home

Wednesday Open Thread

There is an issue bubbling, at least in my threads, with people claiming to be Democrats telling me how great McCain is on the economy.

No true Democrat believes that. If you are a Republican, well, of course McCain's crazy economic policies will appeal to you. But not if you are a Democrat and claim to have been a Clinton supporter.

Now I have no patience for stupidity, so I suggest those people who want to claim to be Democrats and Hillary Clinton supporters but also claim that McCain is better on the economy not comment in my threads. Such a claim is simply untenable. You can't be a Dem and Hillary Clinton supporter on the economy and claim McCain is better on the economy than Obama. It makes no sense. I have no patience period, but absolutely no patience for that type of nonsense. Maybe J and Chris will accept it in their threads, I will not. Do not bring it there.

This is an Open Thread.

< Good News: Bush Considering Prime Time Address On Economic Crisis | Instead Of Canceling The Debate . . . >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Here Here (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by progrocks on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:34:45 PM EST
    They tend to congregate in your threads more than the others, so the PUMA's will likely go away.

    I do not mind PUMAs (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:55:44 PM EST
    I mind stupid PUMAs.

    There can be understandable reasons to be resistant to Obama. Thinking McCain is better than Obama on the economy is not one of them in my mind.

    Parent

    No, McCain is not better... (5.00 / 3) (#120)
    by alexei on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:40:00 PM EST
    Hillary is better.  That said, my posts are aimed at the Dems coming out with their own proposal and not just "improving" the Paulson plan.  We are in a big mess and it is the Republicans fault, with some Dem enablers.

    Parent
    Oh man (5.00 / 3) (#31)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:56:49 PM EST
    I'm one of this disappointed HRC supporters. I maxxed out and raised money. I was devastated when she lost. I was very very angry at the DNC, and I still am.

    Now I've maxxed out to Obama and am raising money. There is absolutely no way that a man who professes not to understand the economy, and gets his advice from Phil Effing Gramm, can possibly be trusted on the economy.  McCain's always been for de-regulating financial institutions -- ever since before the S&L crisis.

    McCAIN JUST ISSUED A PRESS RELEASE SAYING HE WANTS TO DELAY THE FRIDAY DEBATE SO THAT THEY HAVE TIME TO DEAL WITH THE ECONOMY.

    Yeah, he probably wants to learn about how there are interlinks in the economy, just like Bush found out the other day.

    Parent

    I just saw him in TV (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:14:08 PM EST
    He not only is asking to delay the debate, he says he is suspending his campaign to return to Warshington to focus on the crisis.
    Yeah, like McCain is going to take the lead.  He's gotten some good ideas from Phil Gramm.

    Parent
    Hmm, so I guess he'll take his TV ads (5.00 / 3) (#71)
    by andgarden on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:15:56 PM EST
    off the air. RIIIIGHT?

    heh.

    Parent

    Now he can avoid the press, (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by byteb on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:22:15 PM EST
    debates and criticism for the rest of the campaign under the mantle of crisis management. Of course, that goes for Palin too.

    Parent
    Fear grips the heart (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:36:57 PM EST
    Palin is working on the economic crisis.

    Parent
    Let's Encourage McCain... (5.00 / 2) (#101)
    by santarita on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:29:50 PM EST
    to permanently suspend his campaign.  

    That would do wonders for level of truthiness in the campaign,

    Parent

    For the briefest of moments, (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by Realleft on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:49:40 PM EST
    I thought that's what the announcement was saying.

    Parent
    Typical Grandstanding.n/t (none / 0) (#78)
    by santarita on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:19:48 PM EST
    And what of Obama (none / 0) (#121)
    by Lahdee on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:40:17 PM EST
    will he suspend in deference to McCain? Heh.

    Classic republican s**t, look like a leader and then stick it to the country. I hope Obama stands up to this grandstanding.

    Parent

    What a stunt (none / 0) (#45)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:04:12 PM EST
    Kinda like Ted Stevens asking to be excused from his own corruption trial because the financial crisis just can't be resolved without him!

    Sullivan warned Stevens on Tuesday that it might not be the best idea to leave the courtroom during the first week of his corruption trial but that if he's needed in the Senate, the judge will explain his absence to jurors.

    "I would be remiss if I didn't bring this to your attention," Sullivan told Stevens just before jury selection began. "I think it's possible that some jurors may think someone is too busy."

    Stevens' lead attorney, Brendan Sullivan, wanted the judge to tell jurors that if Stevens is absent, it's because he's needed in the Senate to help address the looming financial crisis. But the judge told him he'd say only that Stevens simply wouldn't be there, but that there was nothing wrong with his absence and the jurors shouldn't speculate about it.

    Gosh, John McCain is such a "country first" kind of guy that he'd postpone a debate just to make sure he can assist with the financial crisis.  This from a guy who has made about 2 votes in the Senate in the past year.  Give me a break.

    Parent

    Coward. (none / 0) (#55)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:08:18 PM EST
    Not a coward, but smart. (none / 0) (#74)
    by Newt on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:17:52 PM EST
    Avoid the press, avoid the debate, and hope like crazy that the culture war makes low info, low income & middle class voters side with the rich voters in electing another Republican.

    The last thing McCain wants to do right now is have the entire country listen to him try to explain how he's going to fix this mess.  

    People are suddenly paying attention...

    Parent

    Afraid to face Obama (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:23:30 PM EST
    one on one.

    Afraid to let Congress work through the details of the legislation - he wants Bushie to call a "leadership conference", to include him, Obama, some other clowns, and do the deal-hammering that Congress is supposed to do.

    I think it means the Paulson plan is going down, and they think they can roll it through by rolling Obama.

    That, or get everyone's hands on the mess so no one can be blamed.

    I smell Rove.

    Parent

    I am sure (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by TheRizzo on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:26:31 PM EST
    They will reschedule the debate after the bill gets worked out and signed.  And of course Obama is the one that ducked the weekly townhalls.

    No question this was a political thing by McCain to one up Obama and also try and force the Dems to pass a bill quickly to get the mess off the headlines.  Shrewd but transparent move by McCain.

    Parent

    Another Hail Mary (4.00 / 3) (#152)
    by MKS on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:52:15 PM EST
    McCain is erratic and flies by the seat of his pants......He wants attention for being "dramatic."

    The McCain "celebrity" ads showed just how jealous McCain is.

    During times of crisis, the wheels of Democracy must still turn.  This means (Rudy, you listening?) no postponment of elections, just as we did not postpone national elections during WWII or the Civil War.....National Debates are part of that process....Postponing them means giving way to panic....Calm and steady is better...

    Parent

    Just for the record (5.00 / 1) (#157)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:54:37 PM EST
    we did postpone the mayoral primary on 9/11!

    Parent
    Hmm (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by MKS on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:05:45 PM EST
    Didn't Rudy want to postpone the whole election for months....

    Parent
    Yes (5.00 / 0) (#175)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:08:02 PM EST
    I understood what you were referring to.  I was just sayin'!

    Parent
    He wanted to have his term extended (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:08:19 PM EST
    past the January 1, 2002 expiration of it.

    "To help in this difficult time".

    That went over like the proverbial lead balloon.

    Parent

    No townhalls were scheduled (none / 0) (#125)
    by byteb on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:41:49 PM EST
    My point (none / 0) (#131)
    by TheRizzo on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:44:35 PM EST
    exactly.

    Parent
    Risky politics, probably good for his image (none / 0) (#134)
    by Realleft on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:46:12 PM EST
    on McCain's part. I was commenting last night how I thought Obama saying he would probably have to adjust his timeline for budget proposals helped him take a "country first" stance (sorry for the Repub tagline).  I think McCain is doing the same, and managed to get headlines doing it by saying he is "suspending his campaign" which is obviously an overstatement and just means he won't personally show at a couple of events and of course get out of a debate Friday.  I imagine he hasn't suspended the work of anyone else on his campaign staff and this will be milked for maximum possible political advantage.

    I never thought Obama should have agreed to do weekly townhalls anyway.  It wasn't in the best interest of his campaign strategy and McCain was constraining the proposed events to his own advantage.

    Parent

    A bold risky move (none / 0) (#142)
    by TheRizzo on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:48:12 PM EST
    To help stop the slid and bleeding of the past week in the polls for sure.

    They just said they are planning to suspend all ads as well as long as the Obama campaign agrees to follow suit.  So they are trying to do a full on suspend of the campaign to hammer out the deal before the end of the weekend.

    Parent

    Just more evidence of the reckless (none / 0) (#174)
    by MKS on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:07:18 PM EST
    riverboat gambler....Just for show....  

    Parent
    Drama. Drama. Drama. (5.00 / 0) (#181)
    by byteb on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:13:52 PM EST
    Steamrollering and stampeding (none / 0) (#178)
    by MKS on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:11:30 PM EST
    Congress to act by the weekend sounds like panic to me.....

    Parent
    ahhh (none / 0) (#122)
    by jedimom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:40:43 PM EST
    McCain must be trying to get at a table with the leadership to look as though he has a handle on the situation since his polling is tumbling since this hit the headlines last week.

    Obama maybe gave him the opening calling him and asking to do the joint stmt. I wouldnt have done that if I were Obama, he was ahead on the issue, why let McCain join him in addressing it? Let him look out of touch if that is the meme of the month..

    Parent

    Yep (none / 0) (#136)
    by TheRizzo on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:46:19 PM EST
    Its all a shrewd and obvious political ploy to get some footing on the issue and show leadership and put Obama in a box where he can follow (looks weak) or he can keep campaigning etc (and look weak).  

    Will it work in the end?  Not sure as its pretty obvious why he did it.

    Parent

    I really doubt he is afraid to (none / 0) (#133)
    by kenosharick on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:45:28 PM EST
    face Obama. mccain was the one calling for dozens of one on ones- Obama declined.

    Parent
    not debates, townhall meetings, not the same thing (none / 0) (#137)
    by Realleft on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:46:45 PM EST
    the way debates are today (5.00 / 1) (#161)
    by kenosharick on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:57:21 PM EST
    it is almost the same thing. They get a question and both answer it. Maybe have 30 seconds for rebuttal. Now, Lincoln-Douglas, there was a debate.

    Parent
    Supposedly (none / 0) (#191)
    by MKS on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:25:53 PM EST
    the format for the first debate will be:  Nine separate segments of nine minutes each; for each segment, each candidate will have two minutes to comment(total four minutes), with the remaining five minutes being for free flow discussion and questioning of the candidates by each other.....

    Obama reportedly wanted more of the 5 minute free-flowing discussion, and McCain wanted the lecturns....

    But who knows, McCain will likely change his mind about this too--because of the...ahem....economy.....

    Parent

    That is true (none / 0) (#145)
    by TheRizzo on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:49:29 PM EST
    Not the same as debates but still a good measure of both positions away from the prompter and on your feet thinking.   To me the more townhalls and debates the better.  

    Parent
    Hi BTD, (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by ChiTownDenny on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:36:37 PM EST
    I have significant confidence in the Demcorats to lead our economy to health.  There may be a lack of confidence in these two nominees, from various camps, and a lack of confidence in politicians' concern for "fundraising" (read: lobbyists), but like you, I agree, the Democrats have positions better positioned to grow our economy and our personal economic lives.

    A left winger can't accept... (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by Salo on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:37:57 PM EST
    ...that a GOPer is superior on economics.

    The range of a lefie ideologically goes from Marx to Keynes.

    So while you might think McCain has a superior biography to Obama on the ideological front any  leftie would have to prefer a Democrat.

    Yep (none / 0) (#25)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:54:42 PM EST
    Amend, a real Democrat. (none / 0) (#126)
    by alexei on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:41:49 PM EST
    I suspect they (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Jjc2008 on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:41:13 PM EST
    are folks looking to capitalize on the recent round of Clinton bashing at other blogs....
    I suspect they want to keep the rift going.  SOME lefties are throwing fits because Clinton is no doing enough worshipping to suit them.  Trolls see this as an opening to get the rift going again

    And those Clinton Haters (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:50:41 PM EST
    arenot welcome in my threads either.

    I hate stupidity wherever it comes from.

    Parent

    You are a person (none / 0) (#140)
    by Jjc2008 on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:47:50 PM EST
    after my own heart.  I am an educator and sadly I have heard some elementary students speak more reasonably about the issues than a few a adults (or so they say) on some blogs.

    There is a saying my educator friends and I have used for years: If  you think education is expensive, you ought to see what ignorance costs!

    The last 8 years and, imo, much of the last 25 years with the exception of some of the Clinton years, are a result of ignorance of the electorate when it came to voting.  They voted in greed meisters based on their adolescent need for hero worship....starting with Reagan.  

    We cannot afford that kind of ignorance any longer.

    Parent

    He is going to depend on foreclosure Phil Gramm
    who thinks we and the financial services  industry just needs to sing don't worry be happy.

    I supported Hillary tooth and nail (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by blogtopus on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:45:34 PM EST
    in fact, it took me a couple months to realize that Obama would make a fine symbol if nothing else. Sad, but true. Finally, after Palin came out and stirred the pot with her views and lack of experience that makes Obama look downright veteran, I realized just how f*cked we can be if McCain gets elected. It took me a while, but I came around.

    Dkos and all the other 'progressive' blogs are still verboten on my computer. It's TalkLeft and Correntewire, baby. The rest is just brainless fun stuff like fugly.com.

    So, yeah, to address BTD's point, its hard seeing some PUMAs cornering themselves with just straight up contrarianism for its own sake. There's smart ones, but sometimes it gets difficult to see that its not just Obamabots who pretzel themselves (even if they do it better than everyone else, heh).

    Pretty thin diet, bloogtopus! (5.00 / 3) (#72)
    by oldpro on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:17:38 PM EST
    I recommend some salad and some dessert to go with the meat and potatoes...take a gander at Anglachel's Journal, the Incomparable Bob Somerby and Glenn Greenwald to name three thoughtful, knowledgeable politicos who are also - in varying degrees - good writers/communicators.

    Just a thought...

    Parent

    I agree (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by Jjc2008 on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:51:38 PM EST
    As a former dkos and huffpo reader/commentor who gave up on those hateful sites, I now regulary come here, or go to Salon for Glen and Joan and to the Daily Howler for some real honesty about the sanctimonious hypocrites of the pundit class.

    Parent
    I recommend them as well (none / 0) (#77)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:19:23 PM EST
    It's hard to participate in a purity dialogue, (none / 0) (#21)
    by ChiTownDenny on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:53:00 PM EST
    when those the dialogue refers to aren't purists.  Your point is well taken.  The decison is to support party prinicples, even this party, or not.

    Parent
    No room for nuance? (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Manuel on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:47:03 PM EST
    Isn't it possible to think that while Obama will be better overall for the economy, there are some areas (e.g. free trade vs protectionism) where a Democratic supporter might prefer McCain's policies.  Now, with regards to free trade, I happen to think that Obama will be closer to Bill Clinton than what his campaign has been saying but that is another story.

    I also find some merit in McCain's proposal to tax health benefits.

    child tax credit (none / 0) (#28)
    by jedimom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:56:15 PM EST
    I am a 20 year-lifetime liberal Democrat, (or thought I was liberal until I saw what some people who I previously admired have IMHO become, which is anything but liberal-ie Palinpalooza), in this election.

    However, I have no problem with liking the DOUBLING of the child tax credit that McCain proposes. Why would I not like a plan that doubles the tax credit for every child from 3500 to 7000?

    Parent

    And renewing the Bush tax cuts? (none / 0) (#33)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:57:26 PM EST
    How do you feel about that?

    Parent
    recession (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by jedimom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:09:03 PM EST
    BTD I think we can all agree we are in a recession and I would not extend Bush tax cuts for the top but I would not raise cap gains right now either and neither would Jared Bernstein IIRC. Also why isnt Obama giving more to the middle? His 1000 is very low IMHO.

    My issue is I cant believe what he is saying. He cannot possible give us the healthcare and the education plan in the face of this bailout and the recession and yet he kept insisting all the way thru to Monday, telling John Harwood he would in fact NOT roll back any tax raises or plans he put forward.

    Then, yesterday he reversed that and said he WOULD delay the tax hikes and see where we are.

    We see where we are and where we are going and it is nowhere good. Hillary would have addressed this head on all fiery and fighting spirit. Obama seems to be waiting for it to be safe to take a strong position when the dust settles, and with Pritzker, who created most of these lovely subprime vehicles being his finance chair, I find it all very unnerving.

    I think you may be mistaking Obama for somehting I dont think he is yet, a Democrat loyal to our ideals. U of C advisers like Fuhrman and Goolsbee do not give my liberal Dem ID the warm fuzzies and I dont know a single other DEM who likes their ideas either. Fuhrman loves him some Walmart and wants to privatize SS. Mccain is a GOP that is my problem with him, that nad the military aspects of course.

    But b/c I like Cramer (who said sell CFC by the way something Atrios never reports, that he called a sell on it)and remember how McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts when the economy was good saying it was unfair, that doesnt make me a GOP undercover.

    Have a great day.

    Parent

    The Bush tax cuts expire in 210 (none / 0) (#76)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:18:37 PM EST
    recession's end (none / 0) (#190)
    by jedimom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:25:23 PM EST
    an homage to Arthur CClarke

    IIRC everyone who is anyone, LOL, is projecting the second half of 2010 as the end of our downturn..it will be hotly contested ...

    Parent

    Better overall (none / 0) (#32)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:56:50 PM EST
    Ends the discussion don't you think?

    Parent
    No, I want more (none / 0) (#164)
    by Manuel on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:59:15 PM EST
    Obama's plans and policies aren't perfect.  I welcome discussion from anywhere if it improves his policies.  I want him to have to defend his proposals.  If McCain has a better idea in some area, unlikely as it might be, I want it discussed.  I want accountability.  My support for Obama isn't unconditional.

    Parent
    Really? (none / 0) (#75)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:18:04 PM EST
    First of all, its a tax increase from Senator Tax Cuts. It's a regressive tax cut, because of course the value of health benefits is a larger precentage of working and middle class taxpayers than wealthy ones. The so-called "tax credit" that's supposed to help you pay for your insurance is going to be at least partly (if not completely) cancelled out by the tax increase.

    The only way to avoid the new tax is to leave your employer plan and get private, individual insurance. Of course, that will cost more money for less coverage and more exclusions, so the tax credit won't be as valuable to pay for that.

    In short, it's just more "let the free market compete and decide." Another way for ordinary taxpayers to get screwed.

    What is it that you like about it?

    Parent

    agree (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by jedimom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:33:58 PM EST
    I absolutely ABHOR the idea of taxing our health benefits, absolutely hate it hate it, grrr.

     It is totally regressive and it is IMHO a tax HIKE on the middle class, and this has to be one of the worst things about McCains health plan ideas IMHO.

    Absolutely awful. I dont see any ads where I am, not a swing state, but I think the DEM ticket should be hammering on this issue as a tax hike on the middle class without any of the benefits of the proposed DEM health plan.

    This is something that surely all Democrats agree on still, even those of us who are apparently shifting from liberal to moderate :0)

    Parent

    Tax increases will be necessary (none / 0) (#154)
    by Manuel on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:53:29 PM EST
    And taxes can be made progressive by indexing to income.  Plus McCain has a point that we need to address demand as a way to coontrol costs in health care.  Perhaps the benefit tax isn't the way to do it but it should be talked about.

    Parent
    McCain wants to postpone debate (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by byteb on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:06:12 PM EST
    on Friday to focus on economic crisis.

    Good lord.

    LOL (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:08:43 PM EST
    I bet he does. He doesn't want his core issue to be diluted by....facts on the ground!

    Parent
    Rahm Emmanuel on CNN (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by byteb on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:13:29 PM EST
    now says the Democrats can do both: debate on schedule and deal with the economic crisis.

    McCain is pretty sad.

    Parent

    Pathetic Stunt (5.00 / 2) (#95)
    by MTSINAIMAMA on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:26:53 PM EST
    I hope Obama doesn't fall for this crap. He should show up on Friday prepared to debate, the hell with McCain.

    Parent
    Sure, it's a stunt but Halperin (none / 0) (#111)
    by byteb on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:34:38 PM EST
    will still award McCain the day, the week, the month because McCain is such a great guy.

    Parent
    Yes (none / 0) (#81)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:20:30 PM EST
    Apparently, McCain asked Obama to issue a joint statement on the Paulson proposal. The campaigns are discussing it. Not clear what they are going to agree on.

    Still no word from Obama on the debate, or "returning to Warshington."

    Multi-task, boys. Change the focus from foreign policy to the economy and display some real leadership, shape the public's ideas.

    "The dog peed on my debate outline.  Can we do it next week?"

    Parent

    The opposite, I think I heard. . . (5.00 / 3) (#86)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:22:58 PM EST
    Obama approached McCain for a joint statement.

    Parent
    Nora O'Donnell says Obama (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by byteb on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:24:46 PM EST
    ppl called at 8:30 this morning asking McCain to issue a joint statement on the economic crisis. Mccain called back at 2:30 and agreed.

    Parent
    How long before Palin cancels (5.00 / 3) (#104)
    by byteb on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:30:04 PM EST
    on Biden? Economic crisis, you know.

    Parent
    I guess I misheard (none / 0) (#124)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:40:57 PM EST
    Why would Obama have called McCain on a joint statement?

    Parent
    a show of bi-partisanship (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by byteb on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:46:13 PM EST
    during this time of crisis. It's probably what caused McCain to cancel the debate: trying to one up Barack.

    Parent
    He probably didn't want to issue (5.00 / 1) (#153)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:52:33 PM EST
    a joint statement that he could agree on with Obama.

    He preferred to make a great show of "country first," while retaining the flexibility to figure out what he actually thinks. He doesn't want to commit himself until the last minute.

    Norah says, "Don't the people want to hear the candidates address these issues?" Idio-pundit is saying, "voters don't want all these debates -- they want someone who will take action!"

    I think its the Republicans who don't want all these debates.  

    Parent

    This will be the first time I remember saying (none / 0) (#177)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:10:14 PM EST
    "nice job, Rahm."

    Parent
    ha! me too. (none / 0) (#184)
    by byteb on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:16:05 PM EST
    Careful! (none / 0) (#193)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:34:11 PM EST
    I'm in Chicago and the word is he's going to replace Obama in the Senate!

    Parent
    SELL STOCKS NOW! (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:12:44 PM EST
    McCain heading to DC to work on the economic crisis?  Get OUT OF THE MARKET NOW.  Buy gold.

    Parent
    Gold? NO, food! (5.00 / 2) (#69)
    by andgarden on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:15:15 PM EST
    heh

    Parent
    And water... (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by oldpro on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:33:16 PM EST
    already on its way to privatization from all appearances, now taking up as much shelfspace at the grocery store as beer and soda.

    Gotta love the new New York Tap!

    Parent

    nyc (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by jedimom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:35:41 PM EST
    oh I miss the NYC tap water, I really do! I am in hard water land now, really bizarre after a lifetime of crisp cold NYC tap water.

    Parent
    Forget gold and food! (5.00 / 1) (#201)
    by Radiowalla on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:47:38 PM EST
    Buy gin!

    Parent
    I'm feeling good about (none / 0) (#87)
    by nycstray on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:23:00 PM EST
    all the food I've been storing for the winter  ;) I should be able to get by until June/July of next yr. with just buying a bit from the farmers market.

    Parent
    But the fundamentals of the economy (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by robrecht on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:21:25 PM EST
    are still strong!  LOL!

    Dog ate his debate notes!

    Parent

    Just saw that also (none / 0) (#52)
    by votermom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:07:52 PM EST
    Remind McCain that we still have a president, (none / 0) (#156)
    by KeysDan on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:53:50 PM EST
    and a fellow Republican at that.  This is either more than meets the eye or less.-my guess is that it is more serious and related to concerns for debate performance. After all, bowing out of a debate is pretty serious and a risky tactic. He does seem  out of sorts these days.  

    Parent
    The money Republicans (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:24:56 PM EST
    with their deregulate everything philosophy (it benefits EVERYONE eventually), are, to a large extent, responsible for the current mess.

    If they're apalled at McCain, its probobly because he's broached the idea of any further regulation at all.

    Quote of the day (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:27:50 PM EST
    Hugo Chavez:

    "I nationalize strategic companies and get criticized, but when Bush does it, it's OK," Chavez said on weekly television program Sept. 21. "Bush is turning socialist. How are you, comrade Bush?"


    LOL. Maybe health care is next. Yippee. (none / 0) (#108)
    by Teresa on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:33:17 PM EST
    Paul Krugman said on Friday (none / 0) (#160)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:56:52 PM EST
    "We are all socialists now."

    MSNBC reports that McCain has cancelled his appearance tonight on Letterman -- it was supposed to tape in a couple of hours.

    Parent

    To be replaced. . . (none / 0) (#173)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:06:14 PM EST
    by Olbermann apparently.  Ironic.

    Parent
    I'm sure Olbermann (none / 0) (#187)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:24:05 PM EST
    will stand-in for McCain and repeat the talking points he would have spouted.

    Parent
    That is now two major cancellations (none / 0) (#197)
    by sj on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:44:56 PM EST
    (okay, in the case of the debates it's an attempted cancellation).  Whaddup, I wonder...

    Parent
    What about (5.00 / 2) (#98)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:28:01 PM EST
    people who think that they are both pretty worthless? I think certainly Dems are better on the economy in general but I see Obama as too weak to actually fight for the reforms that are necessary. He's already conceding that he's not going to be able to do much.

    Obama may be the ... (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:38:12 PM EST
    wrong warrior for this battle.  But if he wins this election, I think events will overtake him, and championing a very left leaning progressive agenda will be the only way he can survive politically.

    Parent
    I do (5.00 / 2) (#148)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:50:53 PM EST
    think that events will overtake him and that's what worries me about him. Having another Jimmy Carter in office who'll get the blame, fairly or not, and having no experience worries me.

    Parent
    He may have no choice (3.00 / 1) (#123)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:40:43 PM EST
    and, at the very least, has given strong indications that he's not an intiate into the inner sanctum of trickle down ie: piss-on-em, unlike McSame.

    But keep pluggin', Zell.

    Parent

    Oh geez (4.00 / 3) (#143)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:48:37 PM EST
    I would like to thank you for helping Mccain. Obama's obnoxious supporters really, really make me want to pull the lever for McCain no matter who much I detest his agenda.

    It's kind of sad when Obama's own campaign workers can't tell you what he stands for does it?

    Parent

    magic Wand (none / 0) (#106)
    by mpBBagain on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:31:11 PM EST
    the crap the bush built will take a while to fix  there is no magic quick fix.

    Parent
    What happens if (5.00 / 2) (#132)
    by oldpro on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:44:54 PM EST
    a Democrat is elected and can't 'fix it,' or even make progress the country will credit?  How many more years of Republican rule do we then get as backlash to a Dem who is perceived as "do-nothing?"

    That is a sales pitch by Republican Dino Rossi who is running a classic R nasty (and quite4 successful) campaign against a very fine, accomplished governor, Chris Gregoire, who is again running a lousy campaign...and it's close.

    Parent

    I'd risk it. (none / 0) (#171)
    by Realleft on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:05:29 PM EST
    I never (none / 0) (#138)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:46:45 PM EST
    said there was a "magic fix" but there will be no fixing from someone who continually caves will there?

    Parent
    You mean like Bill Clinton? (none / 0) (#162)
    by jb64 on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:57:38 PM EST
    Who campaigned on middle class tax cuts, but never got the opportunity to implement them because he had to straighten out the budget deficit? Was he "caving' or being responsive to conditions on the ground? I think it was damn straight of Obama to recognize that in light of this "bailout" it would be fool-hardy to talk about his domestic agenda Not being affected by this crisis.

    Parent
    Obama (5.00 / 1) (#182)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:15:29 PM EST
    has caved before the election. If he's already conceding that the GOP is right BEFORE the election what's going to happen after the election?

    Parent
    How has he conceded that the GOP is right? (5.00 / 1) (#194)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:36:18 PM EST
    He's said that his domestic proposals will have to be looked at in light of economic conditions when he takes office.  He can't pretend that the economy will definitely be in the same shape he anticipated when he made those proposals, any more than Bush should have ignored the intelligence that said that Iraq was not a serious threat to the US.

    McCain's the guy who would ignore the economic realities if he were elected by proceeding with his single-minded tax cuts and de-regulation proposals.

    Parent

    About taxes (none / 0) (#196)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:44:24 PM EST
    for one.

    Parent
    His statement (none / 0) (#200)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:47:07 PM EST
    sounds indecisive. You don't say these things while you are running.

    Parent
    What (none / 0) (#189)
    by jb64 on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:25:17 PM EST
    Besides FISA (which I agree was a cave) are you talking about exactly?

    Parent
    He's already (none / 0) (#198)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:45:27 PM EST
    conceded that the GOP is right about taxes. Frankly, sometimes it's just better to ignore them that to agree with them.

    Parent
    All I'm hearing this PM is (5.00 / 2) (#127)
    by Lahdee on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:42:18 PM EST
    McCain this,
    McCain that,
    McCain, McCain, McCain.
    Come on folks, where's the O?

    I am so sorry you posted this (5.00 / 2) (#129)
    by MichaelGale on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:43:34 PM EST
    and gave the directive that people not post on subjects with your name if they disagree with you.

    I do not think McCain's economic policy is better than Obamas no do I plan to vote for McCain.

    Other than that, I always saw you as tolerant and open to everyones opinion and to exclude people on a particular subject is not what I expected.

    I really like reading you and have for years, but I don't like selective responses.

    I'll leave for awhile too.

    Hope you write your own blog someday.

    Why did you lie about what I wrote? (none / 0) (#188)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:24:36 PM EST
    Do not post in my threads if your MO is going to be to lie about what I wrote.

    Do not come to any blog I write about if you are gonna lie about what I wrote.

    Let me be frank, there are now a group, that now seems to include you, that seem to use lying as a debating technique.

    That will NEVER EVER be tolerated by me. If that is what you plan to do, you are not welcome to comment in my threads.

    Disagreement is not the problem, LYING is.

    Parent

    McCain is 15 years old mentally and 200 years old (none / 0) (#4)
    by koshembos on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:39:12 PM EST
    McCain is a teenage that never grow up. He has the temper of teens and the irresponsibility as well. He proposes absolutely nothing except continue the same.

    Voting for McCain is to throw this country into the toilet. What is the problem with those people? I don't think much of Obama, but I am not scared of him as president. McCain should send the chill down everybody's spine.

    This is the sort of comment (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Cream City on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:43:02 PM EST
    that degrades the discourse.  And I would think that the TL hosts, worried about what googles up here, would not want this to represent the site.

    We will see.

    Parent

    You think? (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:52:11 PM EST
    I find it pretty accurate.

    BTW, your concern about the degrading of the discourse did not extend to the stupidty I know you saw in the most recent thread that is the refeence of my admonition here.

    I like you Cream City, but your tolerance for Obama Hatred is extremely high. I do not like that about you.

    Parent

    Well, isn't that interesting (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by Cream City on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:56:04 PM EST
    and I will have to ponder it in larger contexts.

    As to the context of the last thread, I haven't looked there for a while.  Busy day -- too busy to deal with this now.  Back to more important matters; it's not my blog or its rep to worry about.

    Parent

    You know exactly what I am talking about (none / 0) (#39)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:01:06 PM EST
    And you insult my intelligence when you act as if you do not.

    As I said, I like you and respect you, but you have a high tolerance for idiocy directed at Obama, much less than you do for idiocy directed at MCCain.

    I admit that bothers me.

    I have a high tolerance for idiocy directed at McCain I admit. I truly do detest him.

    Parent

    I have a high tolerance for idiocy directed... (5.00 / 2) (#141)
    by alexei on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:48:02 PM EST
    at both, I detest both equally.  I do want a Dem Congress though, with veto proof majorities and much stronger Democratic leadership.

    Parent
    BTD, (5.00 / 3) (#30)
    by ChiTownDenny on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:56:30 PM EST
    Can one have high esteem for Dem party principles without having high esteem for the Dem party candidate?

    Parent
    OF course (none / 0) (#46)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:04:24 PM EST
    What you can not have is esteem for McCain's economic policies and claim to have supported Hillary Clinton's economic policies.

    Only an idiot could say such a thing.

    Parent

    Agree totally with this. (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by alexei on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:51:54 PM EST
    Hillary's economic proposals are 180 degrees different from McCain and I have confidence in her abilities and her commitment to implement her plans, in a Dem Congress.  Even though Obama has some of th similar plans, I have no confidence in either his abilities or his commitment, and I worry that a Dem Congress would not go against the first AA President even when they should, while if you get stronger Democratic leadership particularly with veto proof majorities, McCain can be handled.

    Parent
    But before I go -- note that McCain (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by Cream City on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:59:40 PM EST
    just scored another point with what has been out there for either candidate to do -- cancel campaigning and getting back to D.C. to do the job he's got.  Now, a couple of days ago when I simply noted here that McCain had scored a similar strategic point, I got blistered for it.

    This used to be a good blog for discourse about strategy and tactics, not cheerleading or "hate."

    Parent

    You THINK he scored a point (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:03:38 PM EST
    I think it looks like a stunt.

    You have been predicting doom for Obama for a while now.

    No doubt you think McCain has been winning the past few weeks. Mark Halperin and you are on the same page.

    Meanwhile, the polls say otherwise.

    In many ways, you resemble Jeralyn in her conviction that Palinpoalooza is bringing McCain down. Just in reverse.

    Parent

    Ouch. (none / 0) (#99)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:29:13 PM EST
    For McCain to say that he wants (none / 0) (#85)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:22:51 PM EST
    to put politics aside and focus on the crisis is laughable. If he thought he could win the debate, he'd be gunning for it.

    He's not going to lead the redrafting of the bill. Not unless he's getting his ideas directly from Phil Gramm.

    Parent

    FL practice huddle (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by jedimom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:37:12 PM EST
    maybe McCain is trying to draw Obama out of his FL debate practice huddle and keep him off step...

    Parent
    To: BTD (5.00 / 4) (#92)
    by christinep on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:25:03 PM EST
    Here is the funny thing. While I mostly agree with you--now and in months past--scanning your writings today have left me with more than a chill. So, stating it simply: Your words today sound angry, bullying, and a bit over the top. In times past, you have done a remarkable job of keeping balance--your own and all the rest of us characters--by being a passionate advocate tempered with appreciation of other points of view. Today, the message from here seems to have closed into a "with me or agin' me" or begone. Maybe I'm out-of-sorts, but please bring back the old BTD. (By the way: There is a difference between those of us who occasionally have a take or opinion that varies on a particular issue and those who are thinly-disguised Obama haters. The latter will leave soon enough. Don't paint so many with the same brush. Its beneath you.)

    Parent
    6 Tuesdays (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by jedimom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:44:21 PM EST
    we only have 6 tuesdays to go until the big day, I think everyone is going to get more intense. IN BTD that is brusque, but in the Obamabots that is going to scare the hexx out of me. I am battening down the hatches.

    Parent
    Ask yourself why (none / 0) (#139)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:47:13 PM EST
    So called Dems and Hillary Clinton supporters came to MY THREAD and wrote that John McCain's ideas on the economy are better than Barack Obama's.

    I guess you have never been on the receiving end of my calling idiots idiots.

    But I do and I will and if you do not like it, you have two choices, do not write idiocies (and saying you are for Clinton but McCain has better economic ideas than Obama is an idiocy of the highest order, it simply makes no sense) or do not comment or read my posts.

    I am one of the  most upfront person on the blogs. I do not pretend to be nice, I do not pretend to be even handed in the face of stupidity. I am the leader in truth in packaging when it comes to blogging.

    When I left Daily Kos as adiarist (not as a FP poster), the main reason was I was disgusted with the hypocrisy of some of its Contributing Editors (just a couple, not any of the prminent ones, including Kagro, who hates my guts, he is just wrong, not dishonest), who included some of the lyingest, despicable, unethical creeps ever to blog.

    I told them so and if I see them in person, I will tell them to their face. They were deceitful and two faced.

    I tell you what I think and I tell you that I am going to tell you. So please, spare me the oooh, I can;t believe how mean you are nonsense.

    If you can't believe it, then you were not paying attention.

    Parent

    mea culpa (none / 0) (#167)
    by jedimom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:03:11 PM EST
    BTD I dont know what happened, I went back to read the thread you mentioned and didnt find it there maybe it was deleted. I know how you feel and am verry careful not to criticize. I am not being deliberately obtuse just honestly didnt catch it,

    was it me last week opining that we shouldnt throw stones on FAN/FRED noting the DEMS, including my beloved Hillary, blocked the 05 Fan/Fred reform legislation?

    I certainly find many more people more intense this week. The financial turmoil and as I said 6 Tuesdays to go would do that to anyone, including myself,. It wasnt a criticism and it should in no way imply your concerns weren't merited. although I have never agreed with your selection of Obama due to his preferred media darling status was the way to go, I have always respected your opinion.

    Calling people idiots for their views seems out of character.

    Parent

    ahhhh (none / 0) (#170)
    by jedimom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:04:58 PM EST
    okay I see, my wires were crossed. Got it.

    Parent
    Reply to your reply (none / 0) (#195)
    by christinep on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:37:06 PM EST
    I'm not fainthearted either. Do not presume to know what I or others may have experienced in our lives. You said to spare you the "oooh"; well, I never intended to indicate shrinking timidity. Look, a number of us are used to intensity. While exhibitions of spewing anger (justified or not) may reflect the tense times, the current posture diminishes you. Since you take pride in the fact that you are "upfront," lets hope that you can honor others for their upfront comments as well. I'll take my leave now.

    Parent
    Accuracy is always pertinent, (none / 0) (#12)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:46:30 PM EST
    and always acceptable.

    That's why the kind of comment you malign, is wholly welcome here.

    Because McCain is a doddering, angry, short-tempered and vicious man who whored out what honor he had left for another chance at winning the Presidency and feeding his egomania.

    Before he dies of his melanoma and throws the smallpox-laden blanket that is Palin into our homes.

    Parent

    Oh. I meant to say (none / 0) (#15)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:47:41 PM EST
    Because McCain is a doddering, angry, short-tempered and vicious old man who whored out what honor he had left (voting for torture after having been tortured himself) for another chance at winning the Presidency and feeding his egomania.

    Parent
    The ageims is problematic for me (none / 0) (#24)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:54:25 PM EST
    But other than that, I think you get it just right.

    Parent
    age-ism? check (none / 0) (#43)
    by wystler on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:04:02 PM EST
    But, in McCain's case, there have been moments when he's appeared somewhat infirm. Whether they're due to decline in faculty because he's gotten older, or otherwise ...

    Parent
    I prefer to see what the hosts say (none / 0) (#16)
    by Cream City on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:49:51 PM EST
    as to whether the initial comment and now yours really are the sort that are welcome here -- the sort of comments that say a lot about the senders, and none of it nice, but little about the subjects.

    Parent
    I do not care for it (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:53:57 PM EST
    Especially the ageism involved.

    But the problem of McCain hate starts with me. I absolutely detest him and the Media that created the lying Original Maverick crap.

    McCain is everything that is wrong with politics.


    Parent

    He is old. (none / 0) (#44)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:04:11 PM EST
    There is no escaping that.  And he is showing his age.

    The age issue is quite pertinent, because the actuarial probability of a healthy person of McCain's age dying before completing his one term is more likely, than the probability of getting a live round in playing Russian Roulette.

    And McCain is neither healthy (he's had friggin' melanoma twice and spent five plus years getting tortured) nor in great shape - he is slowing falling apart.

    And that means we get Palin.  Did you see the look the Colombian president had on his face from the video of his meeting with her yesterday?  Something like "What kind of idiot is this?" or "What the hell are the Americans doing?"

    Parent

    Well, I would include Bush and Cheney in that... (none / 0) (#158)
    by alexei on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:55:32 PM EST
    assessment and some Dems (who I won't name).

    Parent
    Other than the (none / 0) (#36)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:00:02 PM EST
    "smallpox-laden blanket", which is metaphorical (and, I submit, an accurate metaphor), all the other adjectives I used and factual assertions I made are, in fact, accurate.

    Every now and again, one reads a reported decision in the case books, where the losing party (often a criminal defendant) complains that the closing argument by the adversary lawyer improperly impugned him for some reason or another, usually related to the heinous act the losing party was accused of.  Something like a closing argument where the prosecutor stands before the jury and says

    "Jurors, the proofs before you are that the defendant took this claw hammer and swung it - repeatedly - seventeen times - raising it above his head and swinging it with the full force a grown man could use - into the skull of the helpless deceased.  I argue to you that if ever there was depraved indifference to the value of human life, this was it.  And I urge you to convict...."

    Unless the complained-about attorney has transgressed a bright-line rule, the appellate court just as regularly deals with the losing party's complaint by saying something like :  
    "lawyers are required to zealously represent their clients and their clients' interests.  In so doing, they are entitled to strike hard blows, but fair.  A fair blow is one which is supported by the facts and the reasonable inferences which can be drawn therefrom.  The argument made was both hard, and fair, having been predicated upon the testimony and evidence as adduced at trial.  Affirmed."

    Hard blows, but fair. That's what I'm dealing.

    Parent
    I really like that... (none / 0) (#80)
    by desertswine on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:20:09 PM EST
    "smallpox-laden blanket" metaphor.

    Nice.

    Parent

    Accurate, too - no? (none / 0) (#93)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:25:49 PM EST
    How much you want to bet that McCain just got a bad diagnosis on his health, and that's a reason contributing to needing to suspend and work on the economy?

    Parent
    Agreed (none / 0) (#18)
    by blogtopus on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:50:40 PM EST
    This is insulting to people like Paul Newman, Clint Eastwood, Harrison Ford, and other celebrities who matter in our media.

    Seriously, there are lots of people as old or older than McCain who are completely capable of handling the Presidency. Going after his age will just lose you Florida (if it isn't already lost), and insult those of us old enough to have parents McCain's age who are active, or as old as McCain themselves.

    Its amazing how these tykes really don't know what happens past age 35...

    Parent

    Late night tv (none / 0) (#5)
    by CST on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:41:12 PM EST
    last night was awesome.  Bill Clinton on the Daily Show, and the Iranian president on Larry King.

    I only watched the first half of Larry King - but man, powerful stuff.

    He seems completely reasonable and intelligent right up to the point that you bring up Israel.  At which point he goes into scary mode.

    "until he brought up Israel" (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by christinep on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:29:32 PM EST
    Reminds one of that comment: "Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play?"

    Parent
    Don't forget Ahmadinejad on gays. (none / 0) (#13)
    by Don in Seattle on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:46:39 PM EST
    He can be called many things on that subject, but "completely reasonable and intelligent" isn't one of them.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#202)
    by CST on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:47:43 PM EST
    I did say "seems".  And I only saw the first half of the interview - so no one had brought up gays.  I am not a fan of the guy by any means, but I can see why Iranians might be sold on him.

    I also think he's a hypocrit, and says things to sound reasonable but doesn't really mean them.

    Parent

    question (none / 0) (#9)
    by mpBBagain on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:44:47 PM EST
    I was reading some stuff over at PUMA and they was attacking a JERALYN today?  was that this sites Jeralyn?

    Yes they attack Jeralyn (5.00 / 3) (#17)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:50:03 PM EST
    Personally, I think Jeralyn has been incredibly wrongheaded with her Palinpalooza.

    And gawd knows the Obamabots hate me with a passion. Now the Obama haters hate me too. I wear the hatred of both as a badge of honor.

    But to claim McCain is better than Obama on the economy while at the same time claiming to have been a Hillary Clinton supporter is sheer idiocy.

    Try it somewhere else, not in my threads (not addressed to you but as a general matter.)


    Parent

    We appreciate your (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by votermom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:09:22 PM EST
    even-handedness and rationality.

    Parent
    Speaking as a representative resident Obamabot (5.00 / 1) (#103)
    by Don in Seattle on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:30:02 PM EST
    (and what is that, anyway? an Obama robot?), I don't hate you, BTD. I disagree with you sometimes, sometimes vigorously, but less often recently; and never, I hope, abusively or hatefully.

    I'll go further, and speak for the whole Obama hive-mind Borg empire:

    We don't hate you. We know we're here at your sufferance, and Jeralyn's, and we're grateful for the forum. We still intend, like most people here, to speak the truth as we see it.

    Parent

    Did we say 'empire'? We misspoke. (none / 0) (#166)
    by Don in Seattle on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:02:42 PM EST
    Of course, we meant to say 'collective'.

    We're sorry.

    Parent

    we don't hate you passionately (none / 0) (#53)
    by wystler on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:08:09 PM EST
    we don't hate you at all, BTD. this is, after all, a big tent, and we're all siblings.

    Parent
    Actually I find you refreshing... (none / 0) (#163)
    by alexei on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:57:42 PM EST
    even when you are wrong! (smile)

    Parent
    Interestingly (none / 0) (#11)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:46:29 PM EST
    My wife told me that some of her acquaintances are holding a "knit-in" on the Upper West Side to show their support for Obama.

    Now, my wife doesn't know much about PUMAs or any of that stuff, so she was a little confused when I broke out laughing.  "Are your knitters bitter?" I asked.  She didn't get it.

    I find it interesting, incidentally, that my wife is excited enough about Obama to be attending events and such, considering she once was a disaffected Hillary supporter who called Obama an unprintable name when she saw the infamous "sweetie" video.  "Is it because you're enthused about Obama or because you're hyped up to stop the Republicans?"  I asked her.  She said it was a little of each.

    we had a "Bake back the white house" (none / 0) (#35)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:59:41 PM EST
    bake sale on Sunday ...we raised $5000.

    Cool, huh?

    Amazing how much cash these efforts bring in.

    Parent

    Mmmmm (none / 0) (#49)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:06:27 PM EST
    I hope you brought enough cookies for the entire class.

    Parent
    we made cupcakes (none / 0) (#51)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:07:39 PM EST
    help yourself

    (insert picture of cupcakes here)

    Parent

    Who are they knitting for? (none / 0) (#47)
    by nycstray on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:05:48 PM EST
    do they have a cause that they are donating the results to?

    Parent
    I assume (none / 0) (#50)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:07:14 PM EST
    that the cause is the Obama campaign.

    Parent
    So are they going to sell the items? (none / 0) (#63)
    by nycstray on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:12:14 PM EST
    Sorry, I'm having a foggy brain day and am not seeing how knitting supports Obama? I can see how the knit-in could be used to invite people who aren't supporters and hope to sway them while knitting and as a moral support event. The Bake back the WH makes sense to me. HRC supporters knitting caps and donating them makes sense to me. So how is this one working? Like I said, foggy brain day :)

    Parent
    I dunno (none / 0) (#82)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:20:32 PM EST
    These are all very good questions that I will ask her.  I guess I just didn't have enough of a yarning for information. :)

    Parent
    If they decide they want to donate (none / 0) (#96)
    by nycstray on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:27:23 PM EST
    to a cause in Obama's name, layette sets and cage comforters are easy to do while chatting. Knitting squares and not having to worry about patterns. Also a great way to use up extra yarn ;)

    Parent
    I should add . . . (none / 0) (#70)
    by nycstray on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:15:30 PM EST
    part of my brain block could be because my mom and sister knit for causes (new babies, children in Afghanistan) and I sew cage comforters for the city shelter :)

    Parent
    Unfair to Republicans. (none / 0) (#22)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:53:06 PM EST
    If you are a Republican, well, of course McCain's crazy economic policies will appeal to you.

    I think a lot of Republicans -- traditional "money" Republicans -- are a little bit appalled at McCain right now -- largely because he doesn't seem to actually understand anything about the economy.

    Fair enough (none / 0) (#29)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 01:56:23 PM EST
    On your broader issue. . . (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:00:38 PM EST
    while I agree that it's absurd for a supposed Clinton supporter to claim that they think McCain is better than Obama (or even acceptable) on the economy I think it's even more absurd to claim that he's somehow as good or better than Obama on women's issues.  And I see that argument made here.  The net result is that people who claim to have been Clinton supporters are seriously considering voting for a ticket that includes a clinic blockader.

    Parent
    What! (none / 0) (#54)
    by Steve M on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:08:16 PM EST
    Oh my God.

    Parent
    It can't be many. (none / 0) (#60)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:10:02 PM EST
    The polls don't support the observations from here.

    Parent
    PS -- Check The News. (none / 0) (#38)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:00:59 PM EST
    I Don't Get The Pumas Either (none / 0) (#40)
    by MTSINAIMAMA on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:03:12 PM EST
    McCain is dangerously out of touch. I've read of several physicians who have looked at McCain's medical records. We are talking scary stuff here.

    one page record (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by jedimom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:48:39 PM EST
    we have not seen Obamas medical records at all though, only a one page letter from his MD.

    Please let's not focus on issues where neither candidate has provided what the electorate is entitled to if we want to ask: why PUMA why. I am a Hillary supporter with 6 weeks to go to Election Day and I have not yet pulled a GOP lever in my 20 years of voting, "waiting for Lefty" over here, I want my fighting Dems, where are they, on another religious tour it seems.....

    Parent

    I'm not voting for either... (5.00 / 1) (#168)
    by alexei on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:03:18 PM EST
    but, because both are bad and I live in a very blue state.

    Parent
    Unless they are his authorized physicians (none / 0) (#192)
    by sj on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:26:41 PM EST
    that is a HIPAA violation of the highest order.  And if they ARE his physicians then it's a confidentiality violation of the highest order.  McCain strikes me as a sick old man, but if what you say is true, that really, really bothers me.

    Parent
    You always have ruffled feathers. (none / 0) (#41)
    by coigue on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:03:12 PM EST
    But mostly, it's funny to watch because people asy things that are really insulting to the candidate and way out there, and when you (or someone else) calls them on it, they always seem surprised. As if they had no idea anyone could ever be insulted by their snarky candidate-bashing.

    Somerby on JMM (none / 0) (#56)
    by rilkefan on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:08:40 PM EST
    Another day, another cuisinarting of Marshall.  The other day the letter quoted here went around my mostly-very-pro-Obama extended family.  I pointed out some problems with the assumptions and attitude in the letter, and the response was, 'So what, there is a double standard'.  The choice is so clear it's just crazy not to hew to the clean line.

    Josh Marshall (none / 0) (#62)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:11:41 PM EST
    has largely discredited himself this election/.

    Parent
    So Ras now claims that (none / 0) (#67)
    by andgarden on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:14:11 PM EST
    Sununu is ahead of Jeanne Shaheen in New Hampshire.

    I guess that's possible, and I actually believe that the numbers of tightened in NH, but my suspicion is that Ras just got a bad sample out of the state yesterday.

    Sununu is the worst Senator left in New England (barely edging out Lieberman), so it would be good to get rid of him.

    Bailout Infusion Upward from the Roots (none / 0) (#68)
    by Newt on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:14:38 PM EST
    Instead of bailing out Wall St and hoping for a trickle down effect, we should bail out homeowners and let the infusion of tax money flood upward from the root of the problem.  To solve our country's economic woes we need to prop up the economy by socializing home ownership with the immediate transfer all at risk mortgages to government sponsored loans.  If we're going to socialize the risk, the investment must be socialized as well.  The bailout should be homeowner centered, not investment oriented, with incentive for good loans to be included in the government sponsored financing pool as well.  With a trillion dollars of tax money, we could easily buy each and every at risk loan across the country.  (Could we also add credit debt to those mortgages?)

    Every homeowner should be offered the option to immediately transfer any and all mortgages on owner occupied properties into government owned financing.  Interest rates should be fixed at 3%, which would be enough of an incentive for anyone with higher rates to switch.  Homeowners who are not in foreclosure should be offered the same deal.  The banks and mortgage companies would be paid a nominal fee to continue to process the loan payments for each loan they already own and manage.  Management of foreclosed properties would be through HUD and/or VA, since both currently have infrastructure for housing and could increase capacity to manage the attorney contracts for foreclosure.  The transition would be seamless in the sense that homeowners would not have to qualify for the new loans with a refinance process.  The government would simply assume the loan, offer the new rate, and have banks continue to manage the payments.   The loans would be purchased with the same fake money that we'd be using to prop up the wealthy with the current plan, that is, government borrowing and increasing the deficit.  Only in this case, the new owners of any foreclosed properties would be the government and the taxpayers, not the banks and mortgage companies.  A homeowner wouldn't have to do anything; their monthly payments continue unless they chose to make changes.  (Savvy homeowners can opt to continue to pay the same monthly amounts, or revise their payments to match the new interest rates.)  Homeowners with financing at less than 3% can choose to do nothing and stay with their current mortgager.  Banks would not have a choice in whether to participate on a loan per loan basis, but could opt out of the entire package, which would mean keeping their junk loans as well as the good loans.  

    This plan means banks would lose good loans as well as the junk debt, but they want a bailout, they got it.  The public needs some opportunity to recoup costs in the long term, and this way the multimillionaires won't suck up the proceeds over the next few years while the housing market recovers.  The immediate infusion of tax money into banks and mortgage companies will stabilize Wall St., but the taxpayers will reap the long term payoff from the rescued mortgages, or the foreclosed properties.

    If Obama presents this taxpayer and homeowner-centered solution, he'll win the election in a landslide.


    yes please (none / 0) (#147)
    by jedimom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:49:53 PM EST
    this would get the middle class on board IMHO.

    Parent
    Been saying the same on every econ thread. (none / 0) (#169)
    by alexei on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:04:48 PM EST
    McCain wants to suspend (none / 0) (#73)
    by robrecht on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:17:39 PM EST
    his campaign and postpone Friday's debate to return to Washington to work on bail-out.  So Fox.

    That's a smart move ... (none / 0) (#112)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:35:08 PM EST
    politically.  I argued for one of them to do this days back.  It would have been my recommendation had I been running either campaign.

    I wish Obama had jumped on this before McCain.

    The whole "suspension of the campaign, canceling debate" part may be a bit overwrought.  

    But Obama will have to be careful in his response to this.

    Parent

    Completely disagree (none / 0) (#128)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:42:47 PM EST
    This is a meaningless stunt that will backfire.  

    Obama should absolutely pounce on this.  

    A leader doesn't run away and hide in a committee room.  

    Parent

    Harry Reid says McCain's plan (none / 0) (#204)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:53:38 PM EST
    to suspend and return to DC is the longest Hail Mary pass in the  history of passes or Mary's. He shouldn't come back to inject presidential politics in the negotiations.

    Obama on now. Serious financial crisis. Jobs, savings, at risk. Have to act swiftly, but we have to get it right. Solution that protects taxpayers without rewarding people who caused mess. In this spirit BO called McCain, recognizing that McCain had adopted many of BO's proposals, Sen. Colburn also told BO that he thought a joint statement would be helpful. At 2:30 JM called BO back. BO asked JM to join him in issuing joint statement: independent board of Dems and Reps monitoring how money is spent; if taxpayers are financing, they should be treated like investors, get equity and any profits; can't bail out Wall Street without helping homeowners; can't spend one dime to reward Wall Street execs.

    JM and BO agreed this was a critical time, bipartisanship. BO talks to Paulson every day, spoke 2x to Paulson today. BO pledged to be helpful to get bill passed that had the principles above. Italics are my comments.)BO looking very presidential; calm, clear. Takes questions.

    Q: What about debate? Is JM playing politics?
    A: At 2:30 JM agreed to joint statement, but then JM said we needed to meet in DC with President and Congressional leaders. BO said, why not issue statment first? JM then went on TV to make his announcement.  JM doesn't want to commit himself until he knows which way the wind is blowing. It's more important than ever to present our ideas directly to American people.

    Q: When JM called back at 2:30, did JM tell you that he was not going to participate in the debate?
    A: He said he wanted to fly to DC, but he oly said he was "considering" whether the debate should go forward. Then he made his statement, he apparently finished mulling it over. Sounds like he is saying that JM blindsided him. BO says he understands that bankruptcy reform and stimulus package may not be able to be in this bill, can't do everything, critical to get protection for taxpayers, ensure they get money back.

    Q: Are you going to stay in FLA to prepare to debate?
    A: I've told congressional leaders that if I can be helpful, I will be anywhere any time. If you need us, if we can be helpful, I will be there. I talk to congressional leaders, Paulson, all the time. Presidents have to do more than one thing all the time. But negotiations should be bogged down in presidential politics.

    Q: Do you think it might be helpful to be there?
    A: It's possible, because bill is controversial, we may need to be seen on the floor to show this is important, but any bill has to have the principles I outlined. I continue to think we should have the debate. Present ourselves to Anerican people. What are the challenges we face, how it relates to our standing in the world, war in Iraq.  

    Q: inaudible
    A: Its very important that the American people see the people who could be in charge of this problem within the next couple of months.  We need to focused on solving the problem, as I have been over the last few days, its possible for us to do both.

    Q: inaudible
    A: I am preparing to debate on Friday. My general view is that the American people need to know what we intend to do to move economy forward.

    Q: Will a joint statement now do any good? Didn't have you some miscommunication with McCain?
    A: (laughs) I have directed my staff to work with his, it could still serve an important purpose.

    Will add more.

    Parent

    More (none / 0) (#205)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:56:45 PM EST
    Responds to questions about miscommunication with McCain:

    BO: I assumed joint statement would go out first, then an appearance on TV.
    BO: We need to figure out what would be helpful, get joint statement out first. We're each running our own campaigns. We need to be clear with American people, this is serious, but it can be solved. Recites his four principles. Then there will be a whole host of structural issues that will have to be faced by the next administration. Healthcare crisis. Jobs going overseas. Financing college educations. Many problems beyond this immediate problem, should be addressed, let's help as we can to make sure we get the current bill right.

    Ends.

    Parent

    Draft (none / 0) (#79)
    by mpBBagain on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:19:49 PM EST
    McCain scares me because i am convinced by 2011 the DRAFT will be back under his presidency or Palin's if he dies in office.

    100% convinced.  and the cieling on the draft age may be like 45

    The draft (5.00 / 1) (#155)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:53:41 PM EST
    is not coming back. If Bush didn't reinstate it after 9/11 it's not coming back. There's lots of reasons to be opposed to McCain but the draft isn't one of them.

    Parent
    Bush didn't reinstate the draft (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:16:00 PM EST
    or even call for volunteers after 9/11 for a good reason - Rumsfeld saw two opportunities which would have been thwarted by an increased military.  

    First, Rumsfeld was scheduled to give that speech where he was going to rail against the Pentagon as the real enemy, b/c it and the safeguards which government impose on government employees got in the way of private contractors doing military things and further privatization.

    Second, he had this whole "tiny forces moving really fast dealing shock and awe" doctrinal thing going on, and did not want a large military getting in the way of that.

    Parent

    No doubt... (1.00 / 2) (#203)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:52:19 PM EST
    ...all of America will sleep better tonight (especially those with draft eligible family members) knowing that you, in your infinate wisdom, have decreed there will be no draft.  

    Parent
    The draft (none / 0) (#159)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:56:17 PM EST
    The draft may be the only way to end the Bush Doctrine of preemptive strikes. If politician had to go back to their districts and tell the people that their son and daughter had to go and fight because some country might do something wrong someday, they wouldn't be so quick to rattle the sabers. I also would like to see Congress force the president to include the war costs in the budget. In the event of war, I would go along with a specific war tax.

    What's happened in this war is a national disgrace. People are dying, billions are being spent and the media and a large segment of the population have totally forgotten about it.

    Parent

    Even most Dems don't ... (none / 0) (#88)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:23:19 PM EST
    understand what this economic crisis means.

    A lot are still buying the notion that this means tons of stuff (such as UHC) is off the table.

    It's actually going to mean quite the opposite.  This means that this country is going to finally take the leftward turn it's needed for decades.

    It also looks like Gordon Brown is going to be able to use this crisis to save his embattled political career.

    This is the true end of the Reagan era.

    No cussing BTD. (none / 0) (#102)
    by Teresa on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:29:56 PM EST
    I'd rather talk football. Not.

    Yep (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:37:18 PM EST
    I have to delete myself

    Parent
    Great (none / 0) (#149)
    by jb64 on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:51:04 PM EST
    November 1st is looming

    Parent
    Anyone in a position (none / 0) (#110)
    by jondee on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:34:10 PM EST
    to forestall the murderous Iraq invasion and the accompanying rapacious looting of the treasury who didnt is a no good bastard, IMO.

    Lets quit pretending here that certain candidates with oh-so-much emotional/symbolic resonance didnt know what was going on and what the ramifications were.

    Obama (5.00 / 1) (#185)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:17:31 PM EST
    has gleefully participated in robbing the treasury. Almost all the Dems have.

    Parent
    hm (none / 0) (#119)
    by connecticut yankee on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 02:39:46 PM EST
    I'm curious what the real reasons are:

    a)trying to look presidential and "above the fray"

    b)trying to avoid a debate when his numbers are down so as to avoid the risk of being put away.

    c)no reason, just typical erratic McCain behavior.

    d)avoiding economy issue when things are still in flux.  Afraid of offending base.

    The answer is "e" - all of the above (none / 0) (#179)
    by Realleft on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:11:37 PM EST
    yeah, "c" seems mutually exclusive of the others, but oh well..

    Parent
    politico (none / 0) (#186)
    by jedimom on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:22:29 PM EST
    the politico now reports McCain is pulling all of his tv ads also...

    Smart Move... (none / 0) (#199)
    by santarita on Wed Sep 24, 2008 at 03:46:54 PM EST
    the ads were bombing any way.

    Maybe McCain will just plain withdraw.  nader's big chance.

    Parent