Obama versus McCain (versus the rest)

[KWhit]

I'm not a supporter of either of them. In the long term, both of them help the wealthier class rather than the average citizen IMO.

So does a flat tax.

[sterlingice]

YouTube - David Letterman Reacts to John McCain Suspending Campaign (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjkCrfylq-E)

For anyone who doesn't feel like waiting/staying up lateish.

Letterman was on fire.

That is an angry, bitter man who I would not want to cross

SI

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

So does a flat tax.

To make that statement, you have to assume that the current tax system is not flawed. Does it help the wealthy or just adjust previous flawed tax law? The overwhelming amount of taxes will still fall on the higher income taxpayers. The flawed assumption is that the higher tax bracket individuals pay more taxes because they are taxed at a higher rate. I can tell you without question that is not even remotely the case. The amount of tax avoidance in the 28%+ tax brackets is ridiculous. People would be shocked how much more the wealthy would have to pay if they just tossed out the loopholes and put in a flat percentage with no exceptions.

Instead, our legislators toss in a new credit here and a new deduction there and call it reform of the tax code. What usually results is a net increase in income for the wealthier classes while the lower tax classes get excited about the $300 bone that they got tossed to keep them happy.

[JPhillips]

Eliminating credits and deductions and creating a flat federal income tax don't have to go together. If the issue is credits and deductions, get rid of those.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Eliminating credits and deductions and creating a flat federal income tax don't have to go together. If the issue is credits and deductions, get rid of those.

I agree with that. Removing all credits/deductions/etc. would be a great first step. At least we could then see how taxpayers in the various brackets would react when they're taxed at their true rate.

My only point related to KWhit's post was that the assumption that the wealthiest taxpayers actually pay 28% or 35% of their income to taxes is highly flawed. Their actual rate is several points less than that due to the loopholes in the code.

[fantom1979]

I really like Joe Biden but he does have foot-in-mouth syndrome sometimes. And, yes, Jon Stewart did go after him last night but that's not exactly the news media.

SI

While I will not argue the point that Stewart is not exactly "news media", I would argue that it is hard to find any "news media" on TV these days. I watch quite a bit of cable and broadcast news, but I don't think they are as willing to light up a political figure as Stewart is. I found Couric's interview of Palin to be refreshing, I just wish she would have gone after Biden the same way.

[fantom1979]

Mizzou, I am guessing you were a Ron Paul fan? I really think it would have been interesting to see him get the nomination. Honestly, I think Obama and McCain are somewhat close on a lot of issues. A Ron Paul/Hilliary Clinton debate would have been very interesting to watch. :)

[Flasch186]

virtues of liberal policy

Im not sure I agree with ALL Liberal Policy so that's just not true....again. Im actually more moderate than you'd think (the test I took on here someone posted confirmed that thought) however I am hung up on hypocrisy and lying, perhaps to a fault, but that doesnt mean I have to lower my standards to be 'ok' with it.

Some liberal policies I do agree with, no involvement in State and abortion rights, rights for gay marriage (if they want them), less taxes on the middle class. However I am also pro-death penalty (although I cringe every time someone on death row is found to be innocent later via DNA), not for raising capital gains taxes above where they were under Clinton, pro fair free trade, anti-illegal immigration, and I was for the war in Iraq and for a smart withdrawal from there only to go clean up the remaining mess in Afghanistan. So painting one in Blue or Red is BS, however accepting hypocrisy or dishonesty is not in the cards. This should not have to be defended in any way.

Oh and about the Kouric interview? Perhaps not having Huckabee come out and cream the press at the RNC convention wouldve not got their ears up. that being said, an interviewer like you said should absolutely chase the question so when Palin didnt answer it, it's the interviewer's duty IMO to go after it.

[Flasch186]

I really like Joe Biden but he does have foot-in-mouth syndrome sometimes. And, yes, Jon Stewart did go after him last night but that's not exactly the news media.

SI

oh, the horror, how dare the press treat him so bad.

/sarcasm

[Fighter of Foo]

Well, if I used that logic to vote, I wouldn't vote for anyone. :)


That's where I'm at. I'm voting for some state initiatives, local candidates and that's it. The rest will be left blank.

I'm struggling to think of a single thing the federal government has done in my lifetime to make my life better.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Oh and about the Kouric interview? Perhaps not having Huckabee come out and cream the press at the RNC convention wouldve not got their ears up. that being said, an interviewer like you said should absolutely chase the question so when Palin didnt answer it, it's the interviewer's duty IMO to go after it.

And once again, that has nothing to do with the argument. I stated that there was nothing inherently wrong with the interview. I just have a big problem with the fact that Couric put away the flamethrower and brought out a Super Soaker for the Biden interview. Grill 'em both.

As far as the media grilling, they had that coming for some time. It must have raised a few eyebrows, because after 'NBC' was chanted by the crowd, Matthews and Olbermann were removed from the anchor seats. That's not a coincidence by any stretch of the imagination.

[Flasch186]

but IMO it's also not left/right bias. Its a ratings bias. the issue du jour is whether or not Palin's 'ready' so as a reporter if the interviewee leaves a door open that would be in line to touch on that issue you need to go after it.

If youre talking to Obama about his experience and he says something that opens the door you bet your ass theyre going to go into that.

Why didnt they go after biden with the FDR TV stuff? Cuz it doesnt play well on TV or in the paper's since it's not his issue du jour. Now if he flies off the handle and says something patently aggressively stupid in a way that could possibly offend a bunch of people, I guarantee it'll be on news at 11.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

but IMO it's also not left/right bias. Its a ratings bias. the issue du jour is whether or not Palin's 'ready' so as a reporter if the interviewee leaves a door open that would be in line to touch on that issue you need to go after it.

If youre talking to Obama about his experience and he says something that opens the door you bet your ass theyre going to go into that.

Why didnt they go after biden with the FDR TV stuff? Cuz it doesnt play well on TV or in the paper's since it's not his issue du jour. Now if he flies off the handle and says something patently aggressively stupid in a way that could possibly offend a bunch of people, I guarantee it'll be on news at 11.

Well, it's certainly not a ratings bias. That's spin on a large scale.

Perfect example is the question about the payments to the McCain advisor from the mortgage companies. That's a perfectly legit question to ask. So why wasn't Biden asked about the connections of two of Obama's advisors to the same companies? Or the $3.9M that Obama personally received from those companies?

How about the question about naming one thing that McCain has done/reformed in 26 years? While I don't agree with asking the question 4 times, it's a legit question. Why wasn't Biden asked to name one thing that Obama has truly reformed in his short time in office? Couric was willing to attack with Palin with those topics......why not Biden so we could compare their answers?

In the grand scheme of things, I think the media is almost doing the Democrats a disservice by giving them these cupcake interviews. If the Dems actually felt attacked during an interview, maybe they'd come out swinging more often and we'd actually get a better idea where they stand on a lot of the issues. I like Biden and I think he'd do extremely well if they put him in that kind of arena.

[flere-imsaho]

I'm biased, sure, but the Couric interview mostly reads as a softball interview gone wrong when Palin couldn't even hit the fluffy pitches out of the park. When you listen to Couric (and Gibson last week, for that matter), she's almost pleading with Palin to give her a reasonable-sounding answer so she can go on to the next question and not look dumb herself.

[ISiddiqui]

President Clinton weighs in on McCain's idea to delay the debate:

YouTube - Bill Clinton: McCain Acted On "Good Faith" In Debate Delay (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJ7hfMFIj64)

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

I'm biased, sure, but the Couric interview mostly reads as a softball interview gone wrong when Palin couldn't even hit the fluffy pitches out of the park. When you listen to Couric (and Gibson last week, for that matter), she's almost pleading with Palin to give her a reasonable-sounding answer so she can go on to the next question and not look dumb herself.

My response to that, regardless of the strength or lack thereof of the questions, would be that she can look dumb all on her own. When Couric or Gibson ask the question over and over again, it puts the focus on them as being in attack mode rather than interviewers. A good interviewer doesn't need to do that. There's plenty of pundits out there who rehash the interview and will note that she looked dumb or smart.

BTW.....if you want another comparison, look at the Hannity interview of Palin and just how toothless that interview was. It was just as embarrassing as the Biden interview.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

That wasn't actually what was happening. It wasn't about "one thing McCain has done/reformed." The issue was McCain talking about reforming Wall Street, and pushing for additional regulations.

Exactly. And Obama says that he will bring about change if he's elected. So a perfectly legit question much like the Palin question would be to ask Biden what major legislation he has passed in his brief career as a senator and press Biden if he couldn't come up with anything specific. I'll even grant you that Biden may come up with a better answer than Palin did, but by not asking those questions and allowing Biden to shine on his own, Couric is robbing Biden of an opportunity and is taking the focus off Biden and putting it on Couric.

[Mac Howard]

It's not difficult to see why the Palin interview seemed so much tougher than the Biden interview. To begin with one was more of a biopic interview and the other one about a subject any Republican would have found difficult. But it was also the way the questions were answered.

Couric began with a searching question in both interviews. With Biden she went for his Achilles heel with a question about his "foot-in-mouth" disease. Biden answered confidently, honestly and was even a little self-depricating. He disarmed the question and prevented any follow up.

The same happened with the question about misleading advertising. Again Biden took charge by accepting the criticism and even volunteered that the Democrat ad on McCain and computers was a disgrace. Again he disarmed the question by accepting that there was some justification in the interviewer's criticism and sympathising with it. Again, it defuses the follow up.

He did what every good interviewee should do - take charge of the interview and turn it into a conversation, preventing the interviewer from getting any negative traction. He even flirted with her and put her off guard.

Palin, by contrast, showed her inexperience and lack of preparation. She struggled, waffled, didn't answer the question directly and at times seemed to be repeating some previously rehearsed answer. That allowed Couric to come back with follow up questions and that's where the 'toughness" came in. Palin tended to repeat herself, still didn't offer definitive answers and let Couric take the interview where she wanted. Couric was able to dictate the interview.

Palin showed her inexperience and allowed the interviewer to take charge. Biden, used his experience, disarmed the interviewer with his (apparent) honesty and controlled the interview himself.

For an excellent example of how to take charge of an interview see the Iranian president wrap Larry King around his little finger the night before while talking the utmost garbage :)

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

He did what every good interviewee should do - take charge of the interview and turn it into a conversation, preventing the interviewer from getting any negative traction..

.......

For an excellent example of how to take charge of an interview see the Iranian president wrap Larry King around his little finger the night before while talking the utmost garbage :)

I'd agree with the first point, but I would also note that it shows just how poor of an interview it was by Couric that she'd be that easily 'disarmed' by that kind of an answer rather than following up on the response. Especially the humor pointed at himself. A good interviewer would have dismissed that humor as trying to get around the issue and then provided other instances that further showed his tendancy to slip up and say different things on an issue depending on which day he was talking. At least that's the pressing tactic that was used in the Palin interviews.

Larry King is a shell of his former self. It's difficult to find any interviews where he doesn't get man-handled by the person he's interviewing when it comes to political figures.

[Flasch186]

I bolded the weird part for me which is that I find it weird that the McCain camp hasnt seen everything prior to her selection. I wouldve thought that really deep looks at her/their financials wouldve been part of the vetting process but, oh well. Hopefully for them, and all of us, it's all on the up n up and nothing to see here.

Palin won't reveal her finances until after debate - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080925/ap_on_el_pr/palin_finances)



Palin won't reveal her finances until after debate

By SHARON THEIMER, Associated Press Writer 38 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Sarah Palin requested and received an extension of the deadline for revealing her personal finances, until the day after her only debate with Democrat Joe Biden.
ADVERTISEMENT
click here

The Republican vice presidential candidate received a four-day extension Thursday from the Federal Election Commission.

The federal financial disclosure report was initially due next Monday. Now, Palin has until Oct. 3, the day after her debate in St. Louis with Biden, the Democratic vice presidential nominee.

Earlier this month, Biden released a decade of personal financial records that showed the veteran U.S. senator from Delaware earned less than many of his congressional colleagues. For example, Biden and his wife, Jill, earned $319,853 in 2007. On Thursday, Biden submitted an updated report to the Federal Election Commission

Presidential, vice presidential and congressional candidates must all file ethics reports outlining their assets and liabilities. That includes such things as sources of income, real estate held for investment purposes, stocks and debt.

Trevor Potter, general counsel for the McCain-Palin campaign, told the FEC that the campaign initially thought it had until Oct. 4 to file the report, but then learned the FEC set an earlier due date.

"Most importantly, because Governor Palin has not previously run for federal office, it is clear to us that additional time is required to compile and prepare Governor Palin's financial information," Potter wrote. "As you are well aware, the Executive Branch financial disclosure form is vastly more complex than most state disclosure forms, and requires the assemblage of a quantity and level of detail far beyond that reported previously by the governor in Alaska and therefore readily available."

In granting the extension, the FEC said that if Palin requests still more time, the last possible due date would be Oct. 6.

Palin's federal financial disclosure report will provide the most complete look yet at her assets and liabilities.

For example, it will show whether she and her husband Todd hold any mortgages for real estate investments, and roughly how much any property held for investment purposes is worth. The financial reports that Sarah Palin filed as Alaska governor list property the couple held at that point, but not how much it was worth; how much, if any, profit they made on real estate sales; or how much, if any, mortgage debt they held.

Such information is a standard part of the personal financial disclosure reports that members of Congress, administration officials and federal candidates must file each year. The reports allow the public to see whether politicians may be receiving favorable financial treatment from people with issues before government or have any potential conflicts of interest. They also offer a glimpse of their ability to manage their personal finances.

The financial reports that Palin has filed in Alaska over the years show the Palins have often had several sources of income.

Last year, for example, Sarah Palin earned $125,000 as governor. Her husband took in $46,790 as a part-time oil production operator for BP Alaska in Prudhoe Bay, $46,265 commercial fishing for salmon from June to July in Bristol Bay, and $10,500 in Iron Dog snow machine race winnings.

[Mac Howard]

I'd agree with the first point, but I would also note that it shows just how poor of an interview it was by Couric that she'd be that easily 'disarmed' by that kind of an answer rather than following up on the response. Especially the humor pointed at himself. A good interviewer would have dismissed that humor as trying to get around the issue and then provided other instances that further showed his tendancy to slip up and say different things on an issue depending on which day he was talking. At least that's the pressing tactic that was used in the Palin interviews.

I don't disagree with that at all, Mizzou B-ball fan. Biden simply took over. There was no way she was going to embarrass him. He has too much experience for that. I was very impressed in a cynical way :)

Palin clearly struggled and showed her lack of experience. Presumably the hacks at The Frontiersman in Wasilla have some way to go yet to get even to Couric's level :)

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

I don't disagree with that at all, Mizzou B-ball fan. Biden simply took over. There was no way she was going to embarrass him. He has too much experience for that. I was very impressed in a cynical way :)

And therein lies my problem with Biden. As far as a person outside of politics, I find him to be a likeable guy and very approachable. As a politician, I find him to be very manipulative much the same as a car salesman. Have I ever said how much I loathe going to a car lot?

I find Palin to be similarly likeable and approachable outside of politics. I don't disagree that she's inexperienced, but that has never inherently bothered me. It's much like Obama. As much as I think it fair to ask about experience regarding Obama and Palin, I don't even use that as a reason to not vote for Obama. I have more policy-driven reasons for my vote.

[I. J. Reilly]

The Couric interview shows the strategic flaw in the campaigns game plan to hide Palin from the media. It was only the second legitimate interview she’s given since being announced, and no press conferences. Couric has to ask hard follow ups, and follow ups to the follow ups if need be, because if she doesn’t who will?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

The Couric interview shows the strategic flaw in the campaigns game plan to hide Palin from the media. It was only the second legitimate interview she’s given since being announced, and no press conferences. Couric has to ask hard follow ups, and follow ups to the follow ups if need be, because if she doesn’t who will?

For the 4th time in this thread, there was nothing inherently wrong with the Palin interview. The problem was the total lack of balance between the Palin interview and the Biden interview.

[JPhillips]

I'd agree with the first point, but I would also note that it shows just how poor of an interview it was by Couric that she'd be that easily 'disarmed' by that kind of an answer rather than following up on the response. Especially the humor pointed at himself. A good interviewer would have dismissed that humor as trying to get around the issue and then provided other instances that further showed his tendancy to slip up and say different things on an issue depending on which day he was talking. At least that's the pressing tactic that was used in the Palin interviews.

Larry King is a shell of his former self. It's difficult to find any interviews where he doesn't get man-handled by the person he's interviewing when it comes to political figures.

She's a morning show anchor out of her element. If you want to argue that she's not a good reporter I'm with you.

[Fighter of Foo]

For the 4th time in this thread, there was nothing inherently wrong with the Palin interview. The problem was the total lack of balance between the Palin interview and the Biden interview.

And as much as that's a fair point, the skill differences between Biden and Palin in handling such questioning were obvious. The interviews started the same. Think that had anything to do with the person being interviewed?

[I. J. Reilly]

For the 4th time in this thread, there was nothing inherently wrong with the Palin interview. The problem was the total lack of balance between the Palin interview and the Biden interview.

Let me rephrase then; The McCain campaign invited this double standard. And they were forced to do so because they picked an unqualified running mate.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

And as much as that's a fair point, the skill differences between Biden and Palin in handling such questioning were obvious. The interviews started the same. Think that had anything to do with the person being interviewed?

How was it obvious? Biden was not asked those kinds of questions. It had a lot more to do with the total lack of interview skills displayed by Couric as JPhillips correctly pointed out.

[ace1914]

For the 4th time in this thread, there was nothing inherently wrong with the Palin interview. The problem was the total lack of balance between the Palin interview and the Biden interview.

Don't you think that the imbalance that you're talking about is at least partly attributed to the experience difference between Palin and Biden? I mean, Biden could've slipped up on the questions asked as easily as Palin did.

[digamma]

In the post listing the questions last page or so, I think the last two questions for Biden are much, much tougher than anything Palin was asked. The Palin questions appear to get tougher because she flubbed the answers to softballs. McCain as a mavrick (sic) is a central talking point of their entire campaign. Citing examples of that is an absolute lay-up.

On the other hand, asking a question about who approved an ad is designed to either cause a rift in the campaign or make Biden look like he has no input. In my mind, that's a question with much harsher consequences than asking for examples of why your running mate is a reformer.

[GrantDawg]

Indeed he was:

Joe Versus the Volcano | The Daily Show | Comedy Central (http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=186018&title=Joe-Versus-the-Volcano)


That was funny, but as a point of reference: Barreta does make shotguns, and Rifles as well.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Don't you think that the imbalance that you're talking about is at least partly attributed to the experience difference between Palin and Biden? I mean, Biden could've slipped up on the questions asked as easily as Palin did.

I absolutely agree. My only point is that they both get similar treatment. I agree that Palin didn't perform terribly well. You say he could have slipped up as well. All I'm saying is that they should have that equal opportunity. As I said, I think he would have done substantially better with similar questions, but was never afforded that opportunity.

[Kodos]

Received this in my e-mail. I will Flaschetize it:

I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight...

If you grow up in Hawaii , raised by your Kansan grandparents, you're "exotic,
different, not like us."

Grow up in Alaska eating moose burgers, shoot wolves from planes, ban books, lie about a bridge, you're a quintessential All American story.

If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.

Name your kids Willow , Trig and Track, you're a maverick.


Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.

Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.


If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience--you are woefully inexperienced.

If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people and can see Russia from your house, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.


If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.

If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible.


If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.

If you're husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.


If you are a Democratic male candidate who is popular with millions of people you are an "arrogant celebrity" "uppity".

If you are a popular Republican female candidate you are "energizing the base".


If you're a minority and you're selected for a job over more qualified candidates you're a "token hire."

If you're a conservative and you're selected for a job over more qualified candidates you're a "game changer."


Black teen pregnancies? A "crisis" in black America.

White teen pregnancies? A "blessed event."


If you're a Democrat and you make a VP pick without fully vetting the individual you're "reckless."

A Republican who doesn't fully vet is a "maverick."


OK, much clearer now.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

On the other hand, asking a question about who approved an ad is designed to either cause a rift in the campaign or make Biden look like he has no input. In my mind, that's a question with much harsher consequences than asking for examples of why your running mate is a reformer.

To be fair, that question never would have been asked had Biden not had a 'Biden' moment all on his own. He created the perceived rift through his own comments.

I'd also mention another thing about political interviews. The public penalty for making the slightest comment out of line with policy or their running mate is far too severe. I think far too many politicians go into these kinds of interviews hoping to NOT screw up rather than just being honest and forthright. I think McCain and Biden do especially well in this regard whereas Obama and Palin tend to dance and duck a bit more.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Looks like the political game continues in Washington. Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd had a brief appearance stating that they have reached an agreement on final verbiage of a bailout bill and that they'll be heading to the White House with a finalized agreement with nothing to discuss.

Only one problem.......Republican leaders say that if there's a final agreement, they sure haven't signed off on it.

So in translation, the Democrat leadership, hoping to avoid any perception that McCain had some effect on the negotiations, announce that an agreement is in place that had nothing to do with McCain. On the other side, the Republicans, regardless of whether they've agreed to a final bill, say that no agreement has been reached so that they can enter the meeting, come to a 'final' agreement in the Oval Office, and give credit to McCain for his involvement.

Sound about right? :)

[mtolson]

I agree with you but like Obama, when you get an aura of being a 'rock star' youre treated differently. Biden and McCain arent thought of in that way, IMO.

What about Obama gives him a rock star aura ? I really don't understand that statement.

Anyway, Bidens slip up to me was not all that aggregious. I bone-headed statement, yes, but not all that earth shattering. It's not like he lied about something HE had said or done or drastically destorted the truth regarding the sentiment. I can't quite say his screw up falls in the same category with "I told them thanks, but no thanks" which has been repeated some many times its not even funny, despite it having a completely different implication as compared to what really happened. If he had distorted something attributed directly to himself then have at him, but this is not the case.

I admit, the media tends to be much harder on Palin/McCain but honestly, when they dropped Palin into the mix the way they did it just sparked more attention. I don't think she is treat the same as Romney would have been treated by the McCain camp which only generates more and more questions.

To me, when she is allowed to speak she comes across like she is unconfident, nervious and not prepared. She more she talks, the more questions people come up with all because she was dropped into the situation and does not appear to be ready.

[GrantDawg]

President Clinton weighs in on McCain's idea to delay the debate:

YouTube - Bill Clinton: McCain Acted On "Good Faith" In Debate Delay (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJ7hfMFIj64)


If I'm Obama, I do not want Clinton campaigning for me. First, he was praising Palin and now defending McCain. I think it is pretty clear who Clinton would like to see in office. Hillary in 2012.

[ISiddiqui]

Well, it appears to me that when McCain was saying that Hillary and him were friends (or was it Hillary that was saying it, I can't remember), they were telling the truth.

[mtolson]

If I'm Obama, I do not want Clinton campaigning for me. First, he was praising Palin and now defending McCain. I think it is pretty clear who Clinton would like to see in office. Hillary in 2012.

When I saw that this morning, thats exactly what I thought. Bill's had a chance to help Obama out but pretty much thumbed his nose at him. So much for him helping. Obama should tell Bill "thanks, but no thanks"

[Flasch186]

What about Obama gives him a rock star aura ? I really don't understand that statement.


hmmm, the Right's comments about Obama being the 'god' of the Libs.

http://newscoma.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/obamacoverrollingstone.jpg

The perception that having hundreds of thousands of Germans at a pseudo-concert for him.

[flere-imsaho]

Katie Couric - Sarah Palin (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/24/eveningnews/main4476173.shtml)

Sarah Palin: My understanding is that Rick Davis recused himself from the dealings of the firm. I don't know how long ago, a year or two ago that he's not benefiting from that. And you know, I was - I would hope that's not the case.

Not a softball question, and I can't fault Palin here as much as I can the McCain campaign for not preparing her with a better denial answer. Since she sounds so unsure, she gets this follow-up:

Katie Couric: But he still has a stake in the company so isn't that a conflict of interest?

Palin: Again, my understanding is that he recused himself from the dealings with Freddie and Fannie, any lobbying efforts on his part there. And I would hope that's the case because, as John McCain has been saying, and as I've on a much more local level been also rallying against is the undue influence of lobbyists in public policy decisions being made.

A flat-out denial of a conflict of interest would have been better here. Just be clear and move on. Instead, she makes her answer worse by sounding like she's spewing a memorized quote. And the 2nd sentence makes no sense (and sounds even worse on tape than it does on paper).

Next, Couric asked about the $700 billion government bailout of bad debt - and whether she supports it.

Palin: I'm all about the position that America is in and that we have to look at a $700 billion bailout. And as Sen. McCain has said unless this nearly trillion dollar bailout is what it may end up to be, unless there are amendments in Paulson's proposal, really I don't believe that Americans are going to support this and we will not support this. The interesting thing in the last couple of days that I have seen is that Americans are waiting to see what John McCain will do on this proposal. They're not waiting to see what Barack Obama is going to do. Is he going to do this and see what way the political wind's blowing? They're waiting to see if John McCain will be able to see these amendments implemented in Paulson's proposal.

Softball question, in the sense that it's so general and open-ended that it just invites a "say something that means nothing" answer. Instead we get some pretty confused thoughts up front and then a wide-eyed appraisal of her running mate's involvement in the solution. The first half sounds like she doesn't know what she's really talking about, and the 2nd half sounds, frankly, naive. Not even partisan, just naive.

Worse, it digs her into this hole:

Couric: Why do you say that? Why are they waiting for John McCain and not Barack Obama?

Palin: He's got the track record of the leadership qualities and the pragmatism that's needed at a crisis time like this.

Couric: But polls have shown that Sen. Obama has actually gotten a boost as a result of this latest crisis, with more people feeling that he can handle the situation better than John McCain.

Palin: I'm not looking at poll numbers. What I think Americans at the end of the day are going to be able to go back and look at track records and see who's more apt to be talking about solutions and wishing for and hoping for solutions for some opportunity to change, and who's actually done it?

Gets back on track here, and for the first time actually seems to be saying something she's actually thought about and in which she believes. Note that since she's clear, understandable and straightforward, it finally closes off this line of Couric's questioning.

Couric: If this doesn't pass, do you think there's a risk of another Great Depression?

Palin: Unfortunately, that is the road that America may find itself on. Not necessarily this, as it's been proposed, has to pass or we're going to find ourselves in another Great Depression. But, there has got to be action - bipartisan effort - Congress not pointing fingers at one another but finding the solution to this, taking action, and being serious about the reforms on Wall Street that are needed.

Softball. The obvious answer is "Depression is too serious a word at this time, I think. I'd rather look to Secretary Paulson and Chairman Bernanke to make that kind of assessment and work with them to avoid that possibility, which is what Senator McCain is doing right now."

Instead, her response is essentially incoherent.

Couric: Would you support a moratorium on foreclosures to help average Americans keep their homes?

Palin: That's something that John McCain and I have both been discussing - whether that ... is part of the solution or not. You know, it's going to be a multi-faceted solution that has to be found here.

Couric: So you haven't decided whether you'll support it or not?

Palin: I have not.

Softball. An A+ opportunity to show they're thinking about the average American. And she does so well until....

Couric: What are the pros and cons of it do you think?

Palin: Oh, well, some decisions that have been made poorly should not be rewarded, of course.

Couric: By consumers, you're saying?

Palin: Consumers - and those who were predator lenders also. That's, you know, that has to be considered also. But again, it's got to be a comprehensive, long-term solution found ... for this problem that America is facing today. As I say, we are getting into crisis mode here.

Say what? First of all, the meme of the week is that it's Wall Street that's made the bad decisions and shouldn't be rewarded. Emphasize that and Couric moves on. Secondly, a "pros and cons" question is a total setup for a quick laundry list that then ends the conversation. Every politician should be able to do this in his/her sleep.

And then the piece du resistance:

Couric: You've said, quote, "John McCain will reform the way Wall Street does business." Other than supporting stricter regulations of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago, can you give us any more example of his leading the charge for more oversight?

Palin: I think that the example that you just cited, with his warnings two years ago about Fannie and Freddie - that, that's paramount. That's more than a heck of a lot of other senators and representatives did for us.

Couric: But he's been in Congress for 26 years. He's been chairman of the powerful Commerce Committee. And he has almost always sided with less regulation, not more.

Palin: He's also known as the maverick though, taking shots from his own party, and certainly taking shots from the other party. Trying to get people to understand what he's been talking about - the need to reform government.

Couric: But can you give me any other concrete examples? Because I know you've said Barack Obama is a lot of talk and no action. Can you give me any other examples in his 26 years of John McCain truly taking a stand on this?

Palin: I can give you examples of things that John McCain has done, that has shown his foresight, his pragmatism, and his leadership abilities. And that is what America needs today.

Couric: I'm just going to ask you one more time - not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation.

Palin: I'll try to find you some and I'll bring them to you.

A softball ("one or two examples") that descends into a farce because a) she's been caught in a lie of her own making (John McCain has never been a fan of regulation) and b) she has no idea what she's talking about.


Honestly, if Palin was ever interviewed by Tim Russert (RIP) or Jeremy Paxman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Paxman), I think there's a good chance she'd end up crying.


Then there's Biden: (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/22/eveningnews/main4470063.shtml)

"You say what's on your mind. Have you found that you have to be uber-careful and disciplined in terms of being out there on the campaign trail?" Couric asked.

"No. I feel passionate about what I'm doing and saying. I know the Republicans are going to take anything I say, no matter what it would be or anybody, and take it out of context," Biden said. "They are going to take any piece and if I have to parse through every single thing I'm going to say, then I'm not me."

Softball.

"Polls show that Sen. McCain and Sarah Palin are making inroads among white female voters who are less educated," Couric told the candidate.

"I don't believe that," Biden said. "Every election people are making up their minds later and later because there's more and more at stake. Everyone should just be a little patient here. Eventually Sarah Palin is gonna have to let everyone know what she thinks, what her record is."

Not too tough a question, but there are a couple of traps in there. First of all Biden could have said something about females that would have alienated Clinton supporters. Likewise, he could have said something equally problematic about the "less educated". Instead Biden defuses the question in a way that doesn't really invite a follow-up.

Couric asked: "How is it preparing for the debates?"

"Well it's kind of hard to prepare, because I don't know what she thinks. There's been no - I just don't know a lot about her, so therefore I'm assuming; I have to assume for purposes of the debate, that she agrees with John on everything," Biden said.

Softball.

"Are you worried that you're going to have to pull your punches a bit because of her gender and you don't want to seem like you're bullying her? It's a different dynamic when it's a male/female thing, isn't it?" Couric asked.

"I don't know, is it? We're sitting here doing it right now, aren't we? Look, all kidding aside," Biden said. "So maybe it's a generational thing but I don't start this thing thinking 'Oh my God, this is a woman, I had better treat her differently.'"

Not a softball, but again Biden defuses it by using a non-committal answer, which is all this question really deserves. He gives away nothing, which doesn't really leave Couric a lot of room for a follow-up.

Couric asked: "Are you disappointed with the tone of the campaign? The 'lipstick on the pig' stuff, and some of the ads - you guys haven't been completely guilt-free making fun of John McCain's inability to use a computer."

"I thought that was terrible by the way," Biden said.

"Why did you do it then?" Couric asked.

"I didn't know we did it and if I had anything to do with it, we would have never done it," Biden said. "And I don't think Barack, you know. I just think that was …"

Did Obama approve that ad?

"The answer is I don't think there was anything intentional about that," Biden said. "They were trying to make another point. That's very different than deliberately taking a vote Barack Obama had to teach children about how to deal with child-predators and saying he was teaching them sex education in kindergarten. Very different in degree."

Not the hardest series of questions in a row, but not total softballs, but here again Biden quickly pulls the conversation onto his turf with his answers and also manages to insert an attack in there.



The key difference I can see is that Palin's answers by-and-large give you the impression that she's either a) not sure of her subject matter, b) not sure what she really thinks about something, c) is regurgitating a talking point from her campaign or d) trying to get a point across and failing badly due to a lack of elocution (to be charitable) or lack of thought (to not be charitable).

Biden, on the other hand, gives the impression that he knows exactly where he stands on each question, and is able to get his opinion across with a minimum of confusion.

That difference, more than anything, is why one interview looks "harder" than the other.

[Galaril]

If I'm Obama, I do not want Clinton campaigning for me. First, he was praising Palin and now defending McCain. I think it is pretty clear who Clinton would like to see in office. Hillary in 2012.

Yup, I have lost what little respect I had for either of the Clintons back stabbers.

[DaddyTorgo]

jeezus flere - thanks for posting that. i hadn't really realized just how incoherent most of her answers to every question are!

And it's frightening to me that someone who can't even put a coherent answer together (let alone one that actually has substance, but even just one that's coherent) is someone that is being pushed to be the 2nd most powerful executive in this country.

Honestly, the whole Sarah Palin thing to me says a great deal about the ignorance of most Americans, or the dumbing-down of genuine intellectual discourse.

Really...we're going to take somone who says "Guys and gals," in a prepared speech and say they should be V.P.?? We don't have any more qualified candidates than that?

And on a non-partisan note: how come we can vote in primaries for a presidential candidate but not for their VP? Wouldn't it make much more sense if we could vote for both? Say 1a and 1b?

[DaddyTorgo]

Couric: But can you give me any other concrete examples? Because I know you've said Barack Obama is a lot of talk and no action. Can you give me any other examples in his 26 years of John McCain truly taking a stand on this?

Palin: I can give you examples of things that John McCain has done, that has shown his foresight, his pragmatism, and his leadership abilities. And that is what America needs today.


that's my favorite part right there. she doesn't even try to close off the question couric asked (if i was couric i'd be pissed). Instead she starts babbling some mumbo-jumbo jingoistic crap about leadership and pragmatism instead of ANSWERING THE DAMN QUESTION.

not to mention: "...things that John McCain has done, that has shown his foresight..." UMMM...come again?? LEARN TO SPEAK ENGLISH!!!!! GODDAMN!!!!

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

On September 9th, 2003, the following document was issued by the Republican Policy Committee.......

http://faculty.chicagogsb.edu/erik.hurst/teaching/fannie_too_big_to_fail.pdf

On September 10th, 2003, the following comments came from John Snow during a committee hearing on the mortgage industry......

"There is a general recognition that the supervisory system for housing-related government-sponsored enterprises neither has the tools, nor the stature, to deal effectively with the current size, complexity and importance of these enterprises," Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told the House Financial Services Committee in an appearance with Housing Secretary Mel Martinez, who also backed the plan.
The committee had two members who responded to those comments, Barney Frank and Melvin Watt............

"These two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking
Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these
problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

"I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer
families and their ability to get affordable housing," Mr. Watt said.
In 2005, John McCain issued the following statement concerning possible legislation in the mortgage banking industry.........

http://tinyurl.com/5t3jts

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac-known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs-and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I found this stuff online after doing some digging. I'm REALLY surprised that we haven't heard more about these comments. I think it's ridiculous that Barney Frank thinks he can lay complete blame at the Republican party's feet with these kinds of comments on public record. Lou Dobbs called out Barney Frank last night about assigning blame and Frank got pretty fired up about it (Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2008/09/24/ldt.barney.frank.intv.cnn)).

Republicans at this point take the fall for the Iraq War as it was obviously a misstep in hindsight. I think time will show that the Democrats will be the ones that missed the bus when it comes to this financial snafu. It'll be interesting to see if McCain focuses on this point during the economy debate. Obama is free and clear of it for the most part since he wasn't in the U.S. Senate until the point after the damage was already done.

[DaddyTorgo]

devil's advocate: it's pretty easy for McCain to say "for years I have been concerned" -- but his record doesn't show he ever acted on that concern.

[gstelmack]

Any discussion yet on the fact that Biden and Obama both voted to maintain funding for the Bridge to Nowhere?

[DaddyTorgo]

600 more posts and we surpass the Maximum FB thread boys and girls

[flere-imsaho]

Previews of Part II of Couric's interview with Palin (on foreign policy!) are now up on CBS' website.

Clip One: (http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/09/25/couricandco/entry4478088.shtml)

Katie Couric: You've cited Alaska's proximity to Russia as part of your foreign policy experience. What did you mean by that?

Sarah Palin: That Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between a foreign country, Russia, and, on our other side, the land-boundry that we have with Canada. It's funny that a comment like that was kinda made to … I don't know, you know … reporters.

Couric: Mocked?

Palin: Mocked, yeah I guess that's the word, mocked.

Couric: Well, explain to me why that enhances your foreign-policy credentials.

Palin: Well, it certainly does, because our, our next-door neighbors are foreign countries, there in the state that I am the executive of. And there…

Couric: Have you ever been involved in any negotiations, for example, with the Russians?

Palin: We have trade missions back and forth, we do. It's very important when you consider even national-security issues with Russia. As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right next to, they are right next to our state.

Clip Two: (http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/09/25/politics/horserace/entry4477239.shtml)

Katie Couric: Why is it much more challenging there? Can you explain that?

Sarah Palin: The logistics that we are already suggesting here, not having enough troops in the area right now. The… things like the terrain even in Afghanistan and that border between Pakistan and Afghanistan, where, you know, we believe that-- Bin Laden is-- is hiding out right now and… and is still such a leader of this terrorist movement. There… there are many more challenges there. So, again, I believe that… a surge in Afghanistan also will lead us to victory there as it has proven to have done in Iraq. And as I say, Katie, that we cannot afford to retreat, to withdraw in Iraq. That's not gonna get us any better off in Afghanistan either. And as our leaders are telling us in our military, we do need to ramp it up in Afghanistan, counting on our friends and allies to assist with us there because these terrorists who hate America, they hate what we stand for with the… the freedoms, the democracy, the… the women's rights, the tolerance, they hate what it is that we represent and our allies, too, and our friends, what they represent. If we were… were to allow a stronghold to be captured by these terrorists then the world is in even greater peril than it is today. We cannot afford to lose in Afghanistan.


From Clip One I gather that she has foreign policy because if Putin decides to attack the U.S., he'll do so through Alaskan airspace. Oh, and trade missions. I learned something here, too, and that is that the Bering Strait is apparently a hotbed of international trade.

Clip Two is great, actually. It's pretty much a compilation of every one-sentence or one-phrase justification uttered in defense of the War on Terror by the GOP for the past 7 years.

Those flash cards are really paying off.

[DaddyTorgo]

Any discussion yet on the fact that Biden and Obama both voted to maintain funding for the Bridge to Nowhere?

i don't put a lot of stock in this - this seems likely to have been one of those "the earmark for the bridge money was buried in a totally unrelated bill" type of situations. one of those "well i could vote against that bill to try to get that earmark removed, but that'd mean i'd be voting against a bill funding XYZ and then I'd politically be toast for that."

to be fair - I don't put a lot of stock into those "this person voted against this type of thing" attacks from either side though, and neither should any intelligent voter, because a high % of the time that's what actually is going on. The thing they're accused of voting against is buried as an earmark in a bill funding VA hospitals or something completely unrelated. that being said, i recognize that not everyone in this country is smart enough to realize that.

IMHO for that to have significant traction though you have to go back and find the bills that the funding for the bridge was in and see what else was included on those bills. because it's quite likely they were actually voting FOR something else and the bridge was just an earmark that they did not feel was a battle worth fighting at that time.

[flere-imsaho]

Any discussion yet on the fact that Biden and Obama both voted to maintain funding for the Bridge to Nowhere?

Neither Obama nor Biden, being realist politicians, have made the elimination of earmarks the central issue of their campaigns or, indeed, the experience of doing so their chief qualification for the job.

On Day One Palin came out and not only said she was anti-earmarks (which was not true), but that she was anti-bridge (which was also not true). That's why this is a story.

Obama & Biden likely voted for the Bridge in a deal to let some of their own earmarks go through. That's just the way it works, and most everyone knows this, even if we'd prefer it not to be the case. That's why no one cares about their votes.

[DaddyTorgo]

wow - that is one ugly, pathetic answer to clip one.

really - Russia's right next door? I didn't realize. And there's so many Russians in Siberia. Uh huh. Trade missions? AKA you invite the Russian fisherman over for dinner.

Canada? Really? You want to cite your experience talking with the governor of the Canadian north (isn't Canada's border-area with Alaska largely deserted of people?) as foreign policy experience? As friendly as we are with Canada i'd say that is at-best like talking to another American governor. That's a joke.

[cartman]

Hmmm, I tried to post the amendment that was voted on, but it was too long, and came back blank.

In any event, here is a link to the amendment that was voted on. Note, this wasn't a funding bill, but rather an amendment to an existing bill that was being debated. The "Bridge to Nowhere" was buried down in it. The amendment failed 82-15.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/C?r109:./temp/~r109nK73qV

[flere-imsaho]

Now that I think about it, I wonder if I, at age 35, have spent more time living and travelling in foreign countries than Sarah Palin has spent living and travelling in the lower 48 states....

[kaosfere]

What did McCain vote on this one?

He didn't bother to vote.

Senate Vote On Passage: H.R. 3058 [109th]: Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban... (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2005-264)

He's also been missing more votes than Obama all year:

Sen. John McCain [R-AZ] - Voting Record - GovTrack.us (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=300071&tab=votes)
Sen. Barack Obama [D-IL] - Voting Record - GovTrack.us (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400629&tab=votes)

[sterlingice]

And it's frightening to me that someone who can't even put a coherent answer together (let alone one that actually has substance, but even just one that's coherent) is someone that is being pushed to be the 2nd most powerful executive in this country.

I think it's more that she's been told by her handlers to not go off the script. AT ALL. FOR NO REASON. So, if a question comes up that she hasn't been prepared for, she just fumbles it away. Either that or she's horrible at ad-libbing.

SI

[flere-imsaho]

Taken from another board:

The capper: “She’s not always responsive when she’s asked questions,” Couric said of Palin. “It was a really interesting experience for me to interview her yesterday,” she added.

Katie Couric thinks the VP is a lightweight. Ponder that for a moment.

OK, I'll stop now.... :D

[kaosfere]

I should add, in spite of my statistics, that I really don't think a Senator's absenteeism during a campaign season is really worth examining closely. It's something all sides do, and it is accepted and expected.

I provide those figures merely to demonstrate that, really, things have been going along all year this way. Whether or not you think it's a matter of crucial importance that two Senators who've hardly been present all year rearrange their schedules at the last minute on an issue that's been brewing for weeks is likely a matter of your political viewpoint.

That said, while I'm linking to Senate records, and for completeness' sake:

Joe Biden's voting record on matters of national import (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=300008&tab=votes)
Sarah Palin's voting record on matters of national import (http://www.aaaalaskanoutfitters.com/i/Moose%20Pictures/tn_Russ_2005_moose.jpg)

[sterlingice]

Ok, I admit- I LOL'd ^^

SI

[fantom1979]

My surprise with the Palin interview is her complete inability to express her policies and ideas on the questions being asked. I am pretty sure, even though I am voting for Obama, that I could answer most of those questions better just from watching fox news and listening to McCain's speeches. Its bad that I am screaming the talking point out before the candidate is. :)

[I. J. Reilly]

I think it's more that she's been told by her handlers to not go off the script. AT ALL. FOR NO REASON. So, if a question comes up that she hasn't been prepared for, she just fumbles it away. Either that or she's horrible at ad-libbing.

SI

I think she’s getting all of the prepared answer out for each question, but getting all the words in the proper order seems to be a challenge. It’s like she just blurts out each word individually as it comes to her.

Palin’s inner-dialogue for the Rick Davis lobbying question: “Okay, there I think I got them all. Oh dear, the question isn’t over yet! Gosh, I’ll just say recused a few more times until we’re done.”

[Flasch186]

Now I just dont see how this going to come across as good to the 'people' when the 'people' view this, mostly, as a Wall Street issue instead of Main Street issue. I just dont see how the spin will stick when Obama's comeback, "A President has to be able to handle more than one issue at a time." is soundbite material.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/candidates_financial_meltdown

McCain campaign won't commit to debate on Friday

By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer 2 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - John McCain's campaign expressed cautious optimism Thursday as congressional Republicans and Democrats agreed in principle on a $700 billion bailout of the financial industry hours before the two presidential candidates were to meet with President Bush on the crisis.

Even so, the action didn't appear to be strong enough to convince McCain to attend Friday's scheduled presidential debate. His campaign has said he wouldn't participate unless there was consensus between Congress and the administration, and a spokesman said the afternoon developments had not changed his plans.

"There's no deal until there's a deal. We're optimistic but we want to get this thing done," McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said.

Obama still wants the face-off to go on, and is slated to travel to the debate site in Mississippi on Friday.

The debate over the debate is the latest campaign twist as McCain and Obama try to navigate the uncharted politics of the financial meltdown and show leadership at a time of national angst.

"With so much on the line, for America and the world, the debate that matters most right now is taking place in the United States Capitol — and I intend to join it," McCain said after addressing former President Clinton's Global Initiative in New York on Thursday before heading to Washington.

Obama argued the debate should proceed because a president needs to be able to handle more than one issue at a time.

"Our election is in 40 days. Our economy is in crisis, and our nation is fighting two wars abroad. The American people deserve to hear directly from myself and Sen. McCain about how we intend to lead our country. The times are too serious to put our campaign on hold, or to ignore the full range of issues that the next president will face."

In Oxford, Miss., debate organizers continued to prepare.

At a news conference, Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, a Republican, said he expected the presidential debate to go ahead, though he said he had no inside information. "This is going to be a great debate tomorrow night. We're excited about it," Barbour said.

Television networks, too, were moving forward. "We're proceeding as if it's on and will until someone tells us that it's not," ABC spokeswoman Cathie Levine said.

The two candidates spoke to the Clinton Global Initiative — McCain in person, Obama via satellite — before the meeting in Washington with Bush and House and Senate leaders from both parties. One of them is certain to inherit the economic mess, including the aftermath of the unprecedented plan to rescue the financial sector.

Presidential politics was running smack into the delicate negotiations over how to stop further weakening the sagging economy without putting an enormous new burden on taxpayers or rewarding corporations or their executives who share the blame for the woes.

On Capitol Hill, Democratic and Republican negotiators emerged from a closed-door meeting to report an agreement in principle. They said they would present it to the Bush administration in hopes of a vote within days.

Rogers said McCain didn't participate in that meeting, but was in talks with Republican leaders afterward. Conservative Republicans were among the holdouts, and there were indications they were waiting for McCain to make a move before they did.

As Thursday began, McCain said he didn't believe the administration's plan had the votes to pass without changes. "We are running out of time," McCain said. However, he said he still was confident a bipartisan compromise could be reached before markets open on Monday, one that would stabilize the markets, protect taxpayers and homeowners and "earn the confidence of the American people."

He again portrayed his announced halt to campaign events, fundraising and advertising as an example of putting the country ahead of politics. But in doing so he also hoped to get political credit for a decisive step on a national crisis as polls show him trailing Obama on the economy and slipping in the presidential race.

Despite McCain's stated campaigning hiatus, his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, paid a highly visible visit to memorials in lower Manhattan to those killed in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Democrats derided McCain's claim to have halted his campaign as a political stunt, though Obama himself didn't go that far.

For his part, Obama urged a swift resolution that would get the legislation passed, saying "action must be taken to restore confidence in our economy ... Now is a time to come together — Democrats and Republicans — in a spirit of cooperation on behalf of the American people."

Obama also rolled out a new 60-second TV ad to run in "key targeted states" in which he cited economic policies endorsed by Bush and McCain as essentially to blame for the troubles.

"For eight years we've been told that the way to a stronger economy was to give huge tax breaks to corporations and the wealthiest. Cut oversight on Wall Street. And somehow all Americans would benefit," Obama says in the ad. "Well now we know the truth. Instead of prosperity tricking down, the pain has trickled up. We need to change direction. Now."

[timmynausea]

RCP now has North Carolina as a toss up. The 3 most recent polls (basically from 9/17 until 9/23) have been tie, tie, Obama +2.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2008 - North Carolina: McCain vs. Obama (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nc/north_carolina_mccain_vs_obama-334.html)

[flere-imsaho]

There's a rumor that if McCain doesn't show for the debate, Obama will turn it into a nationally-televised town hall instead.

I'm going to guess this is a rumor being spread by the Obama campaign (or surrogates thereof) to goad McCain into showing up anyway.

I still think we've missed a quality chance to move the VP debate earlier, just in time for the weekend!

[Flasch186]

This has to be somewhat historic, to have a candidate saying they might not show up a day before hand, no?

[cartman]

And here is a link to the full text of the second measure where Obama and Biden voted for the "Bridge to Nowhere". Again, it was a line item in an overall spending bill for the Departments of Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, District of Columbia, and independent agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006. This passed by a vote of 93-1.

GovTrack: H.R. 3058 [109th]: Text of Legislation, Enrolled Bill (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h109-3058)

[DaddyTorgo]

There's a rumor that if McCain doesn't show for the debate, Obama will turn it into a nationally-televised town hall instead.

I'm going to guess this is a rumor being spread by the Obama campaign (or surrogates thereof) to goad McCain into showing up anyway.

I still think we've missed a quality chance to move the VP debate earlier, just in time for the weekend!

it'd be a shame if McCain didn't show up, but that would be somewhat amusing to see -- wonder if the networks would let him get away with it as a way of expressing their anger towards McCain?

[DaddyTorgo]

thanks cartman! you're a fountain of knowledge eh fatboy?

[cartman]

I'm not fat, I'm big boned.

:D

[DaddyTorgo]

I'm not fat, I'm big boned.

:D

lol believe it or not i've used that line myself.

and apparently i've decided that today is the day i start treating you in a way befitting of your nickname (see wrestlers thread) - hey it gave me a laugh, which is cool

[ace1914]

You know its bad for McCain when you have a full page without, Issi and JohninGA in here.

[Maple Leafs]

You know its bad for McCain when you have a full page without, Issi and JohninGA in here.
They've suspended their posting during this time of crisis.

[ISiddiqui]

I'm not exactly sure why the frequency of posts by certain people means McCain is doing badly. Talk about grasping for straws.

Well, if you want me to say something, how's about:

Obama's $100K Englewood garden grant being probed :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: The Watchdogs (http://www.suntimes.com/news/watchdogs/1184049,CST-NWS-watchdog25.article)


A $100,000 state grant for a botanic garden in Englewood that then-state Sen. Barack Obama awarded in 2001 to a group headed by a onetime campaign volunteer is now under investigation by the Illinois attorney general amid new questions, prompted by Chicago Sun-Times reports, about whether the money might have been misspent.


The garden was never built. And now state records obtained by the Sun-Times show $65,000 of the grant money went to the wife of Kenny B. Smith, the Obama 2000 congressional campaign volunteer who heads the Chicago Better Housing Association, which was in charge of the project for the blighted South Side neighborhood.


Smith wrote another $20,000 in grant-related checks to K.D. Contractors, a construction company that his wife, Karen D. Smith, created five months after work on the garden was supposed to have begun, records show. K.D. is no longer in business.


Attorney General Lisa Madigan -- a Democrat who is supporting Obama's presidential bid -- is investigating "whether this charitable organization properly used its charitable assets, including the state funds it received," Cara Smith, Madigan's deputy chief of staff, said Wednesday.


May not end up with anything, but is not the best thing to come out now.

[ISiddiqui]

A softball ("one or two examples") that descends into a farce because a) she's been caught in a lie of her own making (John McCain has never been a fan of regulation) and b) she has no idea what she's talking about.

Putting aside if Palin knows McCain's record on securities bills (she likely doesn't but I doubt Obama knows Biden's record on the same specific topic either), McCain has indeed voted for more regulation on certain bills:

RedState: Stump The Veep (http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate/2008/sep/25/stump-the-veep/)

McCain voted for Sarbanes-Oxley (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2002-192), and voted against the 1995 Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (one of only four Republicans to do so) (http://race42008.com/john-mccain/) and the 1998 Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (which passed 79-21) (http://www.techlawjournal.com/seclaw/80520.htm), for example, and joined with Carl Levin (http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0322-05.htm) to propose that if companies "don't account for their stock options as a cost in earnings reports, then they cannot claim them later as tax deductions." Of course, I can tell you those things because I'm a securities lawyer and I have access to Google; I'm not sure McCain would have all those examples at his fingertips offhand, much less Palin (indeed, I often find that people even in my business are surprised to hear that he voted against the PSLRA, and obviously Couric couldn't find them or she wouldn't have falsely stated as fact that McCain "almost always sided with the, less regulation, not more").

[ISiddiqui]

Maybe I'll say one more thing to make ace happy.

According to CBS's Bob Schieffer:


I am told, Maggie, that the way McCain got involved in this in the first place, the Treasury Secretary was briefing Republicans in the House yesterday, the Republican conference, asked how many were ready to support the bailout plan. Only four of them held up their hands. Paulson then called, according to my sources, Senator Lindsey Graham, who is very close to John McCain, and told him: you’ve got to get the people in the McCain campaign, you’ve got to convince John McCain to give these Republicans some political cover. If you don’t do that, this whole bailout plan is going to fail. So that’s how, McCain, apparently, became involved.


He has gotten what he wants, he’s going to have this meeting, kind of a summit today with the president and Barack Obama. I’m told that the leaders of both parties are getting close to having some kind of a bill. The question, though, is whether rank-and-file Republicans, especially, are going to vote for this.


Video is here:


Schieffer: Paulson Pleaded for McCain to Save Bailout | NewsBusters.org (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2008/09/25/schieffer-paulson-warned-bailout-would-fail-unless-mccain-got-invo)


(Biased site, but the video from CBS ain't doctored)

[mtolson]

hmmm, the Right's comments about Obama being the 'god' of the Libs.

http://newscoma.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/obamacoverrollingstone.jpg

The perception that having hundreds of thousands of Germans at a pseudo-concert for him.

This really didn't help, I still don't get it. And yes, I am being serious. Are you referring to the fact that he gave a speech at a FREE concert ?

[Big Fo]

The McCain campaign is paying people to ghost-write letters to the editor for local newspapers in swing states.

Sep. 24, 2008 | "You can be whoever you want to be," says an inviting Phil Tuchman. "You can be a beggar or a millionaire. A mom or a husband. Whatever. You decide!"

I volunteer in political campaigns now and then. After a series of outings for Obama and a first mission as a phone banker for John McCain, I returned to McCain's headquarters in Arlington, Va. The offer was too alluring to delay -- they wanted to put me into action as a ghostwriter. Next to commercials and phone banking, writing letters to the editor is the most important method of the McCain campaign to attract voters. At least that is what's written in the guidelines that McCain campaign worker Phil Tuchman presents to me.

Today he is training six ghostwriters. What on earth is the appeal of McCain for the former Soviet bloc? Last time I was here, an exuberant Polish guy was phone banking next to me. Today, a Russian in yellow suspenders is shimmering at the same table, looking just like an actor who is famous in the Netherlands for star turns as a genius who suppresses his dark side with painstaking self-control.

The assignment is simple: We are going to write letters to the editor and we are allowed to make up whatever we want -- as long as it adds to the campaign. After today we are supposed to use our free moments at home to create a flow of fictional fan mail for McCain. "Your letters," says Phil Tuchman, "will be sent to our campaign offices in battle states. Ohio. Pennsylvania. Virginia. New Hampshire. There we'll place them in local newspapers."

Place them? I may be wrong, but I thought that in the USA only a newspaper's editors decided that.

"We will show your letters to our supporters in those states," explains Phil. "If they say: 'Yeah, he/she is right!' then we ask them to sign your letter. And then we send that letter to the local newspaper. That's how we send dozens of letters at once."

No newspaper can refuse a stream of articulate expressions of support, is the thought behind it. "This way, we will always get into some letters column."

It is the day after Sarah Palin's speech at the Republican convention. Today, she is our main subject. The others are already enthusiastically hammering their keyboards. I am struggling with a tiny writer's block. "Dear Editor ..."

Phil Tuchman has handed out model letters, and talking points and quotes from Sarah Palin's speech. But whom do I want to be?

Let's loosen up my fingers a little first -- and my principles, too. Am I actually allowed to make up letters? At the moment, it seems to be the only way to demonstrate how this is done in a campaign. So yes. I start practicing attractive sentences about Sarah Palin:

"Her biggest plus to me is that, besides being amazingly smart and qualified, she managed to remain a woman like us. She is the PTA hockey moms. She is the working mothers of special needs children. She is every caring mother of a challenging teenager."

Her pregnant daughter Bristol (17) is not a talking point. A talking point is her son Track (19), who will be deployed to Iraq.

"And most of all, she is just like any mother of a child who deploys to Iraq in the service of this country."

Now we are getting somewhere. I look around. I type:

"My son, too, is there."

Oh god, you liar. Now build up suspense. New paragraph.

"And my heart needs him back safe so much."

Yes, yes. Well done. Another paragraph -- why not? Now let's pump some iron in that mother, for after all, we are not with the Democrats here. Look up the right, patriotic phraseology in the model letters.

"But when I see him again, I also want to see his face glow with pride. Just like the day he told me he enlisted."

Yes, like that. And now full speed in the direction of McCain's plans to continue the war. Sell that war. With a mother's heart.

"That is why Senator John McCain could count on my vote from day one."

But whatever happened to Sarah Palin in this story? I gaze out of the window. This takes 10 minutes. Then:

"With Sarah Palin, I have even more reason to trust in victory. She represents my heart."

Hmm. Does that sound like total doublespeak? Or does it sound like logical reasoning to a McCain supporter? I cannot come up with anything better.

"Sincerely ..." I leave the dots for somebody else's signature.

Does Phil Tuchman want to read it?

Phil bends over my computer screen and reads. This takes a while. I am expecting roars of laughter or to be kicked out. Then he says drily: "I like that. It appeals to the hearts of people. Can you write more letters?"

-- By Margriet Oostveen


salon.com link (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/09/24/mccain_letters/print.html)

This stuff just gets better by the day.

[Young Drachma]

To be fair, the ghostwriting letters thing is not something pioneered by the McCain campaign. Any campaign I've been involved with at any level has folks write letters and will ghostwrite letters for people. A lot of times it's just a practical thing, folks don't know how to write and want to support the campaign, but don't know how to do it. This makes it easier for them.

It's not a big deal nor some moral outrage.

Hell, I've worked on non-partisan campaigns for referendums or ballot initiatives where letter ghostwriting occurred.

[ISiddiqui]

To be fair, the ghostwriting letters thing is not something pioneered by the McCain campaign. Any campaign I've been involved with at any level has folks write letters and will ghostwrite letters for people. A lot of times it's just a practical thing, folks don't know how to write and want to support the campaign, but don't know how to do it. This makes it easier for them.

It's not a big deal nor some moral outrage.

Hell, I've worked on non-partisan campaigns for referendums or ballot initiatives where letter ghostwriting occurred.

Hell, I've gotten ghostwritten letters from the ACLU (yes, I'm a card carrying member) that I've been instructed to send (though I never have the rare times I got one).

[Young Drachma]

The "liberal media" needs to stop showing those videos of Palin's visiting preacher praying over her. It just reflects their inability to understand religious folks. It's not helping their cause and the issues are totally different than the whole Jeremiah Wright situation.

Anyone whose been to a non-denominational church or has some sort of experience with churches of a more pentecostal leanings make something like this seem not all that strange.

So it's sorta frustrating because I imagine folks with more religious upbringing will see this and take it as a personal affront. Lucky for Obama, it probably won't hurt him, because the rankling over the economy should mute it.

But seeing the video isn't helping anything for anybody, except maybe getting the base warmed up

[Big Fo]

Ah, I didn't know the ghost-written letters thing was that common. I'd never heard of the practice and the article made me laugh.

[Flasch186]

I'm not exactly sure why the frequency of posts by certain people means McCain is doing badly. Talk about grasping for straws.

Well, if you want me to say something, how's about:

Obama's $100K Englewood garden grant being probed :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: The Watchdogs (http://www.suntimes.com/news/watchdogs/1184049,CST-NWS-watchdog25.article)




May not end up with anything, but is not the best thing to come out now.

Well I hope they investigate the shit out of it and they find out the truth as to whether or not there is any wrongdoing here. And I also hope he cooperates fully with the investigation!

[Flasch186]

This really didn't help, I still don't get it. And yes, I am being serious. Are you referring to the fact that he gave a speech at a FREE concert ?

You asked how I felt that Obama had gotten a 'Rock Star' aura and am doing my best to convey that. I really didnt think it was in doubt and that, for at least a while, through no fault of her own, Palin also had gotten the 'Rock Star' aura (even the Right's campaign had talked about how she had emboldened and reinvigorated the supporters)

[Flasch186]

BTW, I just saw a Democratic ad that focused on McCain's Melanoma and I thought it was a hideous ad done in very poor taste. They had doctors on there talking about the dangers of Melanoma with closeup pictures of McCain's surgeries and I think it is a disgusting ad that shouldnt be aired. Not because it's bad that McCain had skin cancer but that a 527 is exploiting that! I hate 527's and that is a low frickin blow and doesnt deserve to be shown on TV. So ridiculous.

[SirFozzie]

Agreed. If you're going to hate on the 527's for the swiftboating, you have to hate this as well.. completely classless

[DaddyTorgo]

Agreed. If you're going to hate on the 527's for the swiftboating, you have to hate this as well.. completely classless

+1

[JonInMiddleGA]

You know its bad for McCain when you have a full page without, Issi and JohninGA in here.

{shrug} If you checked the first, I dunno, 50-100 pages of this thread you'd see my appearances are pretty random & sporadic at best.

As for more recently, what can I tell you, sometimes work interferes with posting more than it does with others. Lots easier to post when I'm waiting for stuff between phone calls than on days where I'm on the phone for the bulk of 8-12 hours straight.

[Swaggs]

BTW, I just saw a Democratic ad that focused on McCain's Melanoma and I thought it was a hideous ad done in very poor taste. They had doctors on there talking about the dangers of Melanoma with closeup pictures of McCain's surgeries and I think it is a disgusting ad that shouldnt be aired. Not because it's bad that McCain had skin cancer but that a 527 is exploiting that! I hate 527's and that is a low frickin blow and doesnt deserve to be shown on TV. So ridiculous.

Saw this ad today in WV.

A pretty odd advertisement overall, but it certainly caught my eye (whereas most political ads cannot get me to look up from the computer).

[ISiddiqui]

BTW, I just saw a Democratic ad that focused on McCain's Melanoma and I thought it was a hideous ad done in very poor taste. They had doctors on there talking about the dangers of Melanoma with closeup pictures of McCain's surgeries and I think it is a disgusting ad that shouldnt be aired. Not because it's bad that McCain had skin cancer but that a 527 is exploiting that! I hate 527's and that is a low frickin blow and doesnt deserve to be shown on TV. So ridiculous.

:eek: :eek:

Holy shit, you are kidding me?!

Sounds as bad as the Saxby Chambless ads against Max Cleland (if not worse)

[SirFozzie]

:eek: :eek:

Holy shit, you are kidding me?!

Sounds as bad as the Saxby Chambless ads against Max Cleland (if not worse)

ISiddqui: YouTube - McCain is 72. He's had cancer 4 times. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHvJPGnkQxE) is the commercial in question. (just hunted it down)

Even the Kos Kiddies are pretty much against this ad

[ISiddiqui]

Sometimes I just don't understand the 527s... who do they think this is going to sway?!

[DaddyTorgo]

i wish all the 527's on both sides would STFU and go away

[Vegas Vic]

Even the Kos Kiddies are pretty much against this ad

Let's not get carried away.

[SirFozzie]

The ones I read were.

[Big Fo]

Yeah, I can't imagine anyone thinking that putting this on the air will win Obama any votes. The doctor sort of looks like he is smiling for fucks sake. Totally unnecessary.

And if you're going to release such a shitty commercial, at least show a few seconds of Sarah Palin sputtering through one of her few interviews to drive home the point that "yeah McCain could die soon and look what we'd be stuck with then."

Classless intent with bad execution to boot.

[EagleFan]

Could someone tell Obama that the winner of the election doesn't take over immediately after the election is over...

[Arles]

Ouch for Barney Frank:


September 11, 2003
New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae
By STEPHEN LABATON
The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago."
"Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

...

"Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

[cartman]

If the Republicans are seriously trying to state that they couldn't do anything they wanted from 2000-2006, then I don't know what else there is to say. It really didn't matter what a Democrat said, the Republicans pretty much got their way on anything they wanted. They were really close to getting the rules changed on debate in the Senate to almost eliminate any say from the minority party.

[Arles]

Interesting comments by Obama:


I wanted to have a chance to talk to you, because obviously this
is a moment of great uncertainty in America.
As I mentioned at the rally today, the era of greed and
irresponsibility on Wall Street and in Washington has led us to a
financial crisis as serious as any we’ve faced since the Great
Depression.

And there’s much blame to go around for causing this crisis, but
we’re now here.

Every American has a stake in solving this crisis and saving our
financial system from collapse, because if we don’t act soon, then
people’s jobs, people’s savings, the economic security of millions of
Americans will be put at risk.

So the clock is ticking. We have to act swiftly.

He then says:
QUESTION: Are you still going to stay here in Florida and prepare for the debate, or are you thinking of going back to Washington?

OBAMA: You know, what I’m going to do is I’m going to — what
I’ve told the leadership in Congress is that, if I can be helpful,
then I am prepared to be anywhere, anytime.

What I think is important, though, is that we don’t suddenly
infuse Capitol Hill with presidential politics at a time when we’re in
the middle of some very delicate and difficult negotiations.

So, you know, I think the message is, if you need us, if I can be
helpful, I’m prepared to be there at any point.
So, we're facing the next depression if we don't act. But, hey congress, Obama's busy preparing for the debates so you can call him if you need him, but try to figure this out yourself. Barack really needs his beauty sleep for the debates... That's some quality leadership there.

[cartman]

Interesting comments by Obama:



He then says:

So, we're facing the next depression if we don't act. But, hey congress, Obama's busy preparing for the debates so you can call him if you need him, but try to figure this out yourself. Barack really needs his beauty sleep for the debates... That's some quality leadership there.

You see, that is just Obama playing the media like a Stradivarius. I'm just shocked he's been able to get away with it for so long. You'll see.

[Flasch186]

Yeah, Arles, having the Presidential candidates there worked great! If what were hearing is true the GOP is having a frickin' coup against Boehner and stifling the bill's passage. Frickin brilliant idea to have the most partisan of campaigns candidates arrive to help....how? Who knows because they havnt helped out, at all and news channels (I know, liberal media bias) are reporting that the GOP is in revolt.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080926/financial_meltdown.html

A White House summit meeting called principally with the purpose to seal the deal that President Bush has argued is indispensable to stabilizing frenzied markets and reassuring the nervous American public descended into arguments -- mostly among Republicans.

The meeting revealed that Bush's proposal to combat the worst financial crisis in decades had been suddenly sidetracked by fellow Republicans in the House, who refused to embrace a plan that appeared close to acceptance by the Senate and most House Democrats.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson begged Democratic participants not to disclose how badly the meeting had gone, dropping to one knee in a teasing way to make his point according to witnesses.

And when Paulson hastily tried to revive talks in a nighttime meeting near the Senate chamber, the House's top Republican refused to send a negotiator.

"This is the president's own party," said Rep. Barney Frank, a top Democratic negotiator who attended both meetings. "I don't think a president has been repudiated so strongly by the congressional wing of his own party in a long time."

By midnight, it was hard to tell who had suffered a worse evening, Bush or McCain. McCain, eager to shore up his image as a leader who rises above partisanship, was undercut by a fierce political squabble within his own party's ranks.

But a session aimed at showing unity in resolving the financial crisis broke up with conflicts in plain view. McCain would not commit to supporting a plan worked out by congressional negotiators, said people from both parties who were briefed on the exchange.

McCain's campaign said the meeting "devolved into a contentious shouting match" and implied that Obama was at fault — on a day when McCain said he was putting politics aside to focus on the nation's financial problems.

Democrats differed.

IMO, whoever is screwing this up are idiots! This is going to hurt all the way down to the gutter on main street....gotta love those trickle down economics. They need a few more scary days on Wall Street again as a reminder of what we face.

[CraigSca]

Are there any polls showing what the people want as far as the bail out? I could have sworn I heard that the general public is 80%+ against this.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Are there any polls showing what the people want as far as the bail out? I could have sworn I heard that the general public is 80%+ against this.

That's an inaccurate summary of the actual poll. The poll that I saw that you are likely referring to had the following reponse numbers.

18% were for the bailout.
40% were against the bailout
42% felt like they needed more information

Granted, it doesn't show good support for the measure by any means, but there's a vast number of people that just don't know because they feel like the information hasn't been fully presented yet.

[JPhillips]

I'd like to see the presentation Paulson gave congressional leaders made public. If it's really a crisis, let the American public see the numbers.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

I'd like to see the presentation Paulson gave congressional leaders made public. If it's really a crisis, let the American public see the numbers.

Agreed. I'd like to see the lawmakers be just as open about what the hang-up is on the bill. There's a whole lot of finger-pointing, but no specifics being given on what the exact disagreements are. We've got a Congress with a 9% approval rating that has both sides pointing fingers at the other side. Worse yet, they have Christopher Dodd and Barney Frank doing the finger-pointing on behalf of the Democrats, two men who were the main members of Congress who resisted reform 5 years ago on this very issue. It all rings very hollow.

[JPhillips]

It's not Dems vs Republican as far as I can tell. It appears that House Dems, Senate Dems, Senate Repubs, and the White House are very close to an agreement, but a majority of House Repubs are blocking the deal. I'm not sold on a 700 billion bailout, but the plan Cantor and House Repubs have come out with is a fucking joke. It doesn't help that they're making statements like this:

"For the sake of the altar of the free market system, do you accept a Great Depression?"

Meanwhile McCain won't say what he supports, but reports are that he's at least sympathetic to House Republicans. Isn't it ironic that McCain may be placing his campaign into the hands of Republicans that trust him least.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

It's not Dems vs Republican as far as I can tell. It appears that House Dems, Senate Dems, Senate Repubs, and the White House are very close to an agreement, but a majority of House Repubs are blocking the deal. I'm not sold on a 700 billion bailout, but the plan Cantor and House Repubs have come out with is a fucking joke. It doesn't help that they're making statements like this:

Meanwhile McCain won't say what he supports, but reports are that he's at least sympathetic to House Republicans. Isn't it ironic that McCain may be placing his campaign into the hands of Republicans that trust him least.

You're quite naive if you don't think this will be turned into a McCain and the Republicans vs. the Democrats situation. Barney Frank already did that yesterday in his press appearance. It doesn't matter whether the Senate Republicans are on board or not.

Regardless, a deal will be done today. I wouldn't be surprised to see Obama in Mississippi 15 minutes before debate time preparing for a town hall format, only to have McCain ride in on a white horse 2 minutes before the debate goes live on TV and say, "Great idea! Let's have a town hall format!" :)

[ISiddiqui]

It most definitely has the feeling of a GOP Civil War. The question becomes, which side will McCain throw his support behind, because I can see defections based on the way the de facto leader of the Party (no one thinks that about Bush anymore, so it's McCain's role) leans.

[GrantDawg]

It most definitely has the feeling of a GOP Civil War. The question becomes, which side will McCain throw his support behind, because I can see defections based on the way the de facto leader of the Party (no one thinks that about Bush anymore, so it's McCain's role) leans.


He is in a bind, because this is exactly the type of issue that he usually goes against the more hard-line of the party. He's going really tick a large group off either way he handles it.

[larrymcg421]

Seems like a weird battle with Barney Frank and George Bush on one side and House Republicans on the other, and everyone is waiting to see where McCain ends up.

[albionmoonlight]

McCain ride in on a white horse 2 minutes before the debate goes live on TV

Racist.





























;)

[QuikSand]

First of all, I don't know what to think or root for on the bailout. I'm a pretty well-informed citizen, I keep on top of national and political affairs, and hell, I even teach economics. And I still don't know whether I like the idea of the bailout, nor do I really comprehend what happens if we do too little here. So, I'm honestly not vested in one particular outcome on this issue, I don't really even know where I stand on it.


However, I think the safest political step for McCain here is to be against the fix. Since he really has given up the mantle of straight talk and so forth, his campaign is best served by just criticizing the deal, whatever it is, and claiming that it wasn't well done, and voting against it. It's really just the same thing we see on the campaign trail -- voters are unbelievably stupid and ill-informed, and they can very easily fall for massive mis-characterizations of any firm position. So, don't have any firm positions. Say you are against everything anyone opposes, and that you're in favor of empty platitudes. Distribute your "plan" and say that all the details are there, but fill it with empty bullshit. That is how you win an election that gets decided by idiots, and that's what this is, face it.

If McCain and the GOP (to whatever extent) really think that orchestrating some sort of "be brokered the deal" on this mess is a winner, I think they are sorely mistaken. It might look like leadership to some. But it will put his face, rather than Bush/Paulson's, on this thing, and I don't think that's a winner -- popular opinion among the great unwashed is that a massive bailout of wall street is idiotic. The GOP's great strength is being part of that sort of chant, not trying to get into the details that might convince an attentive and informed audience that the chanting is incorrect-- the latter is the windmill-tilting domain of hapless Democrats.

I don't know what Senator McCain has in mind here as an endgame, but if I'm whispering in his ear, I advise him to throw the whole thing overboard. Say it's a bad deal, that it doesn't do enough for America, wrap yourself in the flag, and remind us you were a POW. And, if in your heart you want it to pass because you think it's the right thing to do, suck it up, you have an election to win first. Set that stuff aside for now.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

He is in a bind, because this is exactly the type of issue that he usually goes against the more hard-line of the party. He's going really tick a large group off either way he handles it.

But is this a problem? He's been ticking off people his whole career. To be honest, I don't think that hurts him as all. The party core will still vote for him because he's better than Obama in their eyes. I'm a moderate Republican and if I see a bunch of core Republicans pissed off at him, that only furthers his image of a 'maverick' and someone who challenges people in his party from a campaign perspective.

[Fighter of Foo]

Chris Rock on Larry King last night:

"It’s a pretty bad choice. I thouht Al Davis made the choice that’s how bad it was. She’s done 3 interviews and she is running for Vice President of the United States? Jason Lee has done more interviews promoting My Name Is Earl. i did more interviews today than she has to run for Vice President. Every time they let her talk for more than 4 minutes, you actually start feeling sorry for her.

It’s kind of like Kim Kardashian on Dancing With The Stars, all that ass and can’t shake it."

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Chris Rock on Larry King last night:

"It’s a pretty bad choice. I thouht Al Davis made the choice that’s how bad it was. She’s done 3 interviews and she is running for Vice President of the United States? Jason Lee has done more interviews promoting My Name Is Earl. i did more interviews today than she has to run for Vice President. Every time they let her talk for more than 4 minutes, you actually start feeling sorry for her.

It’s kind of like Kim Kardashian on Dancing With The Stars, all that ass and can’t shake it."

Yea! Another celebrity that believes they're smarter than the rest of the nation.

[Fighter of Foo]

See, it's funny cause it's true. :)

[Butter_of_69]

Yea! Another celebrity that believes they're smarter than the rest of the nation.

You're right, the rest of the nation thinks that pick is solid gold.

[JPhillips]

The only thing I'd quibble with QS on is that there is a risk. If no plan is passed and the market drops by 1000 or 1500 points in October and the news is dominated by economic stories, McCain doesn't want to be the guy that stopped the rescue plan.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

You're right, the rest of the nation thinks that pick is solid gold.

I believe the actual breakdown is 45/45 give or take a couple of points with 10 percent undecided. :)

[bronconick]

The only thing I'd quibble with QS on is that there is a risk. If no plan is passed and the market drops by 1000 or 1500 points in October and the news is dominated by economic stories, McCain doesn't want to be the guy that stopped the rescue plan.


If the economy continues to weaken and tops the news stories, McCain's screwed anyway.

[Butter_of_69]

Rest of the nation = 45%?

Oh right, I forgot to allow for the Couric/Palin interview bump. I bet that's up to 70-80% by now.

[DaddyTorgo]

Yea! Another celebrity that believes they're smarter than the rest of the nation.

Umm Mizzou, he's not saying or implying that at all. He's simply saying that she's done next-to-no interviews.

FWIW I think his point would have been stronger without the cracks on her "every time she opens her mouth" and the "kim kardashian's ass" comments. Just point out the irony of the fact that Jason Lee has done more interviews for his TV show than she has done, and let that speak for itself and be it's own humor. But then again he's Chris Rock, you almost knew he'd have to get a crack in there somehow.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Rest of the nation = 45%?

Oh right, I forgot to allow for the Couric/Palin interview bump. I bet that's up to 70-80% by now.

I'd be floored if some of these celebs didn't think they were smarter than the majority of Democrats as well. They're pretty high on themselves.

[DaddyTorgo]

I'd be floored if some of these celebs didn't think they were smarter than the majority of Democrats as well. They're pretty high on themselves.

+1

[Butter_of_69]

You certainly couldn't say that about anyone in this thread, either.

:thumbsup:

[cartman]

Wow, a columnist for NRO is calling on Palin to step down from the VP spot.

Palin Problem by Kathleen Parker on National Review Online (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiMDhjYTU1NmI5Y2MwZjg2MWNiMWMyYTUxZDkwNTE)

[DaddyTorgo]

Wow, a columnist for NRO is calling on Palin to step down from the VP spot.

Palin Problem by Kathleen Parker on National Review Online (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiMDhjYTU1NmI5Y2MwZjg2MWNiMWMyYTUxZDkwNTE)

i'm sure in < 5 minutes we'll hear from the spin-meisters that she's the resident wackadoo "far-left" columnist for NRO.

[Arles]

i'm sure in < 5 minutes we'll hear from the spin-meisters that she's the resident wackadoo "far-left" columnist for NRO.
There's about 10 articles out there saying Obama should drop Biden (especially after this very tough week he's had). The margin for error is so small in this election, everyone is panicking (on both sides of the media/punditry). Both VP candidates will stay and neither will have much of an impact from this moment on. Palin got the right-wingers on board and Biden alleviated some of the initial foreign policy fears people had on Obama. They've each served their purpose and outside of the one debate (which I doubt will have much impact), this election is now on Obama and McCain only.

[Arles]

BTW, one theory was just stated on the radio. It appears that McCain is going to be against the democrat house/senate/Bush plan and work with House republicans on a bill that involves a treasury loan (not bailout) to these companies for the bad mortgages. McCain (it appears) will also be at the debate tonight no matter what.

So, the theory stated that the democrats/Obama will be faced with two options:

1. Accept the House republican/McCain compromise and have it be a loan instead of a bailout. McCain can then take credit tonight for brokering the settlement and saving the country from a $700 billion bill to the taxpayers.

2. Reject the House plan and face a debate where McCain says something like "You have a choice between the two of us. My Opponent wants to write a $700 million check to corporate business coming from your pocket. My plan involves a loan to these businesses where the American tax payer is not on the hook."

Either way, if it goes like this, McCain may have set himself up in a very advantageous position on this.

[sterlingice]

However, I think the safest political step for McCain here is to be against the fix. Since he really has given up the mantle of straight talk and so forth, his campaign is best served by just criticizing the deal, whatever it is, and claiming that it wasn't well done, and voting against it. It's really just the same thing we see on the campaign trail -- voters are unbelievably stupid and ill-informed, and they can very easily fall for massive mis-characterizations of any firm position. So, don't have any firm positions. Say you are against everything anyone opposes, and that you're in favor of empty platitudes. Distribute your "plan" and say that all the details are there, but fill it with empty bullshit. That is how you win an election that gets decided by idiots, and that's what this is, face it.

"Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others!"

SI

[JAG]

And now, the moment you've all been waiting for...what's that? John McCain is going to debate? John McCain is going to debate! How's the leg feel son...er, pops?

[digamma]

2. Reject the House plan and face a debate where McCain says something like "You have a choice between the two of us. My Opponent wants to write a $700 million check to corporate business coming from your pocket. My plan involves a loan to these businesses where the American tax payer is not on the hook."



If McCain says this, then it shows he fundamentally doesn't understand this issue. (No comment on whether Obama does.) And that's not to say that the 48% of the people who were supporting McCain before the debate won't continue to support him.

[timmynausea]

"Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others!"

SI

This one deserves LOL credit. Kudos to you, sir.

[Flasch186]

If McCain says this, then it shows he fundamentally doesn't understand this issue. (No comment on whether Obama does.) And that's not to say that the 48% of the people who were supporting McCain before the debate won't continue to support him.

I sincerely hope that he does not believe or agree with this.

On another note I truly truly hope the Obama camp comes out and smashes that 527 Melanoma ad. I had hoped W would do the same for the Swiftboat ads (he didnt) but I hold the same hope here for the Obama camp in regards to that despicable ad.

[timmynausea]

RCP has added Missouri to the toss-ups today as the latest poll has McCain +1. With 11 states within 3.5% margins, this should at least be a fun election night to follow on TV.

[ISiddiqui]

Have we done the latest polls?

CBS/NY Times: Obama 48, McCain 43 (LV)
Gallup Tracking: McCain 46, Obama 46 (RV)
GW/Battleground Tracking: McCain 48, Obama 46 (LV)
Hotline/FD Tracking: Obama 49, McCain 42 (RV)
Rasmussen Tracking: Obama 50, McCain 45 (LV)

[digamma]

That is how you win an election that gets decided by idiots, and that's what this is, face it.



I was too optimistic in my previous post.

[QuikSand]

The only thing I'd quibble with QS on is that there is a risk. If no plan is passed and the market drops by 1000 or 1500 points in October and the news is dominated by economic stories, McCain doesn't want to be the guy that stopped the rescue plan.

My argument isn't that he should stop it... quite the reverse. The safest seat in politics is up in the peanut gallery, where you can jeer at the people who actually did stuff, and yell and scream about how they did everything wrong, and how your non-specific platitude of an idea is better (which it always is at that level of detail).

[Flasch186]

Republican Senator on CNBC says having the Presidential candidates come to Washington 'helped them refocus and move the ball forward.'

They just voted down (the Senate did) a new 'stimulus' package.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Interesting. McCain's press release and information from the American Spectator both suggest that Obama's partisan attack where he stated that the current bill should pass and that no changes should be made resulted in a collapse of the entire meeting. He pissed off the House Republicans to the point where they refused to support the bill. The House Republicans refuse to pass the bill because funding is included in the bailout that would send money to a voting group that is trying to drum up support for Obama via voter registration. Obama reportedly had no interest in discussing a compromise.

Another thing to mention. Why don't the Democrats just pass this bill if they know that Bush won't veto it? They have the majority. If it's a great bill, they should be more than happy to put their name on it so they can take full credit when it works.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

They just voted down (the Senate did) a new 'stimulus' package.

I couldn't be more happy to see the end of yet another stimulus package. These bills don't do anything to fix the root problem.

[Flasch186]

I couldn't be more happy to see the end of yet another stimulus package. These bills don't do anything to fix the root problem.

we agree that the focus needs to be on the 'root' of the problem and agree that another stimulus package is not the answer.

but you probably think Im lying or something ;)

[lungs]

At least the McCainiacs have a built in excuse for a poor performance tonight, or they can tout how spectacular a performance it was given the conditions if he fares well.

And you know they'll do it too.

[Crapshoot]

I'd be floored if some of these celebs didn't think they were smarter than the majority of Democrats as well. They're pretty high on themselves.

I think I'm smarter than most of the nation - should I lie and pretend otherwise? And you sure as hell think you're smarter than most (where's today's Sony press release? :D ).

[Big Fo]

I'm glad the debate is still on for tonight, I've been looking forward to it. On the news I think I saw a blurb on the rolling ticker that there might be some economic stuff in addition to foreign policy due to recent events, anyone else see something like that?

[JPhillips]

Interesting. McCain's press release and information from the American Spectator both suggest that Obama's partisan attack where he stated that the current bill should pass and that no changes should be made resulted in a collapse of the entire meeting. He pissed off the House Republicans to the point where they refused to support the bill. The House Republicans refuse to pass the bill because funding is included in the bailout that would send money to a voting group that is trying to drum up support for Obama via voter registration. Obama reportedly had no interest in discussing a compromise.

Another thing to mention. Why don't the Democrats just pass this bill if they know that Bush won't veto it? They have the majority. If it's a great bill, they should be more than happy to put their name on it so they can take full credit when it works.

Well if McCain says it's Obama's fault, that settles it for me.

[JPhillips]

My argument isn't that he should stop it... quite the reverse. The safest seat in politics is up in the peanut gallery, where you can jeer at the people who actually did stuff, and yell and scream about how they did everything wrong, and how your non-specific platitude of an idea is better (which it always is at that level of detail).

I don't think he can credibly pull that off now. If he had stayed out of it that would have worked, but now he's set himself up as the most important guy in the room, so if it fails he's bound to take a lot of the blame.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

At least the McCainiacs have a built in excuse for a poor performance tonight, or they can tout how spectacular a performance it was given the conditions if he fares well.

And you know they'll do it too.

That's convinient, but doesn't mirror the truth. McCain has always been expected to out-perform Obama in the debates. Any perceived Obama win in any of the three debates will hurt McCain.

FWIW.....I don't think McCain needs a whole lot of preparation time for the debate. By this point, his policy opinions are not a surprise to anyone. Obama is the more inexperienced politician and will need more prep for the debate. That should be a surprise to no one.

[Flasch186]

That's convinient, but doesn't mirror the truth. McCain has always been expected to out-perform Obama in the debates. Any perceived Obama win in any of the three debates will hurt McCain.

what?! McCain, did you see his speech at the convention. Im not knocking him because I disagree with you 100% that most of the country expects him to not do well in the debates....which is why he is begging for a townhall style. Where do you come up with some of your statements when they go against conventional wisdom, the campaigns actions and statements, and the video evidence, etc.?



FWIW.....I don't think McCain needs a whole lot of preparation time for the debate. By this point, his policy opinions are not a surprise to anyone. Obama is the more inexperienced politician and will need more prep for the debate. That should be a surprise to no one.

Wow. A good speaker (as has been shown inversely during Palin's recent interviews) can improv there way through most speeches and interviews. a poor speaker will struggle through notecards, teleprompters, and connecting to the audience and will find themselves reverting to 'failsafes'. I mean, sometimes, facts are facts. This doesnt even apply solely to politics but almost to any type of speaking there is.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

what?! McCain, did you see his speech at the convention. Im not knocking him because I disagree with you 100% that most of the country expects him to not do well in the debates....which is why he is begging for a townhall style. Where do you come up with some of your statements when they go against conventional wisdom, the campaigns actions and statements, and the video evidence, etc.?

McCain has always been an extremely good speaker/debator when he isn't working off a script/teleprompter. It's certainly no secret that rehearsed speeches are his weakest point. As you mention, that was very evident at the convention.

[fantom1979]

That's convinient, but doesn't mirror the truth. McCain has always been expected to out-perform Obama in the debates. Any perceived Obama win in any of the three debates will hurt McCain.

FWIW.....I don't think McCain needs a whole lot of preparation time for the debate. By this point, his policy opinions are not a surprise to anyone. Obama is the more inexperienced politician and will need more prep for the debate. That should be a surprise to no one.

I don't know, inexperienced politicians seem to do better in these debates (Kennedy/Nixon, Reagan/Carter, Clinton/Bush, Bush/Gore)

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - CNN Poll: Obama has higher expectations to meet in debates « - Blogs from CNN.com (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/09/26/cnn-poll-obama-has-higher-expectations-to-meet-in-debates/)

That's mostly based on the perception that the public in general has from the rehearsed/scripted speeches that Obama and McCain have given. That's the only thing that a lot of people have seen of the candidates as they don't follow the day-to-day changes. Anyone who has watched Obama in his appearances know that he does extremely well in scripted speeches, while he tends to stutter quite a bit and require 'thought time' for lack of a better phrase when he's not working with a script. McCain is the exact opposite. McCain's presentation is terrible in scripted speeches, but he's very convincing as a candidate when discussing issues without a script.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

I don't know, inexperienced politicians seem to do better in these debates (Kennedy/Nixon, Reagan/Carter, Clinton/Bush, Bush/Gore)

Obama didn't fare that well against Clinton head-to-head. McCain is considered a slightly stronger debater than her.

It's all subjective in the end. But if the perception is that Obama should win the debates at this point, it's likely going to end well for McCain.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

I must have misunderstood you. When you said

you actually meant

Sorry.

LOL.....do we now have to express that a post is our opinion in a political discussion thread?

I feel like I'm writing a bailout bill for Congress. :D

[fantom1979]

It's all subjective in the end. But if the perception is that Obama should win the debates at this point, it's likely going to end well for McCain.

If I am McCain, I am still a tad worried about the "TV effect". Having a handsome, young Obama on the same stage with an older, not so handsome McCain. Younger/hipper candidate (when there is one), usually seem to pull these off well (Clinton/Kennedy) over the older/stuffy candidates (Nixon/Bush Sr). Democrats are going to vote for Obama, Republicans are going to vote McCain, but who are the independates going to vote for? What will decide their vote? We can only hope it is on the issues, but I am not that confident in the American voters.

[fantom1979]

LOL.....do we now have to express that a post is our opinion in a political discussion thread?

I feel like I'm writing a bailout bill for Congress. :D

Are you suspending your posting on this forum to work on the bailout bill? ;)

[ISiddiqui]

Yeah, I have to disagree with Mizzou. Right now, most people expect Obama to wipe the floor with McCain, mostly because they believe that stump speaking can be equivalent to debating style. They don't realize that McCain is actually very good in debates (it's one of the main reasons his campaign in the primaries went from just about done to nominee).

[Flasch186]

That's mostly based on the perception that the public in general has from the rehearsed/scripted speeches that Obama and McCain have given. That's the only thing that a lot of people have seen of the candidates as they don't follow the day-to-day changes.

This statement and the previous one I said "What?!" to are in complete and udder contrast. and I do mean milky.

[timmynausea]

I actually think McCain can be a good debater, but he can also get flustered easily. He had some ugly moments with Romney where it was really bitter and personal. That said, he's certainly a much better debater than he is on the stump. I don't expect him to have any problems tonight in terms of losing control of his emotions, either.

His main issue in the debates may be that he is roughly 5'6" and 70 some years old.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

This statement and the previous one I said "What?!" to are in complete and udder contrast.

You're right. I didn't phrase the first post well at all. There's a big difference between public perception and the perception of those who follow the race closely. I should have been more specific. The debate tonight should be a lot of fun to watch.

New Rasmussen Daily poll discussed the move towards Obama in the polls over the past week or so.

Rasmussen Reports&trade;: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll)

[fantom1979]

Obama is taking the South baby!!!!

[Arles]

I don't know, inexperienced politicians seem to do better in these debates (Kennedy/Nixon, Reagan/Carter, Clinton/Bush, Bush/Gore)
I would change it to politicians with low expectations seem to do better in these debates.

[Arles]

If I am McCain, I am still a tad worried about the "TV effect". Having a handsome, young Obama on the same stage with an older, not so handsome McCain. Younger/hipper candidate (when there is one), usually seem to pull these off well (Clinton/Kennedy) over the older/stuffy candidates (Nixon/Bush Sr). Democrats are going to vote for Obama, Republicans are going to vote McCain, but who are the independates going to vote for? What will decide their vote? We can only hope it is on the issues, but I am not that confident in the American voters.
I would say that in this climate, the elder, statesman McCain may show more stability than the young and fresh Obama. So I don't know that this is true tonight.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Even more information from the American Spectator regarding yesterday's meeting. According to an Obama campaign source, someone gave Obama the bill option suggested by the House Republicans and told him that it was the compromise bill when it was not. So Obama launched into a big speech about how he opposed the bill and then Paulson agreed with him. The rest of the group that agreed on the compromise was wondering why the hell Obama opposed the compromise bill when he was in fact voicing his disapproval for the House Republican bill that he was told was the compromise. The House Republicans felt like the meeting was a big setup to make them look bad thanks to the Obama snafu and the whole meeting fell into chaos. The ironic part is had Obama been in Washington to work on the bill and known what was going on rather than relying on material given to him, we'd likely already have a compromise bill signed. Instead, everyone is finger-pointing to the Nth degree.

Ah, politics.

[cartman]

I'm also curious as to why McCain was against the compromise bill, since it met all of the criteria he had laid out earlier in the week for a plan to be acceptable.

[NoMyths]

Palin in one of her three interviews explaining her foreign policy experience (with a bonus commercial for a bad TV show):

<embed src='http://www.cbs.com/thunder/swf30can10cbsnews/rcpHolderCbs-3-4x3.swf' FlashVars='link=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ecbsnews%2Ecom%2Fvideo%2Fwatch%2F%3Fid%3D4478156n&partner=cbssports&vert=News&autoPlayVid=false&releaseURL=http://release.theplatform.com/content.select?pid=hdkxamTi8l_uCAJ2ORKSzF3marEPn7Ul&name=cbsPlayer&allowScriptAccess=always&wmode=transparent&embedded=y&scale=noscale&rv=n&salign=tl' allowFullScreen='true' width='425' height='324' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer'></embed><br/><a href='http://www.cbs.com'>Watch CBS Videos Online</a>

[JonInMiddleGA]

McCain's presentation is terrible in scripted speeches

Agree.

but he's very convincing as a candidate when discussing issues without a script.

Except for those times when you realize he doesn't have the slightest clue what he's talking about ... which would be any of the several McCain appearances on Hannity's radio show I've had the misfortune of suffering through. He sounds convincing (not to mention convinced) but only if you aren't familiar with the subject matter yourself. Hearing him speak on matters relating to the FCC and media ownership is downright painful for anyone who knows the subject and I've had similar reactions to him on other topics as well.

This has the makings of Kennedy/Nixon, with the added potential for disaster of McCain making one or more definitive statements that are later shown to be flat out wrong.

Happily, it'll be easy for me to miss the entire thing, as I'll be at a high school football game tonight.

[JPhillips]

I would change it to politicians with low expectations seem to do better in these debates.

I'd change it to, better debaters tend to do better in these debates.

With a sample size that small it's not predictive for Obama.

[JPhillips]

I would say that in this climate, the elder, statesman McCain may show more stability than the young and fresh Obama. So I don't know that this is true tonight.

Have you paid even the slightest attention to McCain's erratic fly boy stunts over the past few weeks. Stability hasn't been his strong suit.

[JPhillips]

Even more information from the American Spectator regarding yesterday's meeting. According to an Obama campaign source, someone gave Obama the bill option suggested by the House Republicans and told him that it was the compromise bill when it was not. So Obama launched into a big speech about how he opposed the bill and then Paulson agreed with him. The rest of the group that agreed on the compromise was wondering why the hell Obama opposed the compromise bill when he was in fact voicing his disapproval for the House Republican bill that he was told was the compromise. The House Republicans felt like the meeting was a big setup to make them look bad thanks to the Obama snafu and the whole meeting fell into chaos. The ironic part is had Obama been in Washington to work on the bill and known what was going on rather than relying on material given to him, we'd likely already have a compromise bill signed. Instead, everyone is finger-pointing to the Nth degree.

Ah, politics.

No, he didn't mistake it for the compromise bill. The story is pretty thinnly sourced, but even if 100% true it isn't as you described it. This is what the AmSpec blog says.


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

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

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

"Paulson and his team have not acted in good faith for this President or the administration for which they serve," says a House Republican leader who was not present at the White House meeting, but who instead is part of the team hammering out the House GOP alternative. "We keep hearing about how Secretary Paulson is working with Democrats on this or that, yet he never seems to consider working with the party that essentially hired him. Perhaps he's auditioning for a Democratic administration job. Our proposal didn't just spring forth fully formed; we've been working on this for several days, and Treasury staff has known about it."

[Flasch186]

And back to Troopergate for a nice diversion:
Alaska lawmakers: McCain campaign interfering in Palin probe - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/25/palin.probe/index.html)

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (CNN) -- Lawmakers investigating Gov. Sarah Palin's firing of her public safety commissioner accused the McCain-Palin campaign on Thursday of stonewalling the probe by helping witnesses refuse to comply with subpoenas.
Investigators want to know if Gov. Sarah Palin fired a state employee for improper reasons.

A state Senate committee subpoenaed Palin's husband, several top aides and other advisers earlier this month, but none of those served with demands for testimony appeared before the panel when it met last week.

The panel is scheduled to meet again Friday. A member of the committee said Thursday that he expects more no-shows.

In court filings, lawyers for Hollis French, the Democratic state senator overseeing the probe, and Stephen Branchflower, the attorney hired to conduct it, say Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign has moved "on many fronts" to kill the investigation since Palin became the Republican vice presidential nominee.

"Indeed, recent events demonstrate that witnesses or participants who want to stonewall Mr. Branchflower's fact-finding inquiry can count on plenty of assistance from lawyers and McCain campaign operatives," the filings state.

The filings came in response to lawsuits that Palin's allies filed last week seeking to stop the probe. The suits name as defendants the Alaska Legislative Council, the Republican-dominated committee that authorized the investigation in July, and its chairman, Democratic state Sen. Kim Elton.

The response calls the suits "clearly meritless" and "political, not legal" documents.

The McCain campaign has said that Palin will cooperate with a state Personnel Board investigation instead of the legislative probe, which the campaign has described as being "tainted" with partisan politics.

"Since Gov. Palin was named the Republican [vice] presidential nominee, it comes as little surprise that the Obama supporters leading the legislative investigation would attempt to use the proceedings to the political advantage of their candidate," said Taylor Griffin, a McCain-Palin campaign spokesman.

"All Gov. Palin is asking for is a fair and impartial review of the facts outside of the taint of partisan politics," Griffin said. "That's why she's cooperating with the Personnel Board."

Earlier this week, Democratic state Rep. Les Gara asked the state police to investigate whether state laws against witness tampering have been violated. Gara did not level allegations against a specific person, but said Republican operatives had been sent to Alaska to undermine the legislative probe.

"I think probably the McCain folks think this was just politics," Gara said Thursday. But he added, "All we know is they want to stop the investigation and suddenly the witnesses aren't talking. That's indisputable."

Ex-Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan says he was sacked in July after he refused to fire the governor's ex-brother-in-law, a state trooper who was involved in an acrimonious divorce from Palin's sister.

Palin has denied any wrongdoing, arguing that Monegan was fired for insubordination after he continued to press for funding for projects the governor opposed.

Palin initially agreed to cooperate with the legislative probe and have her staff testify. But since she became McCain's running mate, she and her advisers have argued that the state Personnel Board is the proper agency to investigate.

Campaign aides have repeatedly attacked French for a September 2 interview in which he said the investigation could lead to an "October surprise" for the GOP ticket. The aides have called the probe "a politicized kangaroo court."

French's committee issued the subpoenas September 12. State Sen. Bill Wielechowski, a member of the Judiciary Committee, said none of the seven people ordered to testify since last week have filed requests to quash the subpoenas with a state court -- but he did not expect them to show for Friday's hearing.

"They should all be there, or they're breaking the law," Wielechowski, a Democrat, said.

The full Senate would have to vote on any sanctions against witnesses who refuse to appear. It does not convene again until January.

Palin's husband, Todd, was among the people who refused to appear last week. The couple's attorney, Thomas Van Flein, filed papers arguing the Legislature had no authority to investigate Monegan's firing, and that state law prevents ethics investigations of candidates for state office. The vice presidency is a federal office, however.

The legislative inquiry is scheduled to be completed by October 10. There is no deadline for the investigator hired by the Personnel Board to look into Monegan's firing.

On Tuesday, a Palin spokeswoman said the Personnel Board's investigator has requested confidentiality. The spokeswoman indicated the campaign would no longer answer questions about the probe.

Monegan has vehemently denied charges of insubordination and has told CNN he was a "team player" who never did anything without approval.

[flere-imsaho]

This is the most exciting presidential election since 1992 (which was exciting because of Perot and Bush's self-destruction). :D

[NoMyths]

Palin on the Wall Street bailout and job creation:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/npUMUASwaec&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/npUMUASwaec&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Fidatelo]

Is she just spitting out a stream of random talking points? That is terrible. My God.

[sterlingice]

She's like a talking train wreck

SI

[NoMyths]

And yet she could be the president of our country if things go poorly.

[Fidatelo]

And yet she could be the president of our country if things go poorly.

Haha, good luck with that!

*hides in his igloo*

[DaddyTorgo]

Is she just spitting out a stream of random talking points?

i really think that's what it is. she just is not a competent interviewee.

i really hope these videos get decent circulation - people need to see who they are voting for. More than that, McCain's selection of her really calls into question his judgement. Because while it may have been best to win the election (as some have pointed out), it would be horrible if she ended up needing to do anything at all important, or represent the U.S. at all.

And if McCain is so focused on winning that he'd pick someone unqualified because it gives him a better chance to win, in effect saying "to hell with the consequences," that's not very patriotic of him.

[DaddyTorgo]

Haha, good luck with that!

*hides in his igloo*

dude - swear to god - i'll move up there.

[Fidatelo]

dude - swear to god - i'll move up there.

You might change your mind come January.

* throws log on the fire *

[SirFozzie]

It's really strange.. now, admittedly, I'm biased to dismiss her (I was leaning towards voting Obama already, for the tack back to the right wing that McCain had done, I was a lot happier with him as a Moderate.. for him to tack on a right-winger's right-winger just made it very hard for him to get my vote).. but for the excitement she obviously generates in her base, the more she talks, the more this is looking like Dan Quayle redux.. how does she spell potato? :D

[Fidatelo]

i really think that's what it is. she just is not a competent interviewee.

I think it comes down to this: like a lot of normal people, she doesn't know the answer to that question. But unlike a normal person, she is in a position where she can't admit it. After I listened to it I thought to myself "how would I answer that question if I had to say something aside from 'I don't know, good question Katie!'?" I sort of started off speaking in my mind, changed my mind part way through, paused... and then realised that I was doing exactly what she did, except that I didn't start randomly throwing out phrases people had been drilling into me.

To summarize, I guess on the one hand I feel bad for her, because if it was me, I'd be looking just as stupid. But on the other hand, I've never really considered myself fit to lead a country either. She's just in over her head.

[JonInMiddleGA]

it would be horrible if she ended up needing to do anything at all important, or represent the U.S. at all

And in spite of that, a drunk version of Palin on acid with Alzheimers is infinitely preferrable to Obama.

[Flasch186]

That's simply a lie Jon.

[timmynausea]

From a purely political stand point, the appeal to the drinking and acid dropping voters could actually prove a wise move. It could also work as entertainment - I, for one, would love to see Sarah Palin answer that question on acid. I think she actually did pretty well for being drunk in the Couric interview.

McCain already has the alzheimers vote locked down, though, and let's face it - those guys are not the most reliable voters.

[Arles]

That's simply a lie Jon.
As silly as it reads, I don't think a person's opinion can be a "lie". Are you able to see inside Jon's brain and see that he wouldn't really prefer "a drunk version of Palin on acid with Alzheimers", but he would prefer "a somewhat sober version of Palin on acid with Alzheimers"? :D

A person's opinion can be in poor taste, uninformed or even ridiculous, but I don't know how an opinion can be a "lie".

[ISiddiqui]

but for the excitement she obviously generates in her base, the more she talks, the more this is looking like Dan Quayle redux.. how does she spell potato? :D

And what exactly did the candidate who picked Quayle fare in his election? I'm not sure you'd be smiling if McCain becomes Bush 41 to Obama's Dukakis.

[Anthony]

I think it comes down to this: like a lot of normal people, she doesn't know the answer to that question. But unlike a normal person, she is in a position where she can't admit it. After I listened to it I thought to myself "how would I answer that question if I had to say something aside from 'I don't know, good question Katie!'?" I sort of started off speaking in my mind, changed my mind part way through, paused... and then realised that I was doing exactly what she did, except that I didn't start randomly throwing out phrases people had been drilling into me.

To summarize, I guess on the one hand I feel bad for her, because if it was me, I'd be looking just as stupid. But on the other hand, I've never really considered myself fit to lead a country either. She's just in over her head.

every politician does this - control the interview. if you don't know the answer, phase in an answer to something you do know/have rehearsed. if you think someone is gonna start talking from the top of their head in a live interview you're silly. all a politician does is think about how they're gonna segway their answer into a talking point/message they want to give out. unfortunately for Palin that must not be her strongpoint. what *is* her strongpoint is obviously blowjobs, and she must've given McCain one muthafucka of a blowjob to seal the VP nomination.

you see, i used this post as a way to segway into something i really want to talk about - Palin giving head. the whole first part of my post was just a setup to the point i wanted to make. i could so totally make an excellent politician.

[Flasch186]

As silly as it reads, I don't think a person's opinion can be a "lie". Are you able to see inside Jon's brain and see that he wouldn't really prefer "a drunk version of Palin on acid with Alzheimers", but he would prefer "a somewhat sober version of Palin on acid with Alzheimers"? :D

A person's opinion can be in poor taste, uninformed or even ridiculous, but I don't know how an opinion can be a "lie".

`eh, youre right. For Jon it may be spot on and if were using the Sports Entertainment analogies id actually agree with him.

[kaosfere]

A person's opinion can be in poor taste, uninformed or even ridiculous, but I don't know how an opinion can be a "lie".

Exactly. And I can always find respect for someone who is willing to put bullshit rationalizations aside and simply say, "I think that the Loyal Opposition is a monster, and for that reason alone I will not vote for him."

Like me: However much of a classical conservative I may be when it comes to economic matters -- and not even entering the debate about how little neocons resemble classical conservatives on any matter -- I am even more of a social liberal, and, barring mitigating circumstances, I will almost never be willing to vote for a party with a significant core of policy based on iron age thought and a desire to return to theocratic rule.

Tell me you won't vote for Obama because he's a Muslim terrorist sympathizer and I will call you out for the ignorant fool you are. Tell me it's simply because you believe that what he actually supports is simply wrong, and Palin on her worst day would be infinitely better for that reason alone, and I won't argue with you. I may be convinced, internally, that you are sadly mistaken, but there is no useful way to argue with core principles.

[fantom1979]

I personally believe the U.S. Americans are unable to do so because, uh, some, uh...people out there in our nation don't have maps, and, uh, I believe that our education like such as South Africa and, uh, the Iraq everywhere like, such as and...I believe that they should, our education over here in the U.S. should help the U.S., err, uh, should help South Africa and should help the Iraq and the Asian countries, so we will be able to build up our future for our...

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lj3iNxZ8Dww&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lj3iNxZ8Dww&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[JonInMiddleGA]

I may be convinced, internally, that you are sadly mistaken, but there is no useful way to argue with core principles.

I think I'll quote this one for a brief addendum to my sidebar, because I thought you made a pretty good post. (Hey, I had to pick one for some reason, might as well be that reason ;) )

And along with the core principles involved, I perceive at least one other difference between Palin & Obama. While I believe both would be incredibly even unbelievably out of their depth as C-in-C / POTUS, I think deep down she knows she is while I believe he hasn't the slightest inkling.

[GrantDawg]

That's simply a lie Jon.


You keep using that word. I don't think means what you think it means. :)

[SirFozzie]

Heh. Wonder if Jon would be upset about the sloppiness of the latest McCain ad, released today.. (here's a free hint, boyos... release statements/ad saying you won the debate.... AFTER THE DEBATE, duh!)

(removed the image cuz it broke the thread)

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/09/mccain_wins_debate.html?nav=rss_blog

They've already released two versions of the ad, the 2nd one has a statement from McCain's campaign manager "McCain won the debate-- hands down."

Nothing like declaring victory before it even starts, huh?

[molson]

Heh. Wonder if Jon would be upset about the sloppiness of the latest McCain ad, released today.. (here's a free hint, boyos... release statements/ad saying you won the debate.... AFTER THE DEBATE, duh!)

(removed the image cuz it broke the thread)

McCain Wins Debate - The Fix (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/09/mccain_wins_debate.html?nav=rss_blog)

They've already released two versions of the ad, the 2nd one has a statement from McCain's campaign manager "McCain won the debate-- hands down."

Nothing like declaring victory before it even starts, huh?

Well, to be fair, there's poor children in 3rd world countries all over the world wearing "2008 Super Bowl Champion Patriots" shirts.

[SirFozzie]

Well, to be fair, there's poor children in 3rd world countries all over the world wearing "2008 Super Bowl Champion Patriots" shirts.

I hate you. (stupid Giants)..

yes, but that's because there's physical lead time in making Physical items. online, it's just "Do not show this ad before 10:00 PM EDT Friday".

[Young Drachma]

Well, to be fair, there's poor children in 3rd world countries all over the world wearing "2008 Super Bowl Champion Patriots" shirts.

My understanding is, they've stopped doing that. Now they just destroy the shirts.

[Young Drachma]

Everyone calls Barry professorial, but I'd totally take a class with him. I think it'd be interesting.

[Galaxy]

I always been curious, why are they having a debate on a Friday night?

[Easy Mac]

Oooh, McCain made his Bear/paternity joke... that never gets old.

As to a debate on Friday... I don't know about you, but I enjoy having sex with Jim Lerher in the background.

[Young Drachma]

I always been curious, why are they having a debate on a Friday night?

Well Sunday is football. Saturday? No one is home, is the thought. Friday night?

McCain is coming off defensive and is trying to take the shine off Obama's apple by turning him into a regular ol' Democrat.

Seems Barry isn't gonna have it. I think it's an even debate, but Obama is coming off really strong thus far.

[Young Drachma]

Seems McCain watched a lot of the Hillary debate and realizes how important it is to get the last word in.

[Young Drachma]

Is he wooing the base tonight, McCain is? Who is he talking to?

[Calis]

I want to strangle politicians when they sit there with the snarky smartass smile on their face while the other one is speaking. It's not endearing.

Tonight McCain is dominating that category.

[Young Drachma]

Miss Congeniality in the Senate? Wow. Debate Prep much, John?

[Vegas Vic]

"Six years ago (when I was in the Illinois senate) I stood up and opposed this war."

[SirFozzie]

Miss Congeniality in the Senate? Wow. Debate Prep much, John?

Twice...

[SirFozzie]

Now I see why McCain wanted such low expectations... he's playing into Obama's hands, as the McCain Temper comes to the fore..

[Young Drachma]

Now I see why McCain wanted such low expectations... he's playing into Obama's hands, as the McCain Temper comes to the fore..

I'm sure some will disagree, but as someone who isn't voting for either candidate, I agree...this thing isn't even a contest. McCain isn't coming off well at all and I doubt he'll convert anyone who wasn't already going to vote for him. I doubt Obama does either, but...he certainly has stepped his game up. At best, McCain is coming off sloppy and uninspiring, much less presidential.

[Young Drachma]

The way he says Pakistan is gonna make someone think that he's related to those Muslims over there.

[sterlingice]

The way they keep pronouncing it makes me think of South Park and the "no Towlie ban" :D

SI

[Young Drachma]

The long they stay on military stuff, the more likely that McCain is on his home turf. I don't know if it'll stick, because I'm not sure how much anyone who keeps hearing about the bailout really cares, other than "bring our kids home."

shrug.

[Crapshoot]

This is boring. Seriously - make it no holds barred.

[Crapshoot]

There's always a failed state in Pakistan! It has been so for 40 years!

[SirFozzie]

This is the problem with the 4 minutes to reply, then 5 minutes free form.. instead of debates, you have the candidates talking over each other to get their soundbites out

[Young Drachma]

Is McCain the change candidate? Or the experience candidate? He's following the Clinton playbook against Obama, because I guess they figure it worked. But McCain isn't Hillary and Obama has learned a bit since then.

[sterlingice]

Not sure about the "I also have a bracelet" line and idea...

SI

[SirFozzie]

Not sure about the "I also have a bracelet" line and idea...

SI

In a way, it's a completely awesome burn.. that Obama knew that McCain was going to do that line, and countered it.. but yeah, risky on both sides

[Young Drachma]

I don't think what resonates in the right wing blogosphere is gonna pull people to McCain's side.

But if he keeps saying it over and over again, maybe something he says about Obama "not understanding" will stick.

[SirFozzie]

Is what I'm reading true, that McCain is proposing a UN volume 2, with just democracies?

[Big Fo]

http://i34.tinypic.com/2i9la3a.gif

[sterlingice]

Stumbling through Ahmadinejad and Peristroika didn't help McCain, especially with Obama's little patronizing "that's ok".

SI

[Maple Leafs]

Random question, but can anyone recommend any good conservative (US) blogs for my RSS feed? I have Coulter for comedy and Frum, and Sullivan who was supposed to be conservative but we know how that turned out. Anyone out there who's toughtful and posts fairly frequently?

[timmynausea]

For some of these, McCain is like a newswriter that keeps trying to write long, fluffy leads and won't put the who, what, when, where and why right up front. He goes into abstract territory and likes to resolve a long list of ideas with the gist of the concept, which seems like a really poor debate strategy. Throw in the bitter/temper stuff, and I think it has been a poor showing for him. He does much better when directly responding to something Obama has said, in my opinion.

[SirFozzie]

Stumbling through Ahmadinejad and Peristroika didn't help McCain, especially with Obama's little patronizing "that's ok".

SI

I bet Obama was saying the name mentally over and over again to make sure he didn't screw up the name

[Young Drachma]

Random question, but can anyone recommend any good conservative (US) blogs for my RSS feed? I have Coulter for comedy and Frum, and Sullivan who was supposed to be conservative but we know how that turned out. Anyone out there who's toughtful and posts fairly frequently?

American Conservative Blog (http://www.amconmag.com/blog/) (I went to college and was active in a conservative student org with one of the bloggers here is the associate editor at AmCon) Their take is usually not as party line as the rest.
The Next Right (http://www.thenextright.com/)
Red State (http://www.redstate.com/)
http://www.powerlineblog.com/
http://www.moonbattery.com/

[Crapshoot]

Random question, but can anyone recommend any good conservative (US) blogs for my RSS feed? I have Coulter for comedy and Frum, and Sullivan who was supposed to be conservative but we know how that turned out. Anyone out there who's toughtful and posts fairly frequently?

David Frum is interesting, but he has issues in the sense that he actually admits there are things wrong with the Right. I also like Ross Douhat over at The Atlantic (a great site in general).

[Young Drachma]

Here's Reason's blog too. Libertarian, to be sure, but far more to the right than to the left.

Hit & Run - Reason Magazine (http://www.reason.com/blog)

[JPhillips]

Dan Drezner is a good read.

[SirFozzie]

Way to go off wool-gathering, McCain.. he got asked about 9/11 and if we're safer, and he spent his time resorting to a campaign speech about being a MAVERICK... but then wrapped it up with one sentence 'So we're safer, but not SAFE yet"

[RPI-Fan]

On Intrade, immediately before the debate, it was Obama +12 (or so)... now it's Obama +7.

[SirFozzie]

McCain accusing Obama of being too much like Bush??? Are we living in Bizarro World???

[miami_fan]

McCain accusing Obama of being too much like Bush??? Are we living in Bizarro World???

I had similar thoughts when they talked about Parkistan. I swore they took the positions of their political opposite.

[timmynausea]

I had similar thoughts when they talked about Parkistan. I swore they took the positions of their political opposite.

That was weird. I thought for a minute that Obama was going to call McCain a pussy.

[SirFozzie]

Well, the feeling that I have right now, is that this was pretty much a 10-10 round in boxing, neither side really landed any real telling blows.. and this was McCain's home ground

[JPhillips]

Yeah, I saw it as a pretty dull draw. I should have stayed with the football game.

[Flasch186]

My thoughts:

I thought the setup with the 2-2-5 was terrible. You ended up getting less info and it seemed uncomfortable, which is a shame.

I thought McCain did a very good job tonight.

I thought that Obama did well and he did take a risk with the bracelet line.

Perhaps, due to the low expectations (sorry Mizzou you were so wrong here) I was surprised by McCain and one could argue that his upside was bigger and I think therefore he wouldve won tonight.

So even if it was a draw, that means McCain did better than Obama.


some negatives:

If anything Obama was too polite allowing McCain to get the last word or leave a "John, that's not true moment" unclarified.

John needed desperately to make eye contact with Obama. It didnt speak well of respect for your opponent HOWEVER if this isnt pointed out by pundits Im not sure the laymen will see it as a big deal. Oh his saying that Kennedy was in the hospital when he was actually released from it already and on his way home was a slight mishap of information...not his fault but left me kind of thinking something was amiss there.

and:

Im not sure anyone wouldve been swayed by tonight but I definitely will se how Hawkish people will love McCain and Doves will like Obama.

For me......


I think McCain wins tonight. Now let me go to FactCheck.org and start deducting points for lying. that could sway the decision on the Flasch winner dramatically.

[Young Drachma]

Well, the feeling that I have right now, is that this was pretty much a 10-10 round in boxing, neither side really landed any real telling blows.. and this was McCain's home ground

+1

[GrantDawg]

+1

+2

Draw goes to Obama I would think. He showed he can hold his own on Foreign Policy against a guy who should have mopped the floor with him on this issue.

[DaddyTorgo]

My thoughts:

I thought the setup with the 2-2-5 was terrible. You ended up getting less info and it seemed uncomfortable, which is a shame.

I thought McCain did a very good job tonight.

I thought that Obama did well and he did take a risk with the bracelet line.

Perhaps, due to the low expectations (sorry Mizzou you were so wrong here) I was surprised by McCain and one could argue that his upside was bigger and I think therefore he wouldve won tonight.

So even if it was a draw, that means McCain did better than Obama.


some negatives:

If anything Obama was too polite allowing McCain to get the last word or leave a "John, that's not true moment" unclarified.

John needed desperately to make eye contact with Obama. It didnt speak well of respect for your opponent HOWEVER if this isnt pointed out by pundits Im not sure the laymen will see it as a big deal. Oh his saying that Kennedy was in the hospital when he was actually released from it already and on his way home was a slight mishap of information...not his fault but left me kind of thinking something was amiss there.

and:

Im not sure anyone wouldve been swayed by tonight but I definitely will se how Hawkish people will love McCain and Doves will like Obama.

For me......


I think McCain wins tonight. Now let me go to FactCheck.org and start deducting points for lying. that could sway the decision on the Flasch winner dramatically.

point by analysts on CNN though - if this was supposed to be McCain's strongest topics where he is clearly better than McCain, if he can only manage a 10-10 draw isn't that a loss? Tie-goes-to-the-runner type of thing...

[DaddyTorgo]

DaddyTorgo<aim:timestamp style="display: inline; font-size: 11px;"> (10:53:44 PM)</aim:timestamp>: good point on cnn here
DaddyTorgo<aim:timestamp style="display: inline; font-size: 11px;"> (10:53:50 PM)</aim:timestamp>: by this lady (gloria berger?)

DaddyTorgo<aim:timestamp style="display: inline; font-size: 11px;"> (10:54:06 PM)</aim:timestamp>: that obama attacked mccain on policy and tied him to bush and their independent focus group was okay with that
DaddyTorgo<aim:timestamp style="display: inline; font-size: 11px;"> (10:54:25 PM)</aim:timestamp>: but mccain's attacks on obama were more "you don't understand" and condescending, and their focus group of independents reacted negatively to that

[ISiddiqui]

I think Obama played defensively waaay too much. McCain was more on offense. Obama could have hammered McCain a few times if he wanted to, but mostly out of Obama, you heard a lot of "John/Senator McCain is right" while McCain said a lot of "Senator Obama just doesn't understand", etc.

It made Obama look like he was following along. Based on policies, it was even, but on how they conducted themselves, McCain gets a slight victory.

And a majority of people thought Obama was going to win because of his eloquence on stump speeches (according to polling)... the expectations bar tends to be pretty big sometimes in these debates.

[Flasch186]

no, McCain, due to expectations needed to make up a lot of that to earn, what you call a draw, and I think he may have won, so he gained more ground than Obama extended...so no, McCain Won IMO tonight.

OH BUT IM BIASED. SO I take it all back!!!

[SirFozzie]

I think Obama played defensively waaay too much. McCain was more on offense. Obama could have hammered McCain a few times if he wanted to, but mostly out of Obama, you heard a lot of "John/Senator McCain is right" while McCain said a lot of "Senator Obama just doesn't understand", etc.

It made Obama look like he was following along. Based on policies, it was even, but on how they conducted themselves, McCain gets a slight victory.

And a majority of people thought Obama was going to win because of his eloquence on stump speeches (according to polling)... the expectations bar tends to be pretty big sometimes in these debates.

I agree with you that McCain took more steps forward, but he also took more steps backward (the constant condescending "You just don't understand, Barack", the butchering of names, etcetera)

[JPhillips]

Why don't reporters just boycott the spin room? Nothing of any interest comes out of interviews with people who are paid to promote their candidate.

[DaddyTorgo]

did mccain's advisor just call mccain a once-in-a-lifetime political communicator? or did i mishear that?

edit: yeah i misheard apparently.

but yeah - the spin room is pretty much BS and partisan

[ISiddiqui]

I agree with you that McCain took more steps forward, but he also took more steps backward (the constant condescending "You just don't understand, Barack", the butchering of names, etcetera)

I'm not sure the "you don't understand" is going to hurt him that much. Some people may not like it, but others may see it as Obama not having the same experience.

[Flasch186]

I'm not sure the "you don't understand" is going to hurt him that much. Some people may not like it, but others may see it as Obama not having the same experience.

people are going to see it the way they wanted to to begin with, Im not sure the debates tonight will sway anyone.

[Mike D]

I agree this was pretty even, but not iwthout some wins and losses.

Obama Win:
The big score for Obama was the economy and suggesting 95% of Americans will get money from him if he's elected in the form of tax breaks.

McCain Win:
The big score for McCain was foreign policy and the discussion about "No preconditions w/ rogue leaders". He definately won there.

Obama Loss:
The "Great Orator", Obama came off as very dull and defensive and not like what I imagine him to be like at all. Snapping out "That's not true" made him sound like a 3rd grader.

McCain Loss:
McCain came off as awkwardly aggressive, stumbling over verbage and saying some weird shit like "When I was let out of prison" or "I put some folks into prison" that didn't come off right at all.

But most of the debate was very respectful and interesting enough for me to watch until the end. Although, as I throw my support to the Republicans, I did go and make my PB&J sandwich while Obama was talking...but it only took me a minute.

[SirFozzie]

I'm not sure the "you don't understand" is going to hurt him that much. Some people may not like it, but others may see it as Obama not having the same experience.

The people who'd see it as that, are the ones already inclined to vote for McCain. For an example of it, look at what DT referenced on the CNN.com focus group of independents (the people that McCain needs to win).. they felt it was an attack and condescending