![[mccookgazette.com]](http://www.mccookgazette.com/images/nameplate31.png)
|
|
Fair ~ High: 87°F ~ Low: 57°F Wednesday, May 16, 2012 |
|
McCain's Own BailoutPosted Thursday, September 25, 2008, at 2:40 PM
Yesterday John McCain announced that he would be suspending his campaign and going to back to Washington to help work on the bailout plan for Wall Street. He had called Barack Obama and informed him of his decision. Obama had agreed that it was a good idea for them both to return to Washington and work on this plan. They had even scheduled a joint conference to announce this, but then John McCain went one step further. He announced that he wanted the debate, still scheduled for this Friday, postponed. The Obama Camp was so surprised by this move they had to push back their conference in order to prepare for it. In the the end Barack Obama came out and said that the debate should go on and that it was the perfect place for both men to tell the American people their individual ideas on fixing this economy.
To this point, McCain is still refusing to go to the debate unless their is a deal on the bailout. Personally I think it's a bad idea on McCain's part. If the debate starts at 7, McCain could leave D.C. at 4:30 and fly into Oxford, do the debate, get back on a plane and be back in D.C. by 11 at the latest. McCain runs the chance of people seeing him do this at a time when his poll numbers are slipping and looking at it as him running away from the debate. A president is expected to walk and chew gum at the same time and with McCain doing this he isn't showing he can do it. Now had he been an integral part of the deal they are trying to get through it might be a different story, but Congress has been working on this plan for five straight days without McCain. I am not saying, however that McCain should not be in Washington, in fact, I believe that both men should be there offerring their assistance, if they are asked. I don't think either man should go into Congress and try to make changes to any agreement that is already in place. This is one of the few times in the past eight years that Congress has acted bipartisnly in an effort to help Americans. For once this is not political and the fear is of both Obama and McCain showing up in D.C. and making it political. My own personal thoughts on all of this, is that McCain's ship is sinking and sinking fast. Just two weeks ago he enjoyed a 4-6% lead in every national poll that was taken. Since the Stock Market downturn has occurred he is now down anywhere from 4-6%. That's a loss of 8-12% in two weeks. He needed to something drastic to keep himself a float in the next 40 days. When he announced the suspension of his campaign to work on the crisis it seemed he had connected on his Hail Mary and then he tried a Hook and Ladder with the call for postponing the debate and fumbled. This is not the first debate that has been affected by a national crisis. In 1980 during the Iranian Hostage Crisis Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter still debated and in 2000 just five days after the U.S.S. Cole was attacked Gore and Bush went ahead with their debate. I just have the sneaking suspicion that the McCain campaign does not want to put their candidate out there right now and they have good reason he is struggling right now and it is not looking good.
Another short point to make here. Why is the McCain campaign keeping Sarah Palin underwraps? The Republican Party was completely energized with the choice of her for Vice-President and yet she will hardly take any questions from the press and she really doesn't give a speech unless McCain is on stage with her. It's time for the McCain campaign to unwrap Ms. Palin and let her go wild. Comments Showing most recent comments first [Show in chronological order instead] |
Hot topics A Case Against Merit Pay(12 ~ 6:08 PM, Mar 2)
Hot Springs, America's First National Park
President Obama's Speech
A Most Disgusting Lie
Republicans and the Far-Right Have Hit Rock Bottom
|
Email link
Read comments (11)
Blog archive
![[Feed icon]](http://www.mccookgazette.com/images/icons/feed-icon-14x14.png){kind=icon}
Doodlebug,
I do not support Obama on his stance on merit-based pay for teachers.
I am a teacher and I can tell you that unfortunately there are children that will never be reached. It's a harsh reality but it's true. Also, the merit will be based off of standardized testing. I've had students that were straight A students bomb a standardized test because of test anxiety.
Yes teachers should be judged on how their students perform in thier class, but basing pay off of performance seems a little unfair to teachers that put their blood and sweat into a class but for whatever reasons, those students do not improve.
I honestly wish he would back off of merit pay. I guess we'll see what happens.
It would be nice if just once you could get through a statement without the name calling of Democrats, but oh well.
I will be writing about this later, but the bill that the Senate was an absolute joke with all the por barrel crap they attached and yes I am very disappointed that Obama and Biden voted for it.
Mike,
First off, sorry to hear about your back. Get better soon.
Second. We agree that the bailout is bad. However when the government takes, it never gives it back. We will not see anything back from the bill that we foot and the money will just be used to fund another social program.
It has been proven time and time again you lower taxes, there is more money to spend and the government gets more money. We all are better off. If your company has more money to give you, you make more money. Which is what we all want, right?
The great depression was solved by removing the high tax rates and business was allowed to reinvest in itself, hiring more workers, people had more money to spend, and the cycle continued.
Do you think it is right to take something that doesn't belong to you? It sounds that way based on your saving vs reinvesting idea. That is what the income re-distribution model that Obama and the marxist democrats subscribe to will do. Where does it stop, they will continue to lower the "rich" standard (aka $250,000) so then it will be $100,000 then $50,000 and so on. If 51% of the people decide that it isn't worth their efforts, then we will see what happens when there is no work being done.
Mike
anything about Sen. Obama that you do not approve of?
Oh and to note trickle down economics does not work. This government has proven that in the last eight years. The economy has worsened as the rich have gotten richer thanks to the tax cuts enacted in 2001.
The problem with trickle down economics or simply cutting taxes or giving tax breaks is that a large percentage of the people that benefit from this don't put it back into the economy they put it into savings. With gas prices where they are (even though they are dipping), food prices going up, saving is not a bad idea though it does not help the economy one bit.
Sorry for taking so long to respond. My back went out on me this weekend and I am just now getting around
I love the wait and see attitude, although if you look through history it has proven not to work. The Great Depression came about in part because the government took a wait and see approach to the matter at hand. President Roosevelt did help America start the rise out of Depression and we were pretty much out of it when the war hit. Suscribing to your prescription you would have let us sit in the Depression for almost 12 years just waiting and seeing if we could get out of it ourselves.
Interesting to note that John McCain was still taking credit for the bailout, or whatever they are calling it today, on Monday and yet by the afternoon when the bill failed he somehow found a way to blame Obama for bills failure.
By the way I do not support the bailout. It is essentially giving Wall Street a pass for doing very stupid things and expecting us to foot the bill for it. I do like Obama's idea in that we foot the bill now and when the economy improves that money is given back to us.
I will say, however, that something needs to be done, before this crash affects all of us. Waiting and seeing is not the answer. This bailout is not socializing, that has already been done by the Federal Government when they agreed to buy certain banks and yet let other banks sink.
My main point in my previous entry is that John McCain suspended his campaign (though he really didn't), said he wouldn't debate (but he did), said he wouldn't "phone it in" (which he ended up doing) and took credit for a bill which 60% of his party voted no on. He took a huge gamble inserting himself into this and looking at the polls it has squarely bitten him on the rump.
In your rush to publish this you were extremely fast to criticize McCain but yet it has come out now that there was no deal.
In the rush to push the bailout, the democrats in the original bill tried to push a pork loaded bill with benefits to ACORN and other groups, block exploring for oil shale, and it yet it really didn't fix any of the issues. We should be glad the bill in its current version failed. The democrats could have passed the bill by themselves but they wanted it to be bipartisan. That way, when it failed to actually fix the issue, the republicans would be blamed.
Socialization is not the answer and this bill is anything but constitutional. I am disappointed that this president is pushing this initiative and we are being called idiots for going against an extremely bad bill. We need to drop the tax rate not just for individuals, but also for corporations. This will in turn boost the economy. If the government were to get out of the way the economy would most likely fix itself.
I recon that is why we have two major political parties. "Eye of the Beholder" sums up the difference. I still do not envy the winner of this election. Whomever it is, may well be the most hated President, in freedoms history. Just my opinion.
We'll know soon. Arley
John McCain did exactly what I was afriad he would do, he has injected politics into the bailout plan. Congress worked for almost a week on a bipartisan plan to help get us out of this hole. John McCain comes in (ONE FULL HOUR after it is announced that a deal has been reached) and takes credit for brokering the deal.
And then the debacle at the White House where GOP Representatives completely reneged on that deal and offered their own deal which the powers that be (White House and Secretary Paulson) have rejected but now McCain is now championing. This is a last ditch effort by a desperate man trying to win the White House.
As to your point NavyBlue, serving in the Congress is their job and if both of them thought that anything they had to say was important they should have gone back to Congress last week to work on it not as John McCain has done and waited until all the sweat and blood had already been poured into this deal and then in effect help bring down the deal.
For anyone to say, that what McCain is doing is courageous and indictive of what a President would do I would ask them if they thought it was the job of the President to go to Congress on the day a deal is made not only take credit for the deal but then throw it off track. I don't think it is.
They should only go if 'asked?' They both, are active Senators, being paid to do a job. Neither of them has tied up the job of President, just yet.
Interesting, John McCain want to 'show,' by doing, what the 'debate' is scheduled to have them 'say' by talking. Both have the same subject matter: Saving this country from financial disaster. I opt that they 'do.' Talk is cheap! (Old axiom, having something to do with proof in the pudding)
The 'hostage crisis, this time, effects over 250 Million people, just in the USA, plus many many more worldwide. This is NOT an Iranian hostage crisis!
Vote your heart, Mike, and everyone else, but do V O T E, please. Arley Steinhour