Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

Oh, my God you all are all misinformed.

Heres what happened: Obama called McCain, he didn't pick up. After he called Obama back proposed making a joint statement telling congress their Ideas (which they could actually use). McCain called him again and decided to invite him washington instead, and offered to suspend the campaign.

Now If both suspended their campaigns and went to washington, they'd give the same ideas as the statement and add two to something that doesn't really need their votes. The Last time McCain voted was April, He's skipped MANY important bills and negotiations that were nearly as important, yet he feels his vote is dire for this one. Why? Whats the difference between the past big ones and this one? This one is politicized, If McCain and Obama went there (which they did thanks to Dickain.), They'd bring reporters and other distractions and pressures to a very important discussion. Alot of people in Congress are actually pissed off at the Idea, one of them saying "Its like working months on a master peice and then having someone come and add touches to put their name on it".

Its actually very hypocritical for them to go. IMO McCain thought that if he did this he could skip the debate and avoid any risk and make Obama seem like he'd rather win than help the country. Search it up yourself, alot of congress knows it won't help to come and vote.

You can't be that stupid to think that McCain is worried about a FOREIGN POLICY debate, are you?

Besides, they are Senators, so they should be down there as part of the job that WE pay for.

At 9/25/08 08:53 PM, Frattochino wrote: Oh, my God you all are all misinformed.

LMFAO

...add two to something that doesn't really need their votes. The Last time McCain voted was April, He's skipped MANY important bills and negotiations that were nearly as important, yet he feels his vote is dire for this one. Why? Whats the difference between the past big ones and this one? This one is politicized, ...

Dude, the proposal that came about last weekend from the executive branch would leverage power with the treasury secretary (SECTREAS) Paulson asking for his decisions to be: "non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."

SOURCE

You claim we are ill-informed. But do you realize that this is a greater expansion of executive branch power than even the War Powers Act? Furthermore, do you realize that this makes Paulson the most powerful man in the country? Furthermore, do you realize that this man is NOT elected? What Bush asked for (NOTE: I'm not a foaming at the mouth anti-Bushite with Bush Derangement Syndrome) is for the Treasury Department to be exempt from Congressional or Legal review. He has a blank check to do whatever he wants to do with our monetary and fiscal policy without ever having to worry about testifying before congress or being liable for civil (lawsuit) or criminal (jail) penalities.

This is what defines a dictator. In this case, an unelected one.

Furthermore, with calls for the next president (even if it is Obama) to keep Paulson on as SECTREAS their presence is very important. You need to inform yourself (especially before making the claim that we need to), because it is not just a vote we are talking about. The bailout plan is not being voted upon as written by the White House. Instead the government is actually working overtime to come up with a compromise plan. It is simply more important for the next president (whichever turd-sandwich or giant douche it will be) to be in DC leading their party to put aside the stupid partisanship that is messing up our country and economy.

Its actually very hypocritical for them to go. IMO McCain thought that if he did this he could skip the debate and avoid any risk and make Obama seem like he'd rather win than help the country. Search it up yourself, alot of congress knows it won't help to come and vote.

The debate is on foreign policy, it is probably the one debate that McCain is most confident in challenging Obama. Your argument here is weak and very unconvincing.

As I was reading their statements, McCain (whether a ploy or sincere) saying he wants to suspend his campaign set well with me. This is perhaps the single most important legislation in 100 years.

However, I understood Obama's point and agreed that the people need to see their next president tackling this issue rather than holed-up in DC. However, once he made the multi-tasking comment...he lost me (he actually does that alot). Yes a president will have alot on his plate and will have to deal with multiple issues. However, there is an expectation that when things are going to shit (9/11, Katrina or this) there should be a focus on the disaster. Furthermore, any distraction should be one that directly effects the country...not the president.

In the Air Force we have three core values and the second one is "Service before Self". A campaign is not a service...but a focus one's self. So especially after taking a jab, Obama looks (in my eyes) as a self-centered individual whose only concern is getting elected. This worries me because this is not change...but rather the same sort of self-serving political BS that landed us in this position.

At 9/26/08 01:34 AM, TheMason wrote: However, there is an expectation that when things are going to shit (9/11, Katrina or this) there should be a focus on the disaster.

And what a disaster for the campain. Where are the conspiracists?? A Planned Disastar perhaps?! Maybe a super-computer financial management modelling program is going haywire in some deep bunker. . . doh! lol.

ps. it doesn't smell, it reeks! ;-)

pps. watching stock market Fri.

Let's get it really right. I'm not one to use the Daily News as a source, but there's something about the direct frankness of it that just hits home.

Anyone saying McCain is doing this for the right reasons to fix things is deluded.

Let's Put it SIMPLY for you

(Start at 3:00 minutes if you want the main point)

Essentially McCain took 22 hours to get from NY to DC and after got to Washington the deal fell through. I'd say McCain is messing things up. As its the Republican house now blocking the deal as well, I think the fact that we aren't getting anything resolved isn't something you can blame on the dems.

At 9/26/08 10:17 AM, gumOnShoe wrote: Let's get it really right. I'm not one to use the Daily News as a source, but there's something about the direct frankness of it that just hits home.

Until you realize that Stewart (while I like him and Colbert) is an entertainer and also biased (at least towards being funny). For example he opens with the quote about the "fundamentals of our economy being strong". However, what he does not tell you is that there is a debate amongst economists as to whether or not our fundamentals are strong or weak. Hell even the San Francisco Chronicle is running analysis on this.

Anyone saying McCain is doing this for the right reasons to fix things is deluded.

It is just as delusional to think he's purely doing it for politics.

Essentially McCain took 22 hours to get from NY to DC and after got to Washington the deal fell through. I'd say McCain is messing things up. As its the Republican house now blocking the deal as well, I think the fact that we aren't getting anything resolved isn't something you can blame on the dems.

What do you mean the Republican house is now blocking the deal? Do you mean White House? Republicans in the House of Representatives? Or are you mistakenly asserting that the Republicans control the House of Representatives and are blocking the deal?

As for who to blame it on...both parties. Afterall, McCain did propose legislation in 2005 to reign in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Guess who stifled the bill? That's right, the Democrats. In the 1990s under Clinton the financial sector was de-regulated. This is not to say that the Republicans are blameless. Rather it would be pure folly to heap all blame on one side and give the other (EQUALLY GUILTY) party a pass.

Whether or not McCain suspended his campaign for all the right reasons...I cannot say (but neither can you). So the real question should be: is it the right thing to do? I think so. We have two major sectors of the economy in meltdown (banks and housing). If our fundamentals are not already weak...they are severely threatened. The next president will have to deal with this.

Three of the four candidates are Senators and one of them will become president in four months. They need to be actively involved in how this is handled. I have looked at Obama actually wanting him to give me a reason to vote for him. In fact early in the primary, I thought that I was in fact going to vote for him. However, over time I have come to see him as someone who is just an empty-suit whose idea of leadership is pretty words. That he thinks the appropriate response to an economic (and shifting of political power) crisis is for Americans to see their leaders in a self-serving political debate...kinda goes a long way to confirming the side of my brain that sees him negatively.

San Francisco Chronicle

At 9/26/08 11:48 AM, TheMason wrote:

Essentially McCain took 22 hours to get from NY to DC and after got to Washington the deal fell through. I'd say McCain is messing things up. As its the Republican house now blocking the deal as well, I think the fact that we aren't getting anything resolved isn't something you can blame on the dems.

What do you mean the Republican house is now blocking the deal? Do you mean White House? Republicans in the House of Representatives? Or are you mistakenly asserting that the Republicans control the House of Representatives and are blocking the deal?

The republicans in the House of Reps.

As for who to blame it on...both parties. Afterall, McCain did propose legislation in 2005 to reign in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Guess who stifled the bill? That's right, the Democrats. In the 1990s under Clinton the financial sector was de-regulated. This is not to say that the Republicans are blameless. Rather it would be pure folly to heap all blame on one side and give the other (EQUALLY GUILTY) party a pass.

Stop right there. Just stop. You are wrong to blame this on either party. The fault clearly lies in the companies themselves with the people that were making the horrible decisions to make bad loans and entice people to do it. It was entirely BAD BUSINESS PRACTICES, not a political party, that has brought this about. Companies and executives should know their field well enough to have some idea where their business tactics are going to take them in the future. Its a science. Just because something isn't illigal, doesn't mean its a good idea to do it and it shouldn't be up to the government to make every bad business practice illigal for companies to realize what is and is not a bad idea.

So the real question should be: is it the right thing to do? I think so. We have two major sectors of the economy in meltdown (banks and housing). If our fundamentals are not already weak...they are severely threatened. The next president will have to deal with this.

How does McCain stopping his campaign help the situation? HOW? Its not noble, in fact, it would make more sense for him to continue his campaign if he thinks he has the right answer. If he IS the guy for the job, don't you want him running the country? Doesn't he have the responsibility to continue to campaign so that he his elected president and does have the power to fix the problem?

How is it the right thing to do? Legislation was being drafted long before this. Him coming back and trying to rework the solution and take credit for it is only interfering. Law makers on both sides of party lines DON'T WANT HIM THERE. He's an obsticle and he's not fixing anything. This is the guy who already admitted he doesn't know anything about the economy, so really, WHAT IS HE DOING THERE TRYING TO FIX THE ECONOMY WITH OUT A CABINET?

Also, is it the right thing to do to drop everything to deal with one issue? As president he's going to have multpile issues to deal with each and every day. He can't just drop everything else because one thing is serious.

And if he is dropping his campaign "immediately" to go fix the problem, why does it take 22 hours to even get to Washington, to do anything? Why did he piss of Letterman to go have an interview with Katy? I mean really guys, what the fuck? He isn't doing anything that makes sense on any level. Its a show. "HEY, I'M DOING STUFF. LOOK AT ME, SAVING AMERICA." When what he really is doing, is continuing interviews with other people, eating dinner, sleeping, and then eventually ariving in washington.

Three of the four candidates are Senators and one of them will become president in four months. They need to be actively involved in how this is handled. I have looked at Obama actually wanting him to give me a reason to vote for him. In fact early in the primary, I thought that I was in fact going to vote for him. However, over time I have come to see him as someone who is just an empty-suit whose idea of leadership is pretty words. That he thinks the appropriate response to an economic (and shifting of political power) crisis is for Americans to see their leaders in a self-serving political debate...kinda goes a long way to confirming the side of my brain that sees him negatively.

WHOAH! A debate is a self centered, self serving thing? Not at all, the debate is entirely about letting voters know who the presidents are and how they will vote. It is a chance for us to see them in action, and how they meet a challenge. There is nothing self serving about a debate. Sure they talk about their ideas and what they are going to do, but its for us. It is so that the average voter can be informed and actually see them in action.

Additionally, the debate was being recentered to include questions about the economy, so it is in fact highly relevant to the situation. This is a chance for McCain to actually tell us what he believes should happen that way we know whether we want him to run or whether the final result is a result he really wanted. Its a chance for us to see the reasoning behind the action, and if you don't think thats important then I would rather you didn't vote. Acting without reason is why we continue to fuck up. There is a difference between a response and a reaction. Responses are thought out, reactions are impulses. You know, like firing someone to solve a problem (doesn't work). McCain doesn't think, he just shits out an answer with out knowing the problem.

That bill he wants to work on, that he dropped his entire campaign for, he hadn't even read yet when he decided to cancel his campaign. How is that an informed decision?

I don't know where you are coming from here. I really don't.

At 9/24/08 03:50 PM, mightypotato wrote: John McCain is suspending his campaign and wants to have the Presidential Debate cancelled/postponed due to the economic crisis in Washington.

Interesting political move? Desperate act to shift momentum?

Link to CNN story

Like one of the Sen. said, McCain's move was just weird. I don't think McCain did it to help himself out in someway to help him in the debate. Maybe he is being considerate. But seriously, $700 billion is a freakin lot of money. You can give every person in the world $2,000 a pop.

Oh, by the way, McCain has decided to give in to his "self serving" side and debate tonight. LOL

At 9/25/08 12:49 AM, Memorize wrote: I wouldn't doubt it was political. But I don't think it's because he's "not prepared" for the debate. Remember, the Friday debate was about foreign policy, which, let's face it, McCain beats Obama into a ditch.

By saying let's just stay the course? Seriously guy, I may not be the most up motherfucker on a lot of issues. But your "rara, Republicans are awesome!" bias is just dripping off every post here.

Politically? Probably. Not prepared? Nah.

I agree it'd be more political then not being prepared. I'm sure McCain was as ready as he'll ever be, ditto Obama, but this is a chance for McCain to go back to Washington, try to get his name prominently on legislation to deal with the problem and then have that for when the issue shifts to the economy and beyond. The economy could now trump the war if McCain and crew can successfully make them look like seperate issues, even though there's a correlation.

At 9/26/08 03:35 PM, aviewaskewed wrote:

At 9/25/08 12:49 AM, Memorize wrote: I wouldn't doubt it was political. But I don't think it's because he's "not prepared" for the debate. Remember, the Friday debate was about foreign policy, which, let's face it, McCain beats Obama into a ditch.

By saying let's just stay the course? Seriously guy, I may not be the most up motherfucker on a lot of issues. But your "rara, Republicans are awesome!" bias is just dripping off every post here.

Tell me 1 thing where I was wrong on about the Democrats.

The Democrats controlled Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
They blocked EVERY regulation policy on Freddie and Fannie proposed by Republicans.
The top 5 congressmen who receive donations from those companies are Democrats.
It is a Senator's job to be there anyway.

Hell, even Bill Clinton recently said on an interview that it was the Democrats fault for not working with Republicans on restrictions of these companies.

Have Fun