home

Instead Of Canceling The Debate . . .

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:31:35 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

as John McCain has proposed, why not have a discussion about the Wall Street credit/mortgage crisis instead? John McCain can discuss what he thinks is important about it and what we should do about it and Obama can do the same.

If they happen to agree on the issue, so much for the better. When the two people from which our next President will be chosen agree on a solution, then that will be the plan to follow, since one of them will have to live with it come next January 20.

Let's not run away from the issue Senator McCain, let's discuss it for the sake of the American People. Barack Obama should offer this change to John McCain, for the sake of the country.

Greg Sargent agrees with me: "Obama will make a public statement on this shortly -- it'll be interesting to see if Obama calls on McCain to do the debate on other terms. For instance, he could invite McCain to make the debate about the economy, rather than about national security."

(Emphasis supplied.)

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< Wednesday Open Thread | Obama Responds To McCain Debate Gambit >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Instead Of Canceling The Debate . . . | 155 comments (155 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Hey (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:33:35 PM EST
    Good idea!

    Yeah... (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by Thanin on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:35:36 PM EST
    Id rather have a president that can multitask than one that cant handle more than one problem at a time.

    Parent
    MSNBC reports that Obama about to say (5.00 / 3) (#59)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:21:14 PM EST
    that candidates should be able to multi-task, that the debate should go on, and that subject of debate should be augmented. And Obama spokesperson is saying "the only thing that has changed is John McCain's standing in the polls."

    Joe Lieberman is now on whining that it's too bad that Obama doesn't recognize that now is the time to put politics aside, he hopes Obama thinks twice about this.  Shuster says, what changed between yesterday when McCain was campaigning and today.  Lieberman says, McCain is necessary, his return is the single most important thing to help this legislation pass. He's proud that McCain is doing this. The debate doesn't have to be cancelled, it can be rescheduled to when the crisis is over.

    Heads up, Joe.  The crisis isn't going to be over for YEARS.  

    Parent

    That depends on what you reckon (none / 0) (#136)
    by Salo on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 05:09:59 PM EST
    is happening out there.  

    The cycle becoming New Deal style socialism--or a really bad blip.

    Obama doesn't strike me as someone who intends (based on his writing) to overhaul any fundamental princle of capitalism.

    Parent

    And, corrente is reporting that Obama has given up (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by jawbone on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 06:35:07 PM EST
    the idea of mortgage assistance, saying he doesn't want to do it, but if it will make the Paulson Fix Is In more bipartisan, he'll sacrifice his principles and vote to leave it out.

    Okay then.

    Let's see: Healthcare--too expensive with the $7B etc. bailouts. Maybe some other time.
    Mortgage assistance--not now, to partisan. Maybe some other time.

    Wasn't there something about tax cuts for the uberwealth during a recession?

    Parent

    so it proves to be games. (none / 0) (#148)
    by Salo on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 07:27:54 PM EST
    7oo freaking billion and these buggers can't natinaize the health industry--pull the other one Barack.

    Parent
    You know (5.00 / 1) (#106)
    by patriotgames on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:51:44 PM EST
    I can see some interesting backlash on this.

    There was a candidate for the Senate who wanted to debate the incumbent, but said incumbent never wanted to, so the candidate went ahead  with the debates anyway. "What I would say in a hypothetica response to my opponent..." complete with a cardboard cut out of the incumbent.

    This seems funny, but can you imagine the backlash if Miss goes ahead and sets up and Obama is there and they have to explain it?

    "I would be debating John McCain, but he seems to think it is more important to vote in the Senate than to debate me."

    This isn't the sort of thing you vote "present" on, after all.

    Parent

    Absolutely not (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by Faust on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:36:19 PM EST
    That makes way way way way way WAY too much sense.

    It is therefore unacceptable.

    Absolutely not what? n/t (none / 0) (#85)
    by Don in Seattle on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:35:54 PM EST


    Parent
    1000% - But Not Only Discussion/ Debates on (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by TearDownThisWall on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:37:32 PM EST
    Finance....but the two should be spending every Friday night togther....one moderator.... hours of ideas, conversations, debates....and most importnat solutions on every issue-
    Iraq, Health Care, Education...
    (instead we get McNews and a gaggle of gotchyas, gaffes and goofs).

    Does either candidate have (5.00 / 0) (#8)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:43:26 PM EST
    enough solid information to speak meaningfully this Friday about what Congress should do and what the next President will do regarding the economy?

    I kinda doubt it. (4.00 / 0) (#13)
    by Pegasus on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:46:06 PM EST
    But I'd love to see McCain try.  I think Obama could at least muddle his way through it without coming off as clueless.

    Parent
    An overnight reconversion reversion (none / 0) (#137)
    by Salo on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 05:11:43 PM EST
    rehabilitation to some left wingedness could either propel him to the 55% mark or sink him utterly.

    It's actually going to be a glasgow mega snake debate--if the party wants it that is.  

    Parent

    Oculus, we all ... (4.00 / 0) (#23)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:52:51 PM EST
    know that if Hillary was at the head of the ticket, she'd be looking at a 20 point lead right now.

    But we've gotta go with the leader that the party chose, and push him to where he needs to be.

    Parent

    Exactly when (none / 0) (#12)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:46:02 PM EST
    will they gain this experience?  Next week?  3 weeks?  

    Before the election?  

    Parent

    Oculus (none / 0) (#116)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:04:55 PM EST
    I don't think either one of them was prepared to talk in depth about the economy or the bail-out plan.  My guess would be that the Obama side is breathing a big sigh of relief that McCain effectively canceled the debate.


    Parent
    You may be right. (none / 0) (#127)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:53:06 PM EST
    The only thing I've heard from the candidates on the bail out [admittedly I haven't watched TV] is McCain saying there must be conditions.  Doesn't appear either candidate wants to be too closely associated with this mess at present.

    Parent
    yeah it's a shock to the entire system. (none / 0) (#139)
    by Salo on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 05:12:53 PM EST
    all the smug rightist economists have been caught napping.

    Parent
    Cancel? (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by ks on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:46:54 PM EST
    Doesn't McCain want to delay the debate?  Your idea is not bad BTD but, I think the old slickster bastad McCain has made a clever move here.  

    Also, I suspect his reply to your proposal would be something along the lines of: "I feel that the American people would want their elected leaders to burn the midnight oil to actually work on a solution to the crisis rather than listen to a discussion about the issue between me and my opponent. Blah, blah, blah"  

    This problem... (none / 0) (#140)
    by CoralGables on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 05:14:07 PM EST
    has been eight years in the making. I'd prefer they not make any rash decisions on spending money we don't have until after a new president is in office. This one has done enough damage. Burn the midnight oil all they want but do it over the next 16 weeks and present the plan to a new president in January.

    Parent
    but if they debate it in public (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Turkana on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:53:45 PM EST
    he'll have to actually talk about an issue he knows nothing about. but if he cancels the debate and joins his running mate in hiding, he can pretend to be doing something without actually having to do something.

    Well (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:58:00 PM EST
    Obama's point here is transparency it seems to me. Sunshine.

    Let the American People know what the next President of the US, be he Obama or McCain thinks about this.

    Parent

    mccain's just digging himself in deeper (none / 0) (#104)
    by Turkana on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:51:09 PM EST
    this should, indeed, be an easy play for obama.

    Parent
    ah (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by connecticut yankee on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:56:38 PM EST
    Ah, now Ive read the McCain statement I see what he's doing.  Trying to step in and play leader when the congress already signalled this was going to happen this weekend.

    So many gimmicks with his campaign.  Next he'll include a decoder ring with every purchase of McCain Loops.

    Pretty bold and clever move (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by frankly0 on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:13:30 PM EST
    by McCain, though I can see just about no one here is going to give him credit for it.

    It makes him look once again as the innovative one, the potential agent of change, because he will go against conventional wisdom and make a very surprising choice. That's exactly what happened of course with his selection of Palin -- a move that benefited McCain even past the time when Palin's glow faded, because it still looked like an innovative choice to people, and as if McCain would do things to "shake things up" in Washington.

    On the other hand, we see nothing but the safest of moves from Obama.

    Is McCain's move "desperate"? Well, perhaps it's a Hail Mary, alright, and "desperate" in that sense. But Hail Mary's look bold as well. Playing prevent defense for the entire fourth quarter doesn't look bold. When's the last time Obama did something genuinely bold? Never, maybe?

    That, I think, is why McCain's move creates a problem in perception for Obama. Obama never surprises, even though he's the purported "agent of change", and McCain is the purported cranky, old man McSame who can't change anything.

    Likely McCain will remain behind the 8-ball because of the financial crisis, but I'd be surprised if this move didn't push him in a more positive direction.

    Just another point (5.00 / 2) (#62)
    by frankly0 on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:21:57 PM EST
    Obama is simply far too passive and reactive in his politics. He rides the surge for "change" in the primaries and the general, he rides the policy initiatives created by others, he rides the tide favoring Democrats this year, he rides the current financial crisis.

    But he creates nothing on his own.

    McCain surprises again and again. He postpones the Republican convention. He chooses Palin. Now he cancels the debate. He's taking the lemons 2008 has offered him and figured out how to make lemonade out of them.

    While I certainly agree that Obama's policies (which are boilerplate Democratic policies) put McCain's to shame, it's hard to see much value that Obama adds to any of them. McCain, for a 72 year old guy, seems awfully resourceful to me.

    Parent

    but (none / 0) (#86)
    by connecticut yankee on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:35:59 PM EST
    Well, its a risk.

    At some point you stop having a campaign and start having an unserious carnival.  We'll know soon enough if he's reached that point.

    Parent

    This is a stunt (none / 0) (#109)
    by PolSynth on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:55:46 PM EST
    Please. It is yet another example of McCain seeking to twist circumstances to create the impression that he is putting country first when he's actually trying to score political points. It's the same as his exploitation of 9/11, his selection of Palin to divide the country along cultural fault lines without adequate vetting. At the start of all this he found every possible way to blame Obama for issues that he had nothing to do with so don't pretend that now he's putting country first because he's made a stunningly self-serving and  calculated political move.

    Parent
    Looks like a stunt mostly (none / 0) (#56)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:20:27 PM EST
    But I would take the opportunity if I were Obama and make the discussion about the credit/mortgage crisis on Wall Street.

    No better way to let the American People know what is going on than to have the two men who are vying to be the next President spend 90 minutes talking about it in front of 50 million Americans.

    What's wrong with that idea?

    Parent

    Your idea (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by frankly0 on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:28:02 PM EST
    is probably a good one, but of course whether it might be adopted is purely a political one.

    My guess is that McCain would argue that the important thing to do now for a political leader is to grapple with the problem directly (because it's so "urgent"), and discuss with the American people later how the "solution" was settled upon. What the American people want out of a leader, I think he'd argue, is action, not words or explanations.

    I have a feeling he'd be right to believe that most voters would prefer that approach.

    Parent

    Fair enough (none / 0) (#80)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:32:43 PM EST
    Obama can say he wants to talk to the American People, and McCain can say he wants to to talk his Washington cronies.

    I like the optics on that one.

    Parent

    I LOVE IT (none / 0) (#89)
    by andgarden on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:38:12 PM EST
    John McCain is running back into the arms of George W. Bush.

    Parent
    Shouldn't both Obama and McCain (none / 0) (#132)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 05:04:34 PM EST
    try to get the most current and solid information about whether a bail out is necessary and, if so, how it should be structured?  Do they get that from their economic advisors, whomever that may be; or from the people in DC providing info to the Congress and from their colleagues in Congress and their Senate staffers?  

    Parent
    Well, I'm an American person (none / 0) (#143)
    by sallywally on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 06:02:10 PM EST
    and I want to hear words - how a leader thinks and what his/her plan is - not have someone rush off half-cocked as Paulson, et. al want the Congress to do.

    Of course, McCain loves rushing off like that,and if we want another cowboy president, he would fit the bill.

    But I'm not sure that is what Americans want. It sounds to me from the news I'm hearing that more of us do not support the swindle they're trying to pull - and see it for what it is.

    And are likely to see McCain's stunt for what it is.


    Parent

    Stunt or not... (none / 0) (#68)
    by kredwyn on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:27:07 PM EST
    the statement had made some interesting points...real people...real problems...time for action and both sides coming together, not "gotcha" games.

    Parent
    Nonsequitor to my comment (none / 0) (#74)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:29:48 PM EST
    What's wrong with talking to the American People about it? John McCain wants to talk to his Washington cronies about it it seems to me.

    Parent
    Wow, there's the answer (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by andgarden on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:36:28 PM EST
    If I'm making a quick response ad, the script is something like this:

    John McCain hasn't showed up for work since April. Now that the economy is in crisis he wants to cancel the debate and rush back to his Washington cronies. [Picture of McCain hugging W]

    He needs their help: John McCain admits that he doesn't really understand the economy, and last week even even said it was "fundamentally sound."

    John McCain may be afraid to talk about the issues affecting your family budget, but Barack Obama is not.

    Barack Obama has a plan to turn the economy around, create jobs, blah, blah.




    Parent
    The bad thing about the line (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by patriotgames on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:54:51 PM EST
    "John McCain hasn't shown up for work..." is that NEITHER HAS OBAMA.

    Parent
    Obama has a better work record this Congress (none / 0) (#112)
    by andgarden on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:58:39 PM EST
    than McCain.

    Parent
    yeah but (none / 0) (#119)
    by patriotgames on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:11:53 PM EST
    he actually shows up and votes FOR FISA what does that matter???

    Parent
    Ok, whatever (none / 0) (#120)
    by andgarden on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:15:49 PM EST


    Parent
    Now see, there you go bashing (none / 0) (#131)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 05:01:44 PM EST
    Obama. It would be interesting to know how many votes Obama and McCain have missed in the Senate since each announced he was running for President.  

    Parent
    Google is my friend (none / 0) (#133)
    by CST on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 05:07:49 PM EST
    This is the current senate term

    John McCain is #1 and he is the only member to have missed over 50% of the votes.  He missed 64% compared to Obama at 46%.

    Parent

    Very quick. Thanks. (none / 0) (#141)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 05:38:12 PM EST


    Parent
    yeah but (again) (none / 0) (#152)
    by patriotgames on Thu Sep 25, 2008 at 01:33:09 PM EST
    if you look there are MANY similarities between the two re: missed votes.

    As a matter of fact it is virtually IDENTICAL from May -

    Parent

    and I also believe that those are (none / 0) (#153)
    by patriotgames on Thu Sep 25, 2008 at 01:34:53 PM EST
    missed votes per CAREER in the Senate, not just the last year.

    Parent
    oops my bad (none / 0) (#155)
    by patriotgames on Thu Sep 25, 2008 at 01:41:30 PM EST
    It was this term. But the point still stands, they are virtually identical from May -

    Parent
    and I also believe that those are (none / 0) (#154)
    by patriotgames on Thu Sep 25, 2008 at 01:35:35 PM EST
    missed votes per CAREER in the Senate, not just the last year.

    Parent
    Let's consider a few facts (none / 0) (#94)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:42:24 PM EST
    The stock market first tanked last Monday.  On Wednesday, the AIG bailout was announced.  It was clear to any rational person that we had a very serious problem.

    A week later, McCain admitted he had not even read the Bush/Paulson bailout plan as yet.

    Then suddenly, he decides the next day that this crisis is really important and it's worth canceling a debate over.  Gee, this kind of timely response to a crisis reminds me of nothing but this.

    Parent

    John McCain is a gambler (5.00 / 2) (#98)
    by andgarden on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:46:31 PM EST
    When he feels like he's behind, he'll raise.

    That was Palin, and that is this. But I think he just made a bad bet.

    Parent

    Not a non sequitor... (none / 0) (#90)
    by kredwyn on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:38:16 PM EST
    your subject line reads "Looks like a stunt mostly."

    The rest was just a thought re: the stunt factor.

    Nothing's wrong with talking to the American people. But the point of the discussion, according to the statement, was to bring both sides together (including both candidates) and figure out something to take to those same American people.

    (and no, I wasn't being confrontational...just thinking about what I heard on the radio on my way home from work)

    Parent

    Nothing wrong with it (none / 0) (#77)
    by ks on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:30:20 PM EST
    It's just a matter of perspective.

    Just words vs Just actions.  McCain is trying to play the latter game now.  

    Parent

    Nonsense (none / 0) (#78)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:31:58 PM EST
    This is just a stunt, not actions. Sheesh, do not tell me you buy this BS?

    Some people.

    Parent

    You're not paying attention (none / 0) (#88)
    by ks on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:37:02 PM EST
    I didn't say I bought into McCain's move.  I'm just telling you how I think he's playing the political.   You may dismiss it as just a stunt but so what?  That doesn't mean it isn't a good one.

    Parent
    the obligatory mention (none / 0) (#91)
    by of1000Kings on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:40:31 PM EST
    of Karl Rove....

    the master stunt-puller..

    hey, the polls come out and you're sliding...what do you do...force both campaigns to suspend until a later date by pulling a stunt...

    even Shepard on Faux News wasn't falling for it when I was watching...that says something to me right there...

    Parent

    Harry Reid (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by magster on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:23:51 PM EST
    "I understand that the candidates are putting together a joint statement at Senator Obama's suggestion. But it would not be helpful at this time to have them come back during these negotiations and risk injecting presidential politics into this process or distract important talks about the future of our nation's economy. If that changes, we will call upon them. We need leadership; not a campaign photo op."

    Just posted at TPM

    "But it would not be helpful" (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by patriotgames on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:58:10 PM EST
    WHAT?? It wouldn't be helpful for them to DO THEIR JOB? You know the one they got elected for in the firstplace??

    Sorry.

    DOES. NOT. COMPUTE.

    Parent

    I agree. Shorter Reid: please (none / 0) (#134)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 05:08:18 PM EST
    don't either of you candidates, one of whom I wholeheartedly support, dare come here and mess everything up.  This is my show, darnit.

    Parent
    Yup. (none / 0) (#67)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:26:48 PM EST
    Here's what I suggested he should say:

    I'm Obama, I respond by saying:

    "These are the joint principles. The Congress and Treasury are full of very capable people who have been working this issue for some time. Me and McCain jumping in now will only complicate and slow things down. Let's, McCain and I, take the time to explain to the American people - through the context of a debate (it would be disrespectful of us to all the people who did all the prep work for the debate, plus a lot of people are looking forward to watching it) - how the problem arose, what we are having people do toward resolving it, and where we will be going from here. After all, as President, one does have to delegate, trust that the subordinates will do their jobs well and follow up when they don't."

    Great minds think alike?

    Parent

    The right tone (none / 0) (#75)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:29:50 PM EST
    but be prepared for all sorts of sanctimonious grandstanding from the GOP about how McCain's presence is EXACTLY what the negotiations need.  As if any of his Senate colleagues would even recognize him if he weren't on TV all the time, given his attendance record.

    Parent
    Don't Agree w BTD (5.00 / 1) (#79)
    by SomewhatChunky on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:32:28 PM EST
    They should not debate this issue at this time.  That would only serve to politicize the problem with partisans on both sides falling into line behind the "Obama" approach or the "McCain" approach.

    Frankly, I doubt either campaign has the staff with the ability to effectively analyze this issue or suggest solutions.  Even if they did, any "solution" woud be heavily influenced by a campaign's perecption of short-term political benefits.

    I think Paulson has done a good job in the last few weeks after being dealt a bad hand.    Hopefully, experts on both sides of the aisle can agree on appropriate compromises and get a solution implemented as quickly as possible.  If it turns into an argument of partisan sound bites, I think the outcome for our economy could be disastrous.

    Though it's difficult, I say keep partisan politics out of this as much as possible.   This is a serious issue.  It must be solved.   It's also difficult to both understand and explain.   In my opinion, solving this is bigger than the presidential election.

    It's 3:00 a.m. Unusual time for a debate. Still, (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by Don in Seattle on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:49:37 PM EST
    I'd like to know what the candidates think about this crisis.

    Parent
    Wha? (none / 0) (#82)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:33:37 PM EST
    You think the American People should not hear about this? What the F*ck? Seriously, WTF?

    Parent
    WTF... (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by SomewhatChunky on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:43:37 PM EST
    I appreciate the eloquence of your reply.  

    I didn't say they shouldn't hear about it.  I said try to keep a BI-PARTISAN solution out of the political arena.  I don't think the Obama campaign or the McCain campaign have the ability to solve the problem or even understand it.  Some things are too complex for non-experts to decide effectively.  Heart surgery would be an example.  I think this problem is as well.

    If you make it a topic of the debate, then the candidates positions on this issue become defacto "solutions" which will be pushed by both sides as part of the presidential campaign.

    I'm fear a political solution could result in a world-wide deep recession which hasn't been seen in this country in decades.

    Parent

    I agree with you 100 percent (none / 0) (#121)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:21:06 PM EST
    Let them debate it after it's done.  Then they can do all the political posturing and grandstanding they want without damage.

    Let the people who actually know what they're talking about explain the bail-out issues  to the public and the guys who only know what they've memorized from their briefing books stfu.

    Neither one of them is prepared to discuss this rationally in any detail.  They should wait until it's all over and then debate their ideas on how to fix the broader economy.

    Parent

    Maybe we should just suspend the elections? (none / 0) (#123)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:25:01 PM EST
    Less than 40 days away from the election. No matter what that day is coming up on us.  

    Parent
    Don't be such a moron (none / 0) (#125)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:33:22 PM EST


    Parent
    Don't say silly things (none / 0) (#128)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:57:51 PM EST
    Politics are unavoidable.

    Parent
    Um (none / 0) (#147)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 07:09:55 PM EST
    Look in the mirror.

    Parent
    the people who actually know what they're (none / 0) (#156)
    by of1000Kings on Thu Sep 25, 2008 at 02:25:34 PM EST
    talking about?

    aren't they the reason we are in this mess to begin with?

    Parent

    Do you understand (none / 0) (#122)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:23:21 PM EST
    what politicians do?

    To suggest that this crisis rises above politics is so incredibly absurd and naive I don't know how to respond.

    Parent

    Do you understand (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by SomewhatChunky on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 05:00:27 PM EST
    what happens to the global economy if the world's credit markets cease to function?  Well, neither does your senator or congressman.

    Politicians do what politicians do.  To pretend otherwise is so absurd and naive I don't know how to respond.

    That's why I think a bi-partisan non-political solution to this problem is important.

    Parent

    There is no such thing (none / 0) (#135)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 05:09:17 PM EST
    as a non-political Congressional solution to a problem.  It is a myth.

    Parent
    True, but... (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by SomewhatChunky on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 05:48:09 PM EST
    Some approaches are far less political than others.

    A presidential debate on a topic is about as political as it gets.....

    Parent

    McCain's showing his cowardice, (1.50 / 2) (#16)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:48:20 PM EST
    insecurity, arrogance, and lack of character.

    He's afraid to face Obama one-on-one in a debate.  It's not the first time he's broken - he broke when he was a POW.*

    He's unwilling to accept that the rest of DC could take a joint statement of principles (which he and Obama would put out together) and put together a bill which would be acceptable.  He doesn't believe anything gets done without him, and is so insecure in that and in his position in the polls that he has to inject himself into the middle and steal the spotlight.

    He's been on the campaign trail so long he's probably forgotten how to get to his office in the Capitol.  His committees haven't done anything (except bury the Abramoff papers) and he hasn't voted on anything all year.  But, he is so arrogant that he thinks his appearance will solve all the problems and save the day.

    And he's trying to hide his own failings and dishonesty by dragging Obama down with him into this mud.  Yet again.

    -

    * And when someone jumps in my sh*t about this - think about this, first.  At an Oregon Bible College where McCain had a rally recently, an effigy of Obama was found the other morning hanging by a noose from a tree with a sign "Act 6 Reject" (Act 6 being a form of need-based affirmative action).  You want to have your supporters doing the Klukker, Johnny?  You gotta deal with being called out for being a coward and weak under pressure.

    You do not help Obama (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:53:36 PM EST
    by repeatedly posting this sort of smack-talk.

    I'd be curious how well you would hold up under torture as a POW.

    Parent

    Well said. (none / 0) (#53)
    by Don in Seattle on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:18:52 PM EST
    While I, too, am angry at McCain, we can all do without the POW-bashing.

    Parent
    this (3.50 / 2) (#41)
    by jedimom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:09:55 PM EST
    this is exactly the kind of thing that makes me feel like defending a Republican. You dont help Obama with this sort of thing IMO.

    Parent
    Turns out this stuff is just fine (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Cream City on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:13:00 PM EST
    with Jeralyn now.  

    Too bad.  This is not the time for the campaign to panic and push this stuff.

    Parent

    the campaign? (none / 0) (#50)
    by wystler on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:16:23 PM EST
    please explain ...

    Parent
    Cream city is just grumpy because (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by independent voter on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:30:18 PM EST
    Obama is winning Wisconsin

    Parent
    well ...? (none / 0) (#49)
    by wystler on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:15:51 PM EST
    don't talk sideways. defend McCain.

    explain why his desire to postpone debate is a good thing.

    we're all waiting ...

    Parent

    um (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by patriotgames on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:00:26 PM EST
    How about so they can do their damn JOB????

    Parent
    Harry Reid press release (none / 0) (#129)
    by wystler on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:58:08 PM EST
    ... suggested that, rather than being helpful, McCain's presence would serve as an obstacle to progress on working out the issues.

    Parent
    ya (none / 0) (#73)
    by connecticut yankee on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:28:51 PM EST
    Yeah, because that guy is clearly an Obama spokesperson. lol.

    McCain is no coward but he's clearly reaching for the panic button once too often.   At some point the public could tire of his gimmicks and hail mary passes.  Once his campaign starts to have that smell of desperation, its hard to wash off.

    Parent

    If only the Obama campaign could call him a coward (none / 0) (#26)
    by shoephone on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:54:07 PM EST
    without getting slammed for it by the sensitive little children in the GOP and in the media.

    Straight-talking maverick? Nope. A total chickensh*t is more like it.

    Parent

    I'm going to bet... (none / 0) (#72)
    by kredwyn on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:28:20 PM EST
    50p that you're reading it wrong.

    Parent
    Instead of MORE secrecy and. . . (none / 0) (#4)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:37:27 PM EST
    behind the doors deals, America needs more openness.  Go on TV.  Talk about the economy.  Don't hide in DC.

    Have the debat on the Senate floor (none / 0) (#17)
    by robrecht on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:49:11 PM EST
    Or even a joint session.  Expose all of those idiots to more public scrutiny, not just the CSPAN camara man.  Actually, some have even made a little bit of sense so far this week.  So far, anyway.  

    Parent
    Very interesting! (none / 0) (#145)
    by jawbone on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 06:38:34 PM EST
    I do find myself wondering if there's some Br'er Rabbit trick going on here: Oh, no, please don't thrown me into the briar patch! Oh, no, no, no.

    Maybe McCain wants the Friday debate to be about the economy and has some surprises planned.

    Also, Obama is not good extemporaneously--or at least has not been in the past.

    Is this some kind of Rovian two-fer play, of which the Repubs are so fond?

    Parent

    if obama goes all populist (none / 0) (#150)
    by Salo on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 07:33:54 PM EST
    he's undermined his own defeat of Edwards and Clinton.  The two angry populists.

    Parent
    Ridiculous Stunt (none / 0) (#6)
    by indy in sc on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:40:19 PM EST
    McCain's move, that is.  If he becomes president, McCain cannot pause one crisis to deal with another.  He has to be able to function on several fronts.  Is he saying he can't do that?  

    Even Bush is going through the motions (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:44:07 PM EST
    of addressing the nation.  Not that he's going to say anything worthwhile, or be involved in the actual negotiations.

    Perhaps McCain didn't want to have to take questions on Friday about Bush's speech tonight.

    And McCain hasn't been prepping for an economic debate. He's been prepping for a foreign policy debate. (With Michael Steel!!!!) So how could McCain stuff his head full of Phil Gramm's talking points in just a day and a half.

    Note also that McCain is going to go ahead and speak tonight at the Clinton Global Initiative.

    Parent

    What's the other "crisis" in this case? (none / 0) (#43)
    by ks on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:11:43 PM EST
    In this case, it's an actual crisis vs a debate, no?

    Parent
    No, (none / 0) (#83)
    by indy in sc on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:33:43 PM EST
    this is a crisis vs an election that is going to happen in 40 days regardless of what is happening on Wall St.  

    The American people deserve to get the information they need about the candidates in making a decision.  A one and a half hour debate on Friday is not going to be the downfall of a bailout bill.  

    McCain wants us to believe this can't get done without him and Obama being physically there.  He claims he wants to pull politics out of this when jumping into this more directly and inviting Obama to do the same heightens the level of politics at play in this and I think, distracts from anything useful getting done.

    Parent

    I thought it was interesting... (none / 0) (#57)
    by kredwyn on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:20:31 PM EST
    as was the fact that he rejected the Paulson Plan.

    A campaign isn't a crisis...it's a campaign.

    Parent

    Good call. (none / 0) (#7)
    by Pegasus on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:43:21 PM EST
    Seems like a great potential rebuttal for the O team.

    Unlike some, I'm actually pretty concerned about McCain's postponement proposal today.  It's a deft political maneuver IMO.  If accepted it gets the cameras off the candidates for a bit during what can only be a bad news cycle for him.  If rejected, McCain can jump on Obama for trying to take political advantage of a disaster (which is IMO the only decent counterattack he has available to him right now).

    Yes, his spokesperson Nancy (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:49:12 PM EST
    the Liar was just on TV saying that this is what McCain always does: "He puts country first."  Setting politics aside.

    You know, when there is a foreign or domestic crisis, it is supposed to be part of the political dialogue. It's called "accountability." It's called government by and for the people. Paulson's proposal is all black box, no review, no oversight, complete discretion, a commander in chief of the no-longer-free markets.  This is how we got stuck in Iraq, this is how we got the Patriot Act.

    Obama should go to DC, roll his sleeves up, do interviews and speeches from DC, and show up for the debate even if he is alone.  He talks about the economy, he announces he's going back to work on the Hill as soon as he is done.

    Some idiot is on TV telling Norah that this is 'McCain in the driver's seat...this is the McCain people love...putting country first...blah blah blah."

    Parent

    Move plays to the base and to the McCain themes (none / 0) (#71)
    by stefystef on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:28:15 PM EST
    of "Country First" and "Reform".

    While the idea of changing the debate issue is a good idea, for the Republican base, McCain's actions will look good.  It gives the impression that McCain cares about the country (Country First) and wants to change Washington (Reform).

    It puts Obama on the spot, especially since McCain asked for a "delay" not a cancellation.  McCain is trying to look like a "leader" who know his actions in Washington can make him look "presidential" first.

    If they postpone one week, will it make a difference?  And for whom?

    Parent

    There is no reason to postpone (none / 0) (#113)
    by shoephone on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:59:53 PM EST
    None.

    Parent
    I agree about ... (none / 0) (#20)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:49:34 PM EST
    it being deft politically.  I argued for one of them to do this days ago.

    It's really just politics 101.  If you're running for office, you want to be where the news trucks are.

    All the focus is on Congress this week, so that's where I'd place my candidate.

    Parent

    Great Idea (none / 0) (#10)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:45:00 PM EST
    And exactly how Obama should respond.  Obama should suggest that the topic of Friday's debate be the economy and not foreign policy matters.  

    But then Jim Lehrer (none / 0) (#19)
    by indy in sc on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:49:30 PM EST
    would have to work on a whole new set of questions! ;)

    Honestly, Mr. "Fundamentals of this Economy are Strong" now suddenly wants to drop everything to deal with the economy.  Hmmm.

    Parent

    BTD has got the right ... (none / 0) (#11)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:45:53 PM EST
    reaction.  But I wish Obama had played this card first.

    I just hope this just doesn't allow Obama to run back to his unity pony rhetoric.  It's the Republican economic stupidity, that really began with Reagan, that got us into this mess.

    He needs to show that the Democratic Party offers very different solutions.

    That the contrast couldn't be more stark.

    Obama led on the issue - (none / 0) (#21)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:49:49 PM EST
    he called McCain about 8:30 this morning and proposed they put out a joint statement of principles that a plan/bill should incorporate.

    McCain is trying to steal the limelight, and credit.

    Parent

    That's not the ... (none / 0) (#27)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:56:06 PM EST
    same move.

    Don't you see the difference?


    Parent

    No, but it showed more thoughtful initiative (none / 0) (#33)
    by robrecht on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:00:52 PM EST
    And it's clear that McCain was merely trying to pull a reactive stunt.

    Parent
    All I'm saying ... (5.00 / 0) (#38)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:06:14 PM EST
    is McCain played the better stunt politically.

    And the press will rally to his side on this.

    It may not matter, however, I think the public is ahead of the curve.

    The D after his name may save Obama in the end, even if he plays things stupidly politically for the next next 5 weeks.

    Parent

    I like my stunt better (none / 0) (#60)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:21:25 PM EST


    Parent
    Depends (none / 0) (#63)
    by robrecht on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:22:03 PM EST
    on how Obama responds, which he is expected to do presently.

    Parent
    Is he stalling (none / 0) (#15)
    by WS on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:47:19 PM EST
    for more debate prep time?  

    Yes, he is. (none / 0) (#28)
    by shoephone on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:56:30 PM EST
    He is totally unprepared to address the economic issues.

    Parent
    Isnt the first debate on Foreign Policy? (none / 0) (#36)
    by ks on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:05:15 PM EST


    Parent
    is it so difficult ... (none / 0) (#51)
    by wystler on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:18:25 PM EST
    ... to see the interlink between the two?

    Parent
    well (none / 0) (#52)
    by connecticut yankee on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:18:28 PM EST
    Theyll bring it up anyway at the start.  McCain has a conservative base that is puling its hair out over socialized markets.   He wont have a position by Friday. Or would prefer not to have one.

    Parent
    You can't go around the world starting wars (none / 0) (#54)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:19:26 PM EST
    like McCain wants to, without money and an economy to pay for it.

    Parent
    Really? (none / 0) (#146)
    by oldpro on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 06:49:30 PM EST
    It was my impression we just borrowed the money for the 2 wars we're currently in.  What's the difference how many if you're betting on the come?

    Parent
    Regardless of what the intended focus WAS (none / 0) (#115)
    by shoephone on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:02:53 PM EST
    There is no way the subject of the economy is not going to come up.

    McCain's reminding me of that old Bob Marley song:

    "You're running and you're running and you're running away..."

    Parent

    He is so on the defensive with this whole issue... (none / 0) (#22)
    by espeaks on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:52:25 PM EST
    first the fundamentals are fine then they aren't.. Now yesterday McCain said and this isn't the exact quote but something to the effect that Democrats should not wait for his ideas on the issue, it belittles them to say they don't have an idea with his. Now he needs to be in D.C. to resolve this...sounds good. I think he isn't ready for the debate and sees the polls slipping. I have a new nickname since he is always back-peddling like Micheal Jackson.

    "Moonwalk" McCain.

    I hope Obama releases a statement saying that there will be times during a Presidency when two or more issues have be taken care of, you must multi-task, both candidates can continue with their campaigns and have effective input on the financial crisis.

    Olbermann to replace McCain. . . (none / 0) (#30)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:57:00 PM EST
    on Letterman tonight -- sweet irony!

    On the other hand, the press seems to in the tank for McCain on this.

    Thanks for the warning! ;) (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by nycstray on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:15:09 PM EST


    Parent
    Of course the press ... (none / 0) (#34)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:01:47 PM EST
    is in the tank for McCain on this.  They see the long game.

    They were all for Obama when he was a wishy-washy centrist who they could manipulate.

    But now they know that he will have the muscle, and will almost be required to govern as a true progressive, and they don't like that.

    They don't like that at all.

    Parent

    BTD -- "Offer this change"? (none / 0) (#35)
    by lambert on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:02:25 PM EST
    Or "offer this challenge"?

    * * *

    Obama never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity, so he won't.

    Change (none / 0) (#37)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:05:53 PM EST
    Challenge is provocative.

    Let's call it a change.

    Parent

    I don't know ... (none / 0) (#40)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:09:27 PM EST
    we're being offered the death of the Republican Party on a silver platter.

    Let's not bring out the defibrillator.

    Parent

    overreaction (none / 0) (#58)
    by wystler on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:21:02 PM EST
    one massive presidential election year loss does not mean the death of a party

    you do recall 1980 & 1984, no?

    Parent

    This is an opportunity (none / 0) (#39)
    by OldCity on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:08:44 PM EST
    for the Obama campaign to take control of the message, the story.  They really need to capitalize on this, now.

    For starters, what could McCain possibly have to add to the debate that is so critical that he can't continue to campaign and address other important issues (Iraq, Afghanistan, his woeful VP pick, his advisor's ties to Freddie/Fannie, energy, etc)?  It's a blatantly political ploy, one that he hopes will dissuade the public from examining his role in minimizing regulatory efforts over the years.  (Maybe Keating comes up again?)

    If the Obama folks can't figure out a way to exploit this, then, wow, I'll be amazed.  Or, you know, disappointed.

    Phew (none / 0) (#42)
    by MTSINAIMAMA on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:11:37 PM EST
    Making the debate about the economy, that I can see. But suspending the campaign? WTF? Last week McCain said the "fundamentals of the economy were strong". If he was so concerned about the bailout, why didn't he bring this up last week? His campaign needs to be bailed out. What a gimmick.

    Absurd, I tell you. Absurd. (none / 0) (#46)
    by lilburro on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:13:59 PM EST
    Republicans are always trying to create "political free zones."  If anything happens elsewhere in the world, you can bet McCain will be the first to point to it and try to wave his hands to distract.  This is as annoying as their sanctimony about Gustav during their convention.

    You are right though, good political move to offer to debate the economy instead.  Although I hope they would debate the health of the economy long term in particular.  Because I think people are less anxious about getting the deal done RIGHT NOW than about the long term "are we all screwed" questions.

    McCain looks Chicken to me (none / 0) (#48)
    by mpBBagain on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:15:41 PM EST
    not very maverickish....why not halt his campaign after the debates...its only a couple of days

    Barney Frank (none / 0) (#55)
    by magster on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:20:10 PM EST
    "This is the biggest Hail Mary pass in the history of football or of Mary's"

    LOL-- I love Barney Frank. :) (none / 0) (#95)
    by kempis on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:42:25 PM EST
    McCain sure is a drama queen. Who knew?

    I'm worried, though. With the Hannitys and Limbaughs and others out there to help him spin this, McCain may be able to convince enough voters with this political theatre that he's "a leader" who decided to make a Teddy Roosevelt-like charge to DC to straighten everything out. Obama, left in the dust of the campaign trail, looks like a politician.

    What McCain did will sell well in some quarters. It's a transparent ploy to those of us who follow politics closely--but that's not everybody.

    Another worry I have is that such a drastic move may panic people who buy into it. OMG! The country's in imminent danger! (Which is true, but still....) Real leaders can lead without inflating the direness of a situation and possibly creating a stampede.

    Parent

    Political nonsense aside ... (none / 0) (#61)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:21:34 PM EST
    both campaigns still look like a sideshow to the real issue.

    They did a special on the financial crisis' impact on NYC on PBS last night.  And neither Obama, nor McCain's name was mentioned.

    The presidential candidates look like a couple of clowns trying to draw our attention, when there's a lion tamer in the center ring.

    Obama camp says "debate is on" (none / 0) (#65)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:24:31 PM EST
    Per ABC.

    Even now, McCain cannot help but talk out of both sides of his mouth:


    McCain and his top advisers said the Republican presidential candidate has not committed to voting for the massive financial bailout plan proposed by the Bush administration, with aides saying he will reserve final judgment until there is a final product.

    A senior McCain campaign official said that the "Bush package is dead. This is a serious situation. Package must be resolved by the time markets open on Monday."

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Tuesday that McCain had assured Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson that he would support the $700 billion legislation.

    Asked about that Wednesday, McCain responded: "I did not say that."

    Senior advisor Mark Salter then interjected saying, "He hasn't said that to Paulson or to Reid or to anybody else. He hasn't said that to me."
    Herbert Hoover wanted to issue joint statements (none / 0) (#66)
    by gtesta on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:26:24 PM EST
    with FDR in 1932.  FDR told him to shove it.
    Obama needs to show real leadership now!!!!!
    McCain is just grandstanding.

    If you've got a link for that, that would be (none / 0) (#69)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:27:50 PM EST
    absolutely, insanely great.

    Another anchor to toss McCain.

    Parent

    According to Burton (none / 0) (#81)
    by kredwyn on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:33:14 PM EST
    Obama made a joint statement gesture. Course that Burton announcement appears to have come after McCain's statement.

    So I'm not sure your parallel works.

    Do you have a link for the "he's grandstanding"?

    Parent

    It came this morning (none / 0) (#84)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:34:12 PM EST
    LONG before McCain's stunt.

    NOw what say you?

    Parent

    and that I'm still not sure... (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by kredwyn on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:48:27 PM EST
    that the Hoover proposal/FDR rejection works as a parallel.

    Parent
    I'm advising Obama to be like FDR (none / 0) (#110)
    by gtesta on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:55:46 PM EST
    and not like Hoover.  Obama is running against W's third term.  He has no business issuing joint statements with McCain.
    McCain/Bush should be allowed to totally disintegrate.  I think that this is thowing them a lifeline.

    Parent
    I'm in complete agreement with this (1.00 / 0) (#117)
    by shoephone on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:05:36 PM EST


    Parent
    hmmmm (none / 0) (#126)
    by kredwyn on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:34:04 PM EST
    it's possible that your advice came a few hours too late.

    Parent
    Obama is no roosevelt (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by Salo on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 07:31:20 PM EST
    he's the mechaniism by which the powers that be avoid another New deal. It's all very depressing stuff.  Unless he's a closeted socialist Obama's utterly conventional in every possible way.

    Parent
    That I don't have a radio/TV at work... (none / 0) (#92)
    by kredwyn on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:40:38 PM EST
    and have had a very busy day.

    So I got what news I got from the radio on the way home...before I have to get ready to go to my second job (neither of which is doing me a heck of a lot of good when it comes to dealing with the root canal the dentist told me I needed...yesterday).


    Parent

    McCain is trying to sucker Obama in...... (none / 0) (#93)
    by gtesta on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:42:02 PM EST
    The lame-duck administration remained in office for nearly four months, an interregnum that was nearly as calamitous as that in 1860 to 1861. Hoover tried to tie his successor to his repudiated policies. Roosevelt avoided that contamination, while appearing ignorant of economics and the international situation. European countries defaulted on their World War I debts in December. Publication of RFC loans, at the initiative of Speaker and Vice President-elect Garner, precipitated new and disastrous runs on the banks in January. Revelations before the Senate Banking and Currency Committee in February uncovered gross improprieties by major banks and bankers during the 1920s that further undermined public morale. Roosevelt first ignored and then rejected Hoover's proposal of a joint statement to bolster public confidence. On March 3, 1933, the eve of the inauguration, even the biggest New York and Chicago banks were in peril. Despite pleas from the Federal Reserve Board and others, Hoover refused to act without an endorsement from Roosevelt, which the president-elect refused to give. The governors of New York and Illinois declared bank holidays, bringing to thirty-four the number of states that had closed their banks rather than face ruin. Roosevelt subsequently declared a national bank holiday and holdovers from Hoover's administration crafted the plans for reopening the banks.

    Parent
    Good Idea (none / 0) (#97)
    by kaleidescope on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:46:27 PM EST
    It would be more interesting than the usual set of stupid "what if your wife gets raped and murdered" questions the press asks at the glorified joint press conferences called "debates."

    In fact, why not make it a real debate -- each side gets forty-five minutes to make its case, then each gets 20 minutes to rebut.  No questions from the courtier media.  That's how Lincoln and Douglas did it.

    I suspect... (none / 0) (#99)
    by Jerrymcl89 on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:46:50 PM EST
    ... that both candidates would be reluctant to launch into a full-blown economic debate with only 48 hours to prepare. But if Obama wants to make that offer, he should go for it.

    McCain's Handlers . . . (none / 0) (#100)
    by Doc Rock on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:47:02 PM EST
    . . . cancelled the debate because on issue after issue McCain's been all over the map--they are scared to death about which sides of various issues he might come down on at a widely viewed debate--not to mention the fact that he doesn't seem to be able to absorb reams of information.  Also, they have to fear that he may lose his temper if pushed and show he's not fit to be CINC!

    The NYT, which McCain (none / 0) (#138)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 05:12:30 PM EST
    says hates him a passion and prints untold lies about him, says McCain is a scrappy, experienced  debater who is quite good at sticking in the knife.

    Parent
    Intersting (none / 0) (#103)
    by nell on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:49:51 PM EST
    I think McCain is very successfully lowering expectations for the debate on Friday. Now people think he is a chicken. If he is just a bit better than a chicken, he will come across as a lion. Good political theater.

    Well (none / 0) (#105)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:51:30 PM EST
    I certainly agree with Sargent here. Changing the debate to economics would certainly be the best thing to do for the voters. Now will either campaign think about the voters? Or will they both be thinking about what his best for their campaign?

    Obama should press the multi-task rhetoric (none / 0) (#107)
    by mpBBagain on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:52:10 PM EST
    Obama should press the multi-task rhetoric... McCain is tanking in the polls  so he throws a screw-ball.

    McCain's "golden parachute" investment (none / 0) (#118)
    by Roschelle on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:06:54 PM EST
    McCain couldn't possibly have any clue as to how we're going to get our country out of this financial quagmire. His top economic advisor landed with her own golden parachute!

    The presidential debates (none / 0) (#124)
    by KeysDan on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 04:25:31 PM EST
    are the perfect opportunity for the presidential candidates to discuss a looming crisis that threatens the very economic foundation of our country.  It is not a state secret, we all know of it, albeit, in varying degrees of understanding.  It is difficult to think of a current issue that is more important than the candidate's grasp of the causes, their best analysis of the steps being proposed, and any modifications or changes they may suggest.  Actually, a short delay, in my view, would only help Senator Obama, rather than McCain--given the recent polling trends and the likely delayed realization that this is not McCain's forte. Moreover, it may be noted that McCain is more comfortable working in the darkness than in the sunshine.  McCain is probably just hoping that some resolution will be achieved quickly so he will not have to commit himself to any plan, thereby alienating him from one faction of his or another.

    The presidential debates (none / 0) (#151)
    by chgostan on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 09:14:00 PM EST
    My friend Betsy thinks that if McCain feels he can't debate on Friday that Palin should step in just like she would have to if that elderly gentleman became incapacitated or worse.

    Instead Of Canceling The Debate . . . | 155 comments (155 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment