain camp believes it would be construed as racist to make the argument and that the argument itself is too complicated, then two things become obvious,
a) he must believe that his own base is as racist as Obama does. Therefore, McCain is equally as racist as Obama. We all already know that Obama’s camp believes anyone supporting McCain is racist so who else does he think will assume its a racist argument other than his own supporters?
b) if he believes the argument is too complicated, then he not only short sells himself (and his campaign) to succinctly bottom line what we already know re the Fannie & Freddie and the Dems’ deep pockets, he also short sells the intelligence and capability of his supporters to connect the dots.
Neither of these gives me confidence that he has confidence in his base. It yet again convinces me that his own Achille’s heel of reaching across the aisle (yes, you heard me)prevents him from drawing that necessary hard line in the sand because it may offend those on the other side of the aisle. It also reinforces the level of compromise he is willing to make to not offend. Unfortunately though it only makes him look weak and I do not believe it will draw in new voters.
Dana (973491) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:20 amDo you have any idea of what the hell you are talking about?
The reason McCain/Palin didn’t hit back on the Fannie/Freddie/Community Reinvestment Act debacles is because it is a loser It was the republicans who failed to act.
The same Republican’s who controlled Congress for 12 out the past 14 years. And the White House for the past 8.
And to even mention Community Reinvestment Act is beyond stupid. It’s been around since 77 fer christsakes.
jharp (2282bb) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:35 amWhy didn’t palin hit back?
Maybe it’s because they couldn’t afford the risk.
Try googling “McCain advisors lobbyists for Fannie Mae”
No one who follows politics isn’t aware of McCain’s/Davis’ problems. But I guess you’re assuming your “base” doesn’t follow politics as much as follow the leader.
Readnek (105b91) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:36 amTalk about contributing to the corruption of the country.
lol darleen…my MOM is hawter than Palin.
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:37 amshe was a big 10 homecoming queen.
lil more competition than Alaska pageant circuit.
hahaha
heres my comment from ta-nehisi
The McCain campaign is underestimating how absolutely furious conservatives are that free markets…
From the US News & World Report link, this has consistently been a problem plaguing the campaign. They have underestimated how informed his supporters are and how frustrated we have become with everything from the lack of hardhitting and serious pushback at the MSM in regard to the smears on Palin and the overt endorsement of Obama. Throw this latest reluctance to fight hard and point fingers and name names over one of the biggest economic meltdowns and his campaign again reinforces a sense of his attempts to be all things to all men…
Then again, he’s a Republican but is not a conservative.
Dana (973491) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:37 amMcCain’s advisors have served him poorly. They are like the Republican equivalent of Bob Shrum.
McCain must personally go on the attack over Fannie and Freddie and Ayers, or he will lose the election.
Indythinker (4ed262) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:41 amNeither of these gives me confidence that he has confidence in his base
Well, that feeling is highly reciprocal, isn’t it?
JSM still has not sealed-the-deal with the base of the GOP. If he wants their unwavering support,
AOracle (e6d3fc) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:46 amhe has to go on the attack (he did fly an “attack” plane, didn’t he?) and take the fight to his opponent.
If he can’t do that, perhaps he should just “punch-out” now,
and let the Sarahcuda selct her V-P running mate.
i should add, faux intellectual partisan hacks like Patterico, Beldar, Goldstein, and Allahpundit.
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:46 amlol.
Readnek – Why don’t you post those comments about Oxley trying to reform the GSE’s again. We’ve only seen those about eight or nine times from you.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:50 amgriefer – Has your dad kicked the bucket yet or is he still an empty flesh doll?
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:53 amit depends if u use the mean or the median
The mean and the median are the same in a bellcurve, Katie.
btw, QED
J. Peden (6296db) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:54 amComment by Readnek — 10/5/2008 @ 10:36 am
It was commonly noted that the two GSE’s signed up lobbyists all over K-Street from both Dem-leaning firms, and GOP-leaning firms.
Some were signed to actively advance the programs of Fannie and Freddie, others were signed to deny them to the opposition (now, that’s really padding the payroll).
Mr. Davis’ firm was hired to represent an independent foundation formed by the GSE’s to advance minority, and low-income housing ownership – an admirable goal by itself, totally corrupted by the Dems placed in leadership positions in the two GSE’s by the Clinton Administration, and Congressional Democrats.
Oh, and by the way…
AOracle (e6d3fc) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:55 amYou’re an idiot!
Daley you’re a class act.
Readnek (105b91) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:56 amI wonder if Pat’s gonna punish you now, for being such a bad boy.
“Readnek – Why don’t you post those comments about Oxley trying to reform the GSE’s again.”
You mean the bill he worked on with Frank, that the White House shot down?
I guess I don’t have to now.
But yes, AOracle, the Democrats are responsible for everything that’s gone wrong with the world, since creation.
Adam was a Republican, Eve was a Democrat.
“Dude, don’t eat that apple!”
Readnek (105b91) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:05 amComment by Readnek — 10/5/2008 @ 11:05 am
Further confirmation!
disgusted (e6d3fc) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:07 amA freakin’ nishitiot infestation? Good Allah, it is painfully stoopid. The same 8 memes, over and over and over and over …
JD (5f0e11) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:07 amMy HOPE is that McCain’s calculus was simply to keep from roiling the waters until the bailout was done. He needed that in the rearview (otherwise, if the issue stayed unaddressed it clearly played to the dems). Now, we’ll see.
Is it coincidence that:
1. NRCC dropped the Barney add 10 minutes after signing?
2. WaPo article yesterday announcing McCain to go hard negative?
3. Sara’cuda is off the chain?
I hope not.
Scott (eecd57) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:07 amSince this blog post has almost no chance of changing McCain’s mind, perhaps it’s time to come up with a very effective workaround. Namely, think up some questions about this issue, and encourage people to go to BHO’s appearances and ask them. Then, upload his response to Youtube.
24AheadDotCom (47695f) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:08 amBetween griefer and readnek, you’ve got an IQ approximating the level of a marsupial. Lots of cut and paste jobs and references to Blade Runner – they’d be real popular at ComiCon, the convention for those who don’t know what the opposite sex’s genitalia actually looks like.
Dmac (cc81d9) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:08 amWell, they’ve got 30-days to put into affect the proverbial “2-Minute Drill”.
AOracle (e6d3fc) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:14 amIt now has to be an all-out attack 24/7, no-holds-bared, no-quarter-given.
If John McCain allows a Marxist to be elected President of the United States, his page in American History will be draped in black!
Then you’re going to have to come up with an answer to the question: Why didn’t the GOP do anything when they had majorities in Congress? Especially, why did they ignore McCain, and to be fair, Bush, when they tried to sound the alarm?
The Dems are going to ask that, and then, they are going to point to all the contributions Republicans received from Fannie Mae. It will blow up in his face.
Yes, there are things he can address, but all of you people who think he can come out with both barrels haven’t thought this through, because it will open issues that will be disastrous for the GOP in November.
rightwingprof (fbb932) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:15 amComment by Dmac — 10/5/2008 @ 11:08 am
…and, Dmac…
AOracle (e6d3fc) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:17 amJust what latent animosities do you harbor against Marsupials?
Does this presage an anti-Australian attitude?
What’s up, Mate?
wow
daleyrocks comment refers to my dad’s early onset alzheimers.
he was a rhodes scholar and on orthopaedic surgeon.
thanks for for the conservative compassion.
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:17 amAnd then Palin blaming the crisis on “predatory lenders?”
I suspect, as Patterico does, that that is the line the McCain campaign made sure she put in, the wonderful thing was that she followed it up with a line that got a lot of approval…about personal responsibility in this mess. While the temptation for “free money” is great, and the false assurances by lenders to borrowers was unethical even if not illegal, borrowers should learn to say “no”.
Darleen (187edc) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:19 amComment by rightwingprof — 10/5/2008 @ 11:15 am
They didn’t do anything because they were too busy sowing the seeds of their own defeat realized in 2006!
To win, McCain has to run against the Congress, both sides of the aisle, and the visible corruption that is there.
And, it is time to name names, no matter what the political affiliation following that name!
It’s All-In time!
AOracle (e6d3fc) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:21 amand btw, he was a lifelong republican.
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:21 amBut yes, AOracle, the Democrats are responsible for everything that’s gone wrong with the world….
Nah, not quite. But they’re working on it.
J. Peden (6296db) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:23 amMaybe it was not Sarah’s fault.
1.The same handling (Duhaime) blew out Rudy Guiliani.
AND/OR
Ken M (d8b55b) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:24 am2.McCaine voted for the bailout, and has not even hinted blocking the Pork, Acorn etc. He will not position himself as a maverick protector of the people who had a gun to his head to vote for bailout. He insists on being a loyal Democrat running on the Republican ticket. He probably wonders why Republicans and conservatives are surprised to have not as yet seen this. No Drill,Drill,Drill that will bring jobs and redeem this bailout. USA Oil and energy independence will cause the dollar to go up, the economy to recover, domestic employment to go up and will deny funding to our enemies (foreign oil producers). Further, the Chinese and Indians will get all the oil they need from the sources abandoned by the USA, as well as from the USA. Can he support that foreigners should soil their environments and that the USA should deny the world the clean extraction and refineries that is our trademark? I believe what McCaine is doing is well calculated and very troubling.
Comment by griefer — 10/5/2008 @ 11:21 am
Well, then his illness was a blessing since he didn’t have to observe the blithering idiot that you’ve become.
AOracle (e6d3fc) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:25 amPatterico
Jeff Goldstein further highlights continued demagoguery used by the Left in framing any, ANY criticism of Obama as “racially tinged”.
Darleen (187edc) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:28 amI think this thread’s as done as the republican party.
Readnek (105b91) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:30 amDerailed by their own.
What I would like to have someone in th eMcCain campaign say …
What’s the difference between a friend of David Duke and a friend of Rev Wright?
Would you vote for a friend of David Duke? Of a friend of Bill Ayers?
bill-tb (26027c) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:32 amTo: 24Ahead
Just as Palin said she would speak directly to the people and not through the NY-DC media establishment, I agree that if McCain doesn’t show some fight a willingness to speak the truth you should promote questions to each of them.
In addition to providing questions to Obama, provide questions for McCain, such as “Sen. McCain, you know that your opponent, along with Dem. senators Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, have received significant contributions from Freddie and Fanny, why have you not told the truth to the American people?”
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:33 amWhat I would like to have someone in the McCain campaign say …
What’s the difference between a friend of David Duke and a friend of Rev Wright?
Would you vote for a friend of David Duke? Of a friend of Bill Ayers?
bill-tb (26027c) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:34 amAny criticism of Obama is going to be declared racist, not by the official Obama campaign but by the media. Look at how they are handling Palin’s comments about Ayers/Obama. While the illogic of this might boggle the imagination, it is a fact of life in 2008. The media have become a part of the Obama campaign.
Given this development it is suicidal for McCain to hold off on attacking Obama over the fiscal meltdown because he fears being labeled a “racist”. The only questions in my mind are, will McCain rise to the occasion, and is it too late?
DaMav (e84050) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:37 amSaturday Night Live made an excellent argument for it last night. So Mac, either give up or start fighting. Because I am sick of this laying down stuff. Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, the public does not want rancor (I am sure you focus groups say that). Guess what, you are losing. You really do not have anyting to lose by showing a little rancor, provided it is true and fair.
Saturday Night Live (the bottom clip has Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi
Now do it.
Joe (dcebbd) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:39 amThe odd “griefer” troll wrote:
Um. But then continued to post.
Eric Blair (e60b98) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:41 amIf he sincerely wants to obviate open racial confrontation, McCain needs to be clear and blunt now.
If he lacks the courage to identify causes of the present debacle, Obama will surely win. That will install the first affirmative action presidency, and Obama’s lack of skills and common sense will do inevitable, lasting damage. Any criticism of an Obama administration will automatically be cast as racism, reducing all political disagreement to open and festering racial strife. That inevitable confrontation will undo whatever progress in race relations that has been achieved, giving renewed fodder to grievance mongers and peddlers of hate.
McCain lacks the will to be clear about what is at stake — in short, McCain lacks the will to win. I therefore fully anticipate that Obama will win, and we are in for several years of unprecedented civil conflict and racial acrimony. What we are seeing now is nothing compared to what’s coming.
Federal Dog (1404a2) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:43 amMcCain/Palin can win. But they have to work for it, holding back, playing it nice, or half stepping won’t get the job done. Obama is vulnerable on point after point, a partial list follows:
Obama isn’t qualified, his accomplishments are few or non-existent,
He’s got major lacunae in his resume,
He was under the influence of Frank Marshall Davis,
He’s got problems with his birth certificate,
He was an ACORN community organizer,
He’s tied to terrorists Bill Ayres and Bernadine Dohrn,
He sat in Reverend Wright’s church for 20 years, and lied about Wright’s racism and bigotry,
He funded former Weatherman from CAC funds,
He’s deeply involved in Tony Rezko’s fraud and corruption,
He’s involved himself in the internal politics of Kenya, supporting the muslim candidate,
He took money from FannieMae,
He’s a closet Marxist, a follower of Saul Alinsky,
Every word out of his mouth is calculated to decieve,
And the list goes on, add to it if you wish.
McCain/Palin have to attack, hit Obama hard, hammer him with clear straight forward blows, blows so strong MSM can’t ignore them. Day after day, another blockbuster laid at Obama’s doorstep. I’m talking brutal, relentless, heavy blows, directed at his weak spots.
At #11, above, rwp said, “opinion has solidified…” Well, in my world, solidified opinions are like ice cubes, solid if left out in the cold, but bring them inside under the bright lights and crank up the heat, you’ll find they rather quickly assume the shape of their container.
All Obama’s really got for protection is MSM’s skirts. Expose his lies and deceptions and his shield will shatter, and leave him alone and revealed for what he is, a pretender, a black Pinocchio dancing to collectivism’s siren song.
Ropelight (1be620) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:47 amI can understand why McCain and Palin are timid about the racial issues in this election. I have a good friend, she is black, highly educated, and typically rational, who has posted the following on her facebook account. I feel that if SHE is pulling the race card into this election, it is more widespread than I had thought. (Sorry for how long this message is!)
In an alternate universe, racism wouldn’t exist…
A friend of mine living in Europe sent this to me. It is a much more thorough version of the idea I have posited, namely, “If a white candidate had Obama’s CV, there would be no contest, experienced or not.”
And for those of you have other reasons for not supporting Obama, it is a free country. I’ll thank you now not to make comments suggesting that I am playing the race card. America is what it is.
========================
How Racism Works…
What if John McCain were a former president of the Harvard Law Review?
What if Barack Obama finished fifth from the bottom of his graduating class?
What if McCain were still married to the first woman he said ‘I do’ to?
What if Obama were the candidate who left his first wife after she no longer measured up to his standards?
What if Michelle Obama were a wife who not only became addicted to pain killers, but acquired them illegally through her charitable organization?
What if Cindy McCain graduated from Harvard?
What if Obama were a member of the Keating-5?
What if McCain were a charismatic, eloquent speaker?
If these questions reflected reality, do you really believe the election numbers would be as close as they are?
This is what racism does. It covers up, rationalizes and minimizes positive qualities in one candidate and emphasizes negative qualities in another when there is a color difference.
You are The Boss… which team would you hire?
With America facing historic debt, 2 wars, stumbling health care, a weakened dollar, all-time high prison population, mortgage crises, bank foreclosures, etc.
Educational Background:
Obama:
Columbia University – B.A. Political Science with a Specialization in International Relations.
Harvard – Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude
Biden:
University of Delaware – B.A. in History and B.A. in Political Science.
Syracuse University College of Law – Juris Doctor (J.D.)
vs.
McCain:
United States Naval Academy – Class rank: 894 of 899
Palin:
Hawaii Pacific University – 1 semester
North Idaho College – 2 semesters – general study
University of Idaho – 2 semesters – journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College – 1 semester
University of Idaho – 3 semesters – B.A. in Journalism
Now, which team are you going to hire ?
PS: What if Barack Obama had an unwed, pregnant teenage daughter….
A friend of hers responded:
I hate to throw water on your parade, but it is NOT about color. I take exception to the insinuation that anyone not voting for Obama is a racist. I have been a Republican since the Eighties. I voted for and will vote again for Michael Williams, Dale Wainwright, and Wallace Jefferson…all Texas statewide office holders and yes Black Republicans. The only thing racist about your memo is the insinuation. Are you going to vote for these men I mentioned? (They have better qualification than Obama). I think not, why…because their world view does not match yours. I don’t have a problem with that, you have every right to believe the things Obama does…I would list them here but I think you get the picture (just check out the Democrat National Committee Platform, to see what where Obama stand). Melissa, I consider you a friend and I would NEVER call you racist, but consider your motives in calling me one.
There were a few back and forth messages following this, but the general idea is that you should vote for Obama based on his education and experience?, not his ideas, and if you don’t you’re probably a racist.
yourlilsis (095089) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:56 amIf Obama were a white guy, he wouldn’t even be in the race.
Federal Dog (1404a2) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:02 pmIf everybody knew this was a powder keg, why didn’t the GOP do something about it when we had solid majorities in Congress?
There are Republicans involved in the failure, such as Bennett. He is the ranking member on Dodd’s committee and may have been the chair before 2006. Builders and realty folks were making money and happy. I’m reading Chernow’s House of Morgan right now. Seemed appropriate. The chapters on the 1920s have an eerie echo of the present problem. At the time, the US government, while determined to stay out of post-war Europe, was encouraging loans to South American countries. The bankers and investors got well beyond prudent, assuming that there was a government guarantee behind them. The whole thing collapsed in the late 1920s as banana republics defaulted.
Sound familiar ?
I think the only way McCain can get into this subject is to link energy and mortgage lending. They are two examples of government social policy trumping financial common sense. We have banned drilling for 20 years and have banned new nuclear power plants. The result has been disaster with four dollar gas and heating oil. The same thing can be said about CRA and, especially, the Clinton Administration use of quotas to monitor the CRA performance of banks. It was social policy that ignored fiscal sense.
If Obama gets elected, we will see much more of this as the left wing tries to control his agenda. He is either a left wing radical or he is weak and indecisive and easily controlled by them.
I don[‘t know which is worse.
McCain has to have outside groups make some of these points. He cannot look angry because that is a meme of the Obama campaign. She can some of it and 527s can do some. Ironic since he tried to ban them.
MIke K (155601) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:06 pmSarah Palin hasn’t and probably won’t show up for a single Sunday morning show to make her case. That’s sad.
Bob Wolfe (ceab83) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:06 pmThe slam against Palin for attending several universities is outright classism.
Her parents insisted that all their children pay their own way through college. Going to Hawaii was one way Sarah got to both travel and get an education.
Barry used white guilt to get his education. To date, no one has seen any transcript of his college/law school courses and grades.
Darleen (187edc) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:06 pmfinally, someone sharing my anger and disappointment. a total waste of perfect knockout opportunities. this is where we (fuckin’ they) lost the election. Maybe it’s the pivot point on america’s decline. .
why must we pray for a miracle to win this fuckin’ election – it was so win-able..
Sombrero (460ef7) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:07 pmdaleyrocks comment refers to my dad’s early onset alzheimers.
he was a rhodes scholar and on orthopaedic surgeon.
thanks for for the conservative compassion.
nishidiot/griefer – You have taken the brave position elsewhere that such flesh dolls should be euthanized. They take up useless room. When push comes to shove in the case of your father you are a hypocrite like most liberals.
snot not hawt
rawr!
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:08 pmWith all of the ammo available to McCain and he not using it makes me wonder whether he wants to win. His concern should be for his country and It’s citizens, not whether he’ll be cast as a racist. In the end under an Obama administration, millions of Americans will be racists for saying “I told you so.”
Scott (fdc8d1) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:11 pmReadnek,
If you think it’s a winning argument to bring up Rick Davis, let’s have that argument. Is it more important that McCain’s advisor took money from Fannie and Freddie, or that Obama himself did? If we’re talking advisors, it is more important that one of McCain’s advisors took money from one of those entities, or that Obama had advisors who actually ran the damn things?
Were I McCain, I’d be happy to have that discussion. And the bottom line would be: who tried to do something about it?
Patterico (e94e6d) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:12 pmI think Sarah Palin is and has been following campaign directions, including avoiding attacks on the Democrats regarding the financial crisis. McCain has consistently avoided doing that up to now and one spokesman recently said the campaign wants to turn the page on financial issues. Is this truth or misdirection? My guess is that the McCain campaign has chosen to lay behind the log on this issue because it is the pivotal issue of the election. I think we’ll learn the answer at Tuesday night’s Presidential debate.
But back to Palin. With rare exception, Palin has followed McCain’s lead on every talking point. The one exception I can think of is ANWR, an issue Palin is confident speaking on. Did you really expect Palin or any VP-nominee to come in and defy McCain just because conservatives don’t like McCain’s message? That will never happen and it shouldn’t happen. If a VP selection won’t promise to embrace the Presidential candidate’s policies, the selectee shouldn’t accept a spot on the ticket.
Further, if the proof of Palin’s incompetence is the themes she talks about, then Biden is just as incompetent. Up to now, both VP nominees have focused on the messages their campaigns have chosen to emphasize. Signing on as VP means accepting the candidate’s message and, frankly, I’m impressed Palin didn’t cave on ANWR. Look at all Biden has caved on to be Obama’s VP.
Finally, it’s McCain’s campaign and how he runs it is his choice. Maybe he has polling that says this issue is a loser for him with undecided voters — the only ones who matter now. Maybe he is holding his fire until the domestic policy debate. Maybe he knows the Obama campaign has a strong response and McCain doesn’t want to open the door. Or maybe he’s making a mistake. My point is that whatever McCain’s reasoning, I think there can clearly be more reasons here than incompetence.
DRJ (c953ab) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:15 pmRacism comes in many forms. Yesterday, I attended a wedding. There I met a guy, nice enough fellow, we chatted about a range of topics as strangers will.
He brought up the election and exclaimed, “When will we ever get another chance to vote for a black man?”
My new acquaintance is white but was going to vote for Obama because he’s black. I’m white and I’m going to vote for McCain because Sarah Palin is on the ticket. Where’s the racism?
Ropelight (1be620) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:15 pm“…he was a rhodes scholar and on orthopaedic surgeon.”
If that’s indeed true, sorry to hear about that, but your horrible grammatical usage and syntax in most of your posts here lead one to believe you’re not telling the whole truth of the matter. I’m not so sure any progengy from such an illustrious individual could have developed into such a obvious doofus.
Speaking of doofuses:
“Would you vote for a friend of David Duke? Of a friend of Bill Ayers?”
Gee Bill, why don’t you post your incomprensible remark about two more times – no doubt someone will respond to such inanity, given enough repeated postings.
“Does this presage an anti-Australian attitude?
What’s up, Mate?”
Nah, just making a point – on behalf of all wombats and other assorted marsupials, I apologize. No worries, mate – she be ‘right.
Dmac (cc81d9) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:16 pmThe deadliest impression a candidate can give is disconsonance. JSM has screwed the pooch badly in this regard.
One, he declared he would not campaign again and would not debate until passage of the bailout. Two, he says he will, “Fight, fight, fight” for this country. Yet he utterly refuses to lash out at the complicit Dems, especially those who are part of the Obama campaign.
Enough people saw through the phoniness of Gore and Kerry to allow W to win. Now, they see a McCain who speaks of principles, but fails to act on them.
I hope he enjoys his minority status in the Senate. He deserves it.
Ed (8d1569) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:22 pmLET THEM MAKE THAT ARGUMENT.
Or we’re going to lose.
It’s just that simple.
Gee Wiz, calm down. It’s true that this crisis came at a bad time for mc cain and republicans in general but hey, it aint over yet, theres still a month to go.
It would have done absolutely no good for mccain/palin to jump on the manic & largely false MSM story line that this was a 700 bil bailout for wall st. Better to let some of the facts/truth come out first and then attack this for what it is, a dem congressional slush fund administered by fred/fran.
james conrad (6bb6e6) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:23 pmIt’s not about being called racists. It’s about the fact that the CRA is not REALLY the problem. If McCain were ever to go there, you’d end up with a lot of conservative blogosphere readers finally getting a lot better educated about the crisis and what accounts for the bulk of the problem.
Sure, fair housing efforts paved the way for a bunch of people to get loans who should not have. (Although I would argue that the intent was never to breed predatory lenders who purposely went out of their way to give ARMs to those who would most certainly default when the rates went up.)
But it was the Gramm/Leach/Bliley bill, supported entirely along party lines, that really caused this mess. Without that, we’d have a few big/stupid/predatory mortgage companies going under today, and sure, we’d have to think seriously about bailing out struggling families who got in over their heads (the horror!).
The problem is much larger than this, however, and here is why. With the orgy of credit default swaps that resulted from the deregulation in 1999, causing every major type of financial institution to be ever-more-dangerously interconnected as they exchanged bundles of bad debt with no requirements for actual capital to back any of the lending they were doing, and totaling 43 TRILLION dollars (compared to the entire mortgage market of 7 trillion), it is no surprise we’ve landed here (and you won’t find any credible financial analyst who will explain it to you otherwise).
Families defaulting on mortgages=unfortunate but manageable problem. Banking institutions/insurance companies defaulting on incredibly irresponsible/greedy/utterly unsupervised lending to EACH OTHER=complete meltdown of the financial system. There is a difference.
It is ludicrous that I have not found one single mention of credit default swaps on any conservative blog anywhere. Obviously, no politician’s hands are clean, and there is plenty of blame to go around to all parties and past/present leaders, but it is just willfully ignorant (not racist–just ignorant) to assert that this is ALL a result of pressure to lend to minorities.
If McCain opened up this can of worms like you seem to want him to, he would have to face accusations/scrutiny anew about his continued connections to Phil Gramm, the economic “genius” whose idea this was. Hence, he’s never going there.
J-Ho (6039e6) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:28 pmRacism comes in many forms. Yesterday, I attended a wedding. There I met a guy, nice enough fellow, we chatted about a range of topics as strangers will.
He brought up the election and exclaimed, “When will we ever get another chance to vote for a black man?”
My new acquaintance is white but was going to vote for Obama because he’s black. I’m white and I’m going to vote for McCain because Sarah Palin is on the ticket. We had a drink and wished the newlyweds well.
Ropelight (1be620) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:30 pmDRJ
Read Goldstein’s post. What I see is that the Left in collusion with MSM is out to frame every criticism of Obama as “racially tinged.” This isn’t just aimed at ordinary citizens that “ooo, look, RepuliKKKans are teh racists!” but is aimed squarely at the McCain campaign handlers. THEY don’t want to be labeled “racist.” THEY are allowing the Left to control how the McCain campaign focuses based on the biggest fear that runs through DC.
They refuse to understand that the audience they want to reach really believes the “racism” card has been overplayed and if McCain and Palin are allowed to push back hard against this mendacity, it WILL resonate.
I attended the Palin rally with baldilocks and miss attila (pics at link) yesterday and we discussed this over margaritas last night afterwards.
Baldilocks minces no words … McCain, et al, have got to stop being intimidated by the race card. They have to step up to the plate and say “NO! No reasonable person would say [fill in charge here] is racial, so KNOCK IT OFF. I won’t accept it. And I won’t stop saying what you are trying to label as “racist”.”
Darleen (187edc) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:32 pmI’m having problems. My comment at # 97 showed on my computer as a failed attempt, yet when slightly midified and submitted 15 minutes later, both showed up. I hope things get back to snuff ASAP. Patterico, thanks for your efforts. Best Regards.
Ropelight (1be620) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:37 pmI do think it’s funny that Republicans defense is “when we were the majority party in both house of Congress, and held the presidency, we WARNED you that all this would happen! You just wouldn’t listen!”
In other words, when Republicans had the power to stop this, they screamed “it’s dangerous!” And when the minority Democrats disagreed, Republicans said “awe shucks, I guess we tried.”
Why give the presidency to them again? They couldn’t do anything useful with it when they had it and a Congressional majority. All they could do was spend all our money on wars.
Phil (3b1633) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:40 pmPhil lives in Biden’s reality.
Darleen (187edc) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:41 pmBaldilocks is so right. There is nothing to lose – but an entire election – by not speaking up loudly, against these accusations.
It is already the gospel of the left that we are racists and we’re not going to change their minds but we can certainly influence and draw in independents by pointing out LOUDLY the complete lie this gospel is.
We have absolutely everything to gain by fighting back yet it is perplexing that the one specific person who has everything to lose and gain doesn’t see this.
Again, trying to please both sides of the aisle is the kiss of death.
Dana (973491) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:42 pmbtw, Darleen, your “I confirm that the estimates of 15-20,000 are about right” at the Palin rally yesterday contradict the official LATs estimate of, “more than 8,000”.
They simply cannot reveal that Palin draws in the big numbers…Heh.
Dana (973491) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:48 pmDana
Had they sent out the word earlier, I guarantee you they could have had an even bigger crowd.
Darleen (187edc) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:50 pmMcCain, or his surrogates are now using Jackie Mason as a spokesman, to get the Jewish vote. He was forced to quit a Guiliani mayoral campaign for racist comments and he has a long history of that. So I’ll disagree with J-Ho. This is Repub cynicism not ignorance at least nopt on the part of folks like Pat. He knows about the credit swaps, but his base does not.
And they won’t learn about them from him.
Here’s David Gergen on code words. And since then Obama has literally been called “uppity” by a sitting US Congressman.
Readnek (105b91) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:52 pmHad they sent out the word earlier,
Which begs the question, why didn’t they?
Dana (973491) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:54 pmYeah, “code words”.
schmuck
decipher that
Darleen (187edc) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:55 pmDana
I don’t think they were planning on having Palin come to CA at all. California is a solid blue state.
I believe it was a short decision to have her come to help all the down ticket contests. CA Republicans have been begging the RNC for years not to forget Reagan Country.
Darleen (187edc) — 10/5/2008 @ 12:57 pmHoJo – What is this Gramm/Leach/Bliley party lines BS? It ultimately passed the Senate with a 90-8 vote. What specific part of GLB enabled credit default swaps? Were they not allowed before? Rhis seems to be a common meme on the left but nobody seems to be able to point to enabling sections of the legislation. Hopefully you can point the way for us. This troll will be different!
If the credit default swaps are priced off of actual securities (borrowings or credit ratings), doesn’t the problem begin with the underlying crap security or borrowing? Am I going too fast?
Eagerly awaiting your answers.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:00 pm“McCain, or his surrogates are now using Jackie Mason as a spokesman, to get the Jewish vote.”
Readnek – Link please.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:03 pmThe odd “griefer” troll wrote:
“…This is my last comment here….”
Um. But then continued to post.
Comment by Eric Blair — 10/5/2008 @ 11:41 am
The “griefer” troll is a long-time troll over at Protein Wisdom, usually going by the name “nishizonoshinji.” Evidently, Jeff Goldstein finally ran her off.
Mike LaRoche (6734e5) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:14 pmAs an Obama supporter, I am thrilled by McJerk’s decision to go negative. You guys are going to convert a 53%-44%-2% race into a 56%-40%-4% race. Please, McJerk, make my day!
Democrat (eb8aef) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:18 pmNow the Nutcases are really crawlin’ out of the woodwork. I hope you folks realize that, from here on out, the coverage of McJerk is increasingly going to turn into a deathwatch.
As a Democrat who has watched this sort of thing many a-time, I recognize a deathwatch when I see it!
Democrat (eb8aef) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:24 pmWoW- The only thing worse that the democrats right now -are the republicans! Look at the FACTS; it is OVER. The reality of this years election results are beginning to set in-you republicans realize that America is looking at what YOU have done in the past 8 years- YOU have ruined our country:
1. Your party took over a country with respect in the world. That respect is GONE – we are a BAD JOKE now in EVERY country and have EARNED it!
2. The democrats left you with 86 BILLION in the bank- YOU have BLOWN that and now our children will be paying off the largest debt in US history- that was BEFORE the $850 billion “bailout”- and it’s due to YOUR SCREW UPS!
I am an Independent and I have voted republican more than democrat over the past 20 years- however, I always vote for People and Policy, NOT as a result advertising and fear mongering- (funny how there are no FAKE “Orange” alerts this time- to scare people to vote republican?!) it’s time to come to grips with REALITY- you had 8 years in power and you can stick a fork in it- you’re DONE! How’s that for “folksy”- Joe six pack?
Karen Blake (b205bd) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:27 pm^ Troll.
Mike LaRoche (6734e5) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:31 pmHere is a link to everything about the bill:
http://banking.senate.gov/conf/
Here are some specific links to highlight off that site:
Gramm’s statement about the bill:
http://banking.senate.gov/prel99/1112gbl.htm
The first section seems to be the relevant one. It is called,
“TITLE I — FACILITATING AFFILIATION AMONG BANKS, SECURITIES FIRMS, AND INSURANCE COMPANIES”
http://banking.senate.gov/conf/grmleach.htm
As I understand it (and I will fully admit that I am not an economist myself and have gained a lot of knowledge not from primary sources but from non-partisan economic analysts who have discussed it at length in what I feel are very reasonable and unbiased-sounding terms), up until this point, these institutions had to maintain some distance from each other financially, due to the Glass-Steagall act of 1933, enacted to prevent the markets crashing like they did back then. This new bill was primarily geared towards repealing those rules.
The idea behind credit default swaps was invented by some young gurus at J.P. Morgan in 1995. The industry itself, however, was allowed to go completely haywire after this deregulation of 1999.
I think you are using this page for your data on the 90-8 vote, which is not a record of the vote on the bill itself:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00354
I was using this website for my data on the vote:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00105
I believe the difference is that your page is a record of a vote to approve the conference report of the bill SIX MONTHS AFTER THE BILL HAD ALREADY PASSED, whereas my website is a record of the actually VOTE ON THE BILL. That one went along party lines, 54-44, with McCain voting for and Biden voting against, if anyone’s counting.
Now, in fairness, this bill was signed into legislation by Clinton and I think supported by both Greenspan and Rubin. Again, reasons why no one’s hands are clean, and people are free to come to the conclusions they want on who to blame ultimately (I would say our government as a whole). It would just be nice if those conclusions were based on understanding more than just one miniscule portion of the issue that is being peddled in isolation by the base.
J-Ho (6039e6) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:32 pm“…Maybe he has polling that says this issue is a loser for him with undecided voters — the only ones who matter now. … My point is that whatever McCain’s reasoning, I think there can clearly be more reasons here than incompetence.
Comment by DRJ — 10/5/2008 @ 12:15 pm
McCain’s problem is that he still hasn’t sealed-the-deal with the conservative base. He has to finesse the indies, while still re-inforcing the base; or, the base will just walk away, and he loses.
Comment by J-Ho — 10/5/2008 @ 12:28 pm
Please explain how the vote in the Senate on GLB, 90-8, was a “party-line” vote?
AOracle (e6d3fc) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:36 pmAnd, when did WJC change his party affiliation to GOP? Was that before or after he signed GLB?
Comment by Dana — 10/5/2008 @ 12:48 pm
Headlined in the O.C.Register: 13000!
AOracle (e6d3fc) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:42 pmSubtext is 13000+, as 13000 is the number of tickets passed out (first come, first served) but that there were late arrivals packed around the perimeter.
I too was at a wedding yesterday. One of my wife’s colleagues. We sat with people roughly 20 years younger than me. Bioscientists all, of one kind or another. I tried to tell them about motivating the base. That there are people who will never vote for Obama but we want them to get up off the couch and go vote for McCain. They latched on to “never vote for Obama” and added “because he’s black”. I stopped talking to them.
nk (f2ee58) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:43 pmHey, if McCain still can, right up to this moment, sit in front of a news camera and say with a straight, tight, molar-grinding face and that the lipstick on a pig thing truly was a sexist dig at Palin, then bring on the “My Name is Earl” karma. (I predict McCain will launch his own Earl-fixing-his-karma program to try to recover some of the old straight-talk/strong character cred once he’s lost the election.)
Larry Reilly (d11f9a) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:50 pmMcCain is a racist. McCain is a racist. Shout it loud. It has at least as much substance to it as the lipstick on a pig riff not long ago, probably more.
For good measure, since it was asked again, I’ll repeat that clarification on the vote from my post above. These are the misconceptions I’m talking about.
ACTUAL vote for the bill, 54-44, along party lines except for one Dem, I think:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00105
Vote to approve the CONFERENCE NOTES on the bill, six months later, 90-8:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00354
J-Ho (6039e6) — 10/5/2008 @ 1:50 pm“Shout it loud”
ok.
“MAWY IS A TWELVE YEAR OLD GIRL!”
Dmac (cc81d9) — 10/5/2008 @ 2:02 pmComment by J-Ho — 10/5/2008 @ 1:50 pm
J-Ho, you ignorant ….(fill in favorite disparaging noun here):
Gramm/Leach/Bliley allowed the commercial banks to rescue the investment banks that were going upside-down; such as:
Wachovia rescued A.G.Edwards in 2007;
MorganChase rescued Bear-Stearns in 2008.
Without the repeal of the Glass-Steagall restrictions imposed on the financial community during the Great Depression (by an administration that contributed to, but did not solve the problems of same), the investment banks would be totally exposed and would face dissolution. As it is, with GLB, they are able to be saved, such as it is, by the intervention of the commercial banking sector (JPMorganChase/BankofAmerica/WellsFargo, etc.). If G-S was still in effect, we would be in the midst of a full-blown financial meltdown that would make 1933 seem like a picnic. As it is, we have a chance to avert such a tragedy, but it will be close.
Then again, we might not be in such dire straits if not for the open-wallet (Dodd, Obama, & others), and open-mouth (Reed, Schumer, & others) actions of many of our political leaders who have magnified the problems, if not actually precipitating them (Schumer with IndyMach Bank, Reed with the Insurance scare).
AOracle (e6d3fc) — 10/5/2008 @ 2:10 pmHoJo – Anyone who takes American Government in High School learns that if a different bill is passed by the House and Senate it goes back to Conference Committee to have the differences ironed out before it gets voted on by both houses again and presented to the President to become law. Only the final vote counts.
Since you can’t really explain what the enabling part of GLB was which let people go nuts with credit default swaps when they otherwise were unable to without it, my guess is you were just regurgitating a talking point on a lefty blog that sounded good but that you didn’t really understand.
Thanks for playing.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/5/2008 @ 2:11 pmyes daleyrocks, i would rather my dad was dead.
so would he in what nanoseconds of lucidity he has left.
he is a hostile zombie in depends.
he was a big 10 fullback.
last month he swung on his day nurse and broke his rib.
we lock up the knives, and we lock the doors.
im from a big irish catholic family and we all take turns going home to help keep him out of the dementia lockdown ward.
on my dkos posts i delete peoples comments that say rotten things about Palin’s kids.
so does Kos.
so you go right ahead with your campfire songs.
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 3:12 pmMcCain is busy lashing Palin to his side so he can take her down with the ship.
“…on my dkos posts i delete peoples comments that say rotten things about Palin’s kids.
so does Kos...”
We should introduce griefer to jharp; though, I’m afraid, we would end up with the worst of both, and none of the best (if there is any best).
AOracle (e6d3fc) — 10/5/2008 @ 3:22 pmnishi – Your dad sounds like a great guy. Why did you turn out to be such a worthless bint?
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/5/2008 @ 3:30 pmand….do i really need to point that the so esteemable “Culture of Life” keeps my dad’s torture going strong by both forbidding assisted suicide and ESCR?
haha, thats right….Patterico, the guy that claims Schiavo was starved to death when she weighed 230 pounds.
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 3:31 pmlol
hehe
tell you what Patterico.
when the tau-proteins and neurofibril bundles finally shut down my dads autonomous nervous system and hes dying by centimeters in hospice, i’ll invite you to come watch.
maybe you can give him some jello.
griefer (71e45d) — 10/5/2008 @ 3:49 pmWhat a fucking asshole!
disgusted (e6d3fc) — 10/5/2008 @ 3:59 pmI have no problem with straight talk about the financial crisis and I hope McCain and Palin address this issue now and in the future. But Rod Dreher of the Dallas Morning News has written the speech I wish McCain would give, and he doesn’t have to blame anyone. Of course, I’m a Texan who believes people can handle hard talk and hard times.
DRJ (c953ab) — 10/5/2008 @ 4:38 pmOkay, I can see that I will not make headway and will just make more people call me worse things the more I post, so I will stop after this, but I do think that reasonable people can make the argument that the conference vote to approve the final draft after editing by reps from House/Senate is less politically significant than the original vote to pass it in the first place–the battle has already been fought. They’re basically just approving/disapproving of the specific language to describe the ideas that have already passed as a bill months earlier.
On the other fronts, I realized after I posted that I didn’t address one of your original questions:
“If the credit default swaps are priced off of actual securities (borrowings or credit ratings), doesn’t the problem begin with the underlying crap security or borrowing? Am I going too fast?”
So here is an article that I think sums up very succinctly the tailspin that unregulated credit default swaps caused (note, I don’t know this group’s feelings on Newsweek–apologies if it’s considered a MSM leftist conspirator–but I think it’s okay to say it’s more legit than a leftist blog’s talking points? Maybe not?). The problem is simply much, much larger than some mortgages to minorities going bad, which was really my main point originally–I just wanted people to consider the whole picture:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/161199
As for connecting it to the GLB bill…I’m finding you are right that more is made of that connection than can/should be. With some more digging, I’m finding that the Commodity Futures Act of 2000 was actually the far more significant piece of legislation contributing to the default swap mess.
“Shortly after George W. Bush was elected president, Congress and President Clinton were trying to pass a $384 billion omnibus spending bill, and while the debates swirled around the passage of this bill, Senator Phil Gramm clandestinely slipped a 262-page amendment into the omnibus appropriations bill titled: Commodity Futures Modernization Act. It is likely that few senators read this bill, if any. The essence of the act was the deregulation of derivatives trading (financial instruments whose value changes in response to the changes in underlying variables; the main use of derivatives is to reduce risk for one party). The legislation contained a provision — lobbied for by Enron, a major campaign contributor to Gramm — that exempted energy trading from regulatory oversight. Basically, it gave way to the Enron debacle and ushered in the new era of unregulated securities. Interestingly enough, Gramm’s wife, Wendy, had been part of the Enron board, and her salary and stock income brought in between $900,000 and $1.8 million to the Gramm household, prior to the passage of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act.”
(Disclosure: the above quote was taken from some lawyer who raised money for Kerry/Edwards back in the day, so apologies for that connection. Here’s a Wikipedia link–I know, also not necessarily reliable, but says the same thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_Futures_Modernization_Act_of_2000. Another article about it is here: http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/post_140.php?page=all
J-Ho (6039e6) — 10/5/2008 @ 5:11 pmSomething I have learned from this discussion and my ensuing quests for documentation is that it is well-nigh impossible to find examples of anything these days that someone won’t consider biased in some way or another, so I realized that none of this will appease any of you, but it was worth a shot and at least gave me reason to continue looking further into the matter, which I always appreciate.)
J-Ho, you lost your credibility when you demonstrated your confusion on what a conference report was.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/5/2008 @ 5:31 pmHey, #136, I loved Dreher’s column. It’s a great loser’s speech, and I think McJerk ought to start practicing.
Democrat (eb8aef) — 10/5/2008 @ 5:34 pmHoJo – What caused Senators to switch their votes between the original vote and the final bill? Surely you can’t think it might have been changes made in Conference? Otherwise it would have stayed along party lines as you suggested. Y ou may want to revisit you thinking again on this point, it’s still weak.
Lefties absolutely hate Phil Gramm and are terrified that if McCain wins he’ll be part of his administration. It’s no surprise you came up with the second most popular pin the blame on Gramm bill. Again, the question you have to be able to answer is what did this bill enable companies to do, specifically financial institutions, that they were not able to do before. In my mind you have not answered that question.
I love trying to nail responsibility for Enron’s failure on Rhil Gramm, though. Did he falsify their accounting entries to hide what was going on at the company or was that management? Nice try.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/5/2008 @ 5:38 pmPatterico you are absolutely right. You do owe Sarah an apology, bercause the first few minutes of the debate where she pointed a finger at wall street corruption was exactly correct.
papertiger (e13d35) — 10/5/2008 @ 5:39 pmComment by J-Ho — 10/5/2008 @ 5:11 pm
An underlying problem with this meme is that it all goes back to Phil Gramm, who has not been mentioned in any criminal proceeding, or indictment, on any financial matter, including Enron. That IIRC also is true for his wife, who if she had done anything wrong while on the Enron Board, most certainly would have been mentioned in the subsequent litigation (at the minimum as an un-indicted, co-conspirator).
If you have any negative information on the Gramm’s (with links), I for one, would be most appreciative.
The only negative that I recall on Phil Gramm, is his remark about “whiners”, which forced his resignation from the McCain camp, and was absolutely correct in its’ attack on how American’s have regressed from a nation of doer’s (Can Do, Sir), to a collection of groups that can only find fault with something (NIMBY’s, BANANA’s, etc.) or somebody (the Geraldine Defense: The Devil made me do it!).
The concept of personal responsibility seems to be a lost asset in the American (elite) Community.
AOracle (e6d3fc) — 10/5/2008 @ 5:41 pmComment by daleyrocks — 10/5/2008 @ 5:38 pm
And, how much of Enron’s failure was due to the advice proferred by their Economic Consultant, Paul Krugman?
AOracle (e6d3fc) — 10/5/2008 @ 5:44 pm133 & 134 are closer to the nishi/griefer/quellcrist falconer people are familiar with.
nishi – Got a link for the 230 lbs? Was it all water weight if true?
burqa, burqa, burqa
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/5/2008 @ 5:45 pm“on my dkos posts i delete peoples comments that say rotten things about Palin’s kids.
so does Kos.”
Yeah, sure you do, sweetheart. I must have forgotten how decent, charitable and fair the assholes are who regularly haunt Kos’s site actually are. Would this be the same site who posted a statement from Kos himself (“screw them, I’m glad they’re dead!”), saying how awesome it was when the contractors were tortured and killed in Iraq? Why, yes it was, in fact.
You are a liar, and you know it.
Dmac (cc81d9) — 10/5/2008 @ 6:33 pmYes McCain should go on attack. He needs to fight. He needs to take people’s focus away from the ailing economy and focus it on Obama. Yes. Obama must tell us why he supports terrorists. He must explain where he was during those bombings. He must provide convincing alibi. Obama must be made to pay for this insult. Obama is a terrorist bomber. He is a secret OBL operative. His plan is to bomb the white house once he becomes President. He will destroy America. Attack Obama! Now, McCain. Fight!
love2008 (1b037c) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:10 pmlove2008, your comments are not getting any more coherent.
SPQR (26be8b) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:16 pmShe really needs to breath into a paper bag before she posts, nothing but run – on sentences that become more delusional by the day.
Dmac (cc81d9) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:22 pmSmile. Listen, this isn’t your year. Bite the bullet and throw in the towel. It’s over guys. Obama is winning and will continue to widen his lead. Just as I said earlier. No matter the stunt your people pull. The Democrats have this year. Maybe you don’t like Obama. That’s cool. No one will force you to like him. But you can learn to accept the reality as it unfolds.
love2008 (1b037c) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:28 pmObama/Biden 2008 and 2012.
griefer/nishi/kate’s father finds her vibrator. He asks, “Daughter, what’s this?”
She says, “Dad give me a break. I’m fifty years old, three hundred pounds, with stringy hair, yellow teeth, a bad complexion, and I never had a boyfriend. I live in your house, eat off your Social Security check and pay for my internet on my SSI. What else did you expect?”
Her father says, “Ok daughter, I understand”.
The next day, griefer/nishi/kate sees her father sitting at the kitchen table with her vibrator, a bottle of whiskey and two glasses full of whiskey on the table. He takes a sip from one glass and pours a little on the vibrator from the other.
griefer/nishi/kate shrieks: “Dad, what are you doing?”
He says: “What does it look like I’m doing? I’m having a drink with my son-in-law.”
nk (f2ee58) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:37 pm#148
love2008 (1b037c) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:42 pmHey, Demented Mac…….never mind.
I have a policy to show compassion to handicaps.
McCain may well lose this election; I’m going to have to grit my teeth and shut my eyes when I punch the spot opposite his name on the ballot in early November. There’s a lot not to like about John McCain. There’s even more not to like about Barack Obama. John Nance Garner once described the office of Vice President (while he was occupying the same office) as not worth a bucket of warm spit.
But I don’t see very many bright, exciting, young politicians coming up in the ranks of either party. In short, who the hell are you going to vote for in 2012 or 2016? On the Republican side, you’ve got Sarah Palin and Bobby Jindal. I’ll let the Demtrolls tell me who they’re excited about for 2012 or 2016–if they tell me Joe Biden, then they are truly brain dead. But you’ve got to have somebody on the Dem side once this empty suit Obama passes through the system. Who are they?
But if McCain blows this campaign, and in the process trashes Sarah Palin, then by God, he’s got a lot to answer for. It was a little early for her–better when she’s been Governor of Alaska for 6 years rather than just 2. And frankly it was a little early for the Obamessiah. He’d have a better amount of credibility if he’d been in the Senate for another 4 years.
Mike Myers (31af82) — 10/5/2008 @ 7:58 pmhttp://www.keatingeconomics.com/
FULL DOCUMENTARY AVAILABLE AT 12:00 PM EASTERN
Paid for by Obama for America.
hard core
Readnek (105b91) — 10/5/2008 @ 8:37 pm“On the heels of the dismissal of the Alaska attorney general’s suit to quash subpoenas issued in the legislature’s Trooper-Gate investigation, seven subpoenaed state employees who had previously said they would not cooperate with the probe have now agreed to testify.”
Readnek (105b91) — 10/5/2008 @ 8:39 pmSorry if this has been posted already – I don’t have time to read all 152 responses – but while I agree that McCain (and Palin) “wiffed,” as Brit Hume stated last week, on the 2004 Freddie/Fannie Banking Committee stuff … if they specifically aren’t talking about it now I’m beginning to think that maybe they are holding it for emphasis in one of the last debates. Although the time may have passed, they may still think they can get some mileage out of it.
MOG (36fd70) — 10/5/2008 @ 8:39 pm#152
love2008 (0c8c2c) — 10/5/2008 @ 8:44 pmI agree. But it is, what it is. And we have to work with reality.
Hey NK, at 150: that joke is really in remarkably poor taste. I’m not even on the receiving end and I find it somewhat offensive.
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 10/5/2008 @ 9:04 pmThe description of Keating Economics from the Obama website flagged by Readnek:
John McCain was accused of improperly aiding his political patron, Charles Keating, chairman of the Lincoln Savings and Loan Association. The bipartisan Senate Ethics Committee launched investigations and formally reprimanded Senator McCain for his role in the scandal — the first such Senator to receive a major party nomination for president.
At the heart of the scandal was Keating’s Lincoln Savings and Loan Association, which took advantage of deregulation in the 1980s to make risky investments with its depositors’ money. McCain intervened on behalf of Charles Keating with federal regulators tasked with preventing banking fraud, and championed legislation to delay regulation of the savings and loan industry — actions that allowed Keating to continue his fraud at an incredible cost to taxpayers.
When the savings and loan industry collapsed, Keating’s failed company put taxpayers on the hook for $3.4 billion and more than 20,000 Americans lost their savings. John McCain was reprimanded by the bipartisan Senate Ethics Committee, but the ultimate cost of the crisis to American taxpayers reached more than $120 billion.
The Keating scandal is eerily similar to today’s credit crisis, where a lack of regulation and cozy relationships between the financial industry and Congress has allowed banks to make risky loans and profit by bending the rules. And in both cases, John McCain’s judgment and values have placed him on the wrong side of history.
—————————————-
Very interesting version of history the Obama campaign has there! Also the comparison to today and cozy relationshops – I wonder if they are talking about democrats because they gey the lions share of financial contributions from
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/5/2008 @ 9:10 pmWall Street.
Palin was directed to not bring up Democrat complicity in the financial situation to avoid jeopardizing the legislation in the House. Now that the bill has been signed, the gloves will be off.
Joe (7cca4a) — 10/5/2008 @ 9:24 pmwell.
huh, did you miss “rein”? seemed like that ad went straight at what you are talking about.
anyhow,
first things first. attempting to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two months before the bubble burst (read: after the damage was done) doesn’t look like the greatest credential of all time. Especially when the bill in question (S. 190 [109th]: Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005) was never proposed on the floor of either the house or senate, and that was when both were in the control of the Republicans. To say the Democrats killed it seems a little much.
I understand your frustration, but i think that the reason the campaign isn’t attacking along this route is because they know what Sen. McCain did in regard to this situation was too little, to late, and there are various clips of him saying he didn’t see any of this coming; as such, the claim he was a visionary can be easily deflated, whether rightly or not.
To try to place the blame for this situation squarely on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will present problems of its own. Firstly, because blame doesn’t belong squarely on the two institutions of ill repute. Also because it is widely disseminated amongst the viewers that Wall St is largely to blame here (a view Gov. Palin drove home in the debate), and with it, of course, corporate greed. Trying to blame Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, and also trying to blame CRA will turn too much of the blame right back at the viewers themselves, which is patently unacceptable in a political campaign.
Also, (Palinesque of me, no?) the view espoused by a few here that since we haven’t defaulted on loans, and we didn’t get into mortgages that are way over our heads, those who did should pay the price for their actions, while emotionally more than understandable is not politically or economically viable, and is largely self destructive. A. politically not viable because those people, their friends and family are all voters. They are also all humans with dreams and eyes bigger than their stomach, as we say. They also were mislead by many. Not just Barney Frank, who honestly i don’t think many of them had heard of until recently, but by the likes of Alan Greenspan, who you would have had to have been dead not to know about back in 2000, to say nothing of 2003 and 04. These “home owners” mistakes have been highly destructive, no doubt, but to make them suffer their just desserts has already driven property values s far down that our whole economic system is being propped up by the bailout, and if these people continue to default and have their homes foreclosed… well… there must be some bottom point, right?
are you suggesting that we go there?
half of me would applaud you for such a suggestion, and say we are only getting what we deserve.
The other half has hopes of raising a family. Raising a family in a place that isn’t a shadow of its former self.
These are just my personal opinions.
But, honestly, i am not sure of who to be behind in this election.
I grew up in a conservative house, my father was an appointee under Reagan. As such i absolutely loathe our current administration. The Iraq War has single handedly destroyed the Republican party. Anyone who had any knowledge dealing with the situation in the Middle East, esp. Iraq/Iran could have and did predict this outcome from the outset. (Scowcroft immediately comes to mind)
I don’t trust Sen. McCain. He is a loose cannon and always has been. Hot tempered as may befit a senator, but does NOT befit a president. And Gov. Palin is a non entity. She is a complete and total unknown. To put her into high office would be reprobate. Sadly, i think Sen. McCain may have ruined her career for the sake of a gimmick to revitalize his campaign. This kind of action on his part is not indicative of “redeeming” qualities. The same can be said for his “suspension” of his campaign, during which he did interviews, had his surrogates on television and continued to run ads. What was suspended, i still can figure out, unless it was supposed to be our disbelief.
As for Obama. He is a magnificent orator. His speech on race is one of the most mature and balanced opinions i have heard from a politician in my mature memory. That said, is there any substance there, or are we looking at smoke and mirrors? His support of he FISA bill certainly doesn’t seem like change.
Raising taxes isn’t open for attack anymore, at least for the honest. Whoever is in office come January, taxes will have to be raised. To do anything else would be profligate at this point.
I am as yet undecided, but i don’t see much in the McCain and Palin ticket that recommends it.
What am i missing?
and don’t give me that Palin was a reformer, unless you can back it up. The bridge to nowhere blew up in her face. Selling a jet, saying the office of governor does not need it may be reform minded, but then charging the state for your family’s travel seems like she doesn’t understand the consequences of her actions, and how expensive the consequences can be.
Air Force One on E-bay i would like to see though. That would be something.
Whistle blowing on the still head of the Republican party in her state. I don’t get that. How do you blow the whistle on someone, but they are allowed to keep their position?
i don’t know. i have to be missing something.
coach (68d8ee) — 10/5/2008 @ 10:33 pmi don’t know. i have to be missing something.
You’re missing that you’re a partisan hack, and that belching talking points isn’t ‘analysis’. Skimming your shit reminds me of O.J.’s book.
Example: And Gov. Palin is a non entity. She is a complete and total unknown. To put her into high office would be reprobate.
Your reason to support Obama?
He is a magnificent orator. His speech on race is one of the most mature and balanced opinions i have heard from a politician in my mature memory.
You obviously agree with Hillary Clinton that Obama is not ready to be President, as you share her view of his single ‘accomplishment’. Hillary thought McCain has the experience to be President.
You’ll vote for the “D”, no matter the facts. Stop wasting everyone’s time pretending otherwise.
Apogee (366e8b) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:04 pmmature memory coach?
I think puberty is just around the corner for you.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/5/2008 @ 11:14 pmI grew up in a conservative house, my father was an appointee under Reagan.
i don’t know. i have to be missing something
I have so many flip lines to say to such a “conservative concern troll”, but there’s this nice cup of morning coffee that needs my attention.
Darleen (187edc) — 10/6/2008 @ 6:08 amso just ad homs, not actual arguments?
i am serious and undecided.
conservative concern troll…. hahahahahhahaha.
because McCain and Palin are conservatives.
right.
i think everyone has forgotten what conservatism used to be.
if all you can do is insult me, and not present any arguments, then you would do yourself a service by not speaking/writing.
coach (68d8ee) — 10/6/2008 @ 7:09 amI am as yet undecided
coach – You don’t sound undecided at all. That’s why people are laughing at you.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 10/6/2008 @ 11:01 amdaleyrocks,
that i understand.
however, the fact is that i grew up in a republican house, and i have always felt that conservatism was the right path.
The reason i am undecided is because i don’t feel at all represented by the Republicans, and i don’t feel represented by the Left either.
Yes, Obama can speak well, any one who doesn’t recognize that is either pretending or oblivious to good oratory, but his policies and his inconsistencies are frightening. I mentioned in my original post, but, look, this is a conservative blog so i ask for reasons for supporting the “conservative” candidate. It wouldn’t make sense if i were to ask for reasons to vote for Obama.
does that make any sense?
coach (68d8ee) — 10/6/2008 @ 7:29 pm