Analysis: House vote against bailout wounds McCain By CHARLES BABINGTON, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - The house always wins, gamblers are warned, and the U.S. House made John McCain pay Monday for his politically risky, high-profile involvement in a financial rescue plan that came crashing down, mainly at the hands of his fellow Republicans.
The bill's defeat can hardly be blamed on the GOP presidential nominee, and it's possible that a revised measure might succeed. But by his own actions last week, McCain tied himself far more tightly to the failed bill than did his Democratic opponent, Barack Obama.
McCain argues that action is better than inaction in times of crises. His efforts, however, were aimed squarely at House Republicans, the group mainly responsible for the bill's demise, which triggered a record drop of nearly 800 points in the stock market, the most ever for a single day.
If Congress' impasse leads to a credit crisis, "it's not going to be good for McCain," said veteran Republican consultant John Feehery.
Another prominent Republican strategist, who would talk only on background to avoid antagonizing associates, said the vote was trouble for McCain.
As recently as Monday morning, only minutes before the House's stunning vote, McCain suggested that his call for a White House summit meeting Thursday, and his visit with unhappy House Republicans that preceded it, had helped clear the way for the bill's passage.
"I went to Washington last week to make sure that the taxpayers of Ohio and across this great country were not left footing the bill for mistakes made on Wall Street and in Washington," he told a crowd in Columbus, Ohio. "Some people have criticized my decision, but I will never, ever be a president who sits on the sidelines when this country faces a crisis."
On NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday, top adviser Steve Schmidt said McCain managed "to help bring all of the parties to the table, including the House Republicans, whose votes were needed to pass this."
The comment suggested that McCain took responsibility for rounding up the needed GOP votes, "and that was probably a stupid thing for him to promise to do," said Democratic adviser Jennifer Palmieri.
On Monday, only 65 of the House's 199 Republicans went along. The defeat dealt a major blow to President Bush and threw another twist into a presidential campaign already drawing record numbers of Americans for rallies and televised events.
In a sign of the difficulty he faces, McCain made no direct comment on the House vote for about four hours. His campaign initially issued a sharply worded statement by economic adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin, who blamed Obama and other Democrats. ...
it's really strange to read the mindless ramblings of the left, and then go and hear real people talk about this. Real people don't blame John McCain anymore than Barack or Biden. Does it bother you at all to have to be a cheerleader for a man you despised two months ago?
it's really strange to read the mindless ramblings of the left, and then go and hear real people talk about this. Real people don't blame John McCain anymore than Barack or Biden. Does it bother you at all to have to be a cheerleader for a man you despised two months ago?
Well I can't say wether or not who people (they'll all real bsams) end up blaming but so far McCain hasn't fared to well. His suspending his campaign stunt tied him to the bill that failed to pass. I'm not sure how that will help him reverse Obama's momentum but let me know when the GOP has some sort of coherant talking point.
McCain just said that Venezuela was in the Middle East. This, two weeks after he said that Spain was in Latin America. Here's the video (below) from McCain's economic forum that just took place today - Ben Smith @ Politico.com has the transcript:
Quote:
McCain, talking about energy policy, stresses the importance of "ensuring that America is secure, and not dependent on oil from people like Hugo Chavez or other parts of the Middle East which is, we know, could be destabilized under certain sets of circumstances."
Hugo Chavez is the leader of Venezuela, a country located in South America. Read more about McCain thinking Spain was in Latin America here and here.
when are we going to discuss obama's ability as a public speaker away from the teleprompter?
Or Biden's?
But, seriously, this is getting pathetic. Anybody who isn't a complete partisan can tell that this wasn't a statement that Venezuala was in the middle east but a poorly constructed sentence, the type that every one of us make sometimes.
But, seriously, this is getting pathetic. Anybody who isn't a complete partisan can tell that this wasn't a statement that Venezuala was in the middle east but a poorly constructed sentence, the type that every one of us make sometimes.
Ok. You can excuse that if you think about it that way. What about the Spain comment? what about his Joe Lieberman whispering in his ear moment in Iraq?
Need a refresher?
He reminds me so much of Ronald Reagan in his second term. Senile dementia and/or Alzheimer's both have early warning signs. Anybody that didn't know something was wrong with Reagan at the debates wasn't paying attention. Shortly after leaving office he had a diagnosis....you have to know it started LOOONNNGGG before. John McCain is making numerous and regular gaffes, and even though I don't like him much since he decided to reverse himself and run for the GOP nomination, I do not think he is a stupid man. He sure is having difficulty in expressing simple ideas and thoughts as of late though.
If you've spent time with the elderly, you'd know they have not too much trouble with things that happened 40 years ago, but can't remember yesterday's breakfast. He probably still thinks those countries exist. Too many people will brush it aside as "political dirty tricks" when someone dare mentions it, though. There is definitely something wrong with his thought processes.
What I fail to understand as especially given his poor choice of VP candidate (and I've as well as the press have documented many conservatives that agree) why his current propensity for gaffes and confusion is taboo and off limits or below the belt.
whomod, the simple fact of the matter is that, for every gaffe you give us of McCain's, we can find one just as bad from Obama and/or Biden (who isn't that much younger than McCain).
I'm not going to sit here and claim either of them is senile, however, because I realize that slips of the tongue do occur.
slips happen. they're just especially noticeable today because everything any politician says is online in some form.
the "geographical nightmare" with wenezuela in the middle east was just a grammatical slip. didn't obama say he was in the wrong city several times on his trail, even during his convention? there's no senility claim there. these guys are talking like 22 hours a day, i can't believe they make so few slipups.
Now this is something i've been commenting on her for years. About how the incoming bush Administration downplayed counterterrorism in favor of SDI and dismissed Clinton and Sandy Berger as "being obsessed with Osama" when both Berger and Richard Clarke tried to warn them on the growing danger of Al queda. And how the Bush Administration downgraded counter terror from a Cabinet level position. As per "9/11: The Secret History" and other reports.
Plus i've documented her how the Congressional Republicans opposed many of Clinton's counter terror bills and even when Clinton tried to hit one of Osama's camps. "Wag the dog" they said. That was Clinton's Pre-9/11 mindset.
That phrase "pre-9/11 mindset" gets thrown around a lot, in conservative neocon circles especially. Well, here's a clear view of John McCain's pre-9/11 mindset, from a 1998 Mother Jones interview:
Quote:
You not only have had combat experience in Vietnam, but you were also a prisoner of war. When you look at terrorism right now, with people like Osama bin Laden, do you have any reservations about watching strikes like that?
You could say, Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that's depicted? Most of us have never heard of him before. And where there is a parallel with Vietnam is: What's plan B? What do we do next? We sent our troops into Vietnam to protect the bases. Lyndon Johnson said, Only to protect the bases. Next thing you know.... Well, we've [under Clinton - whomod] declared to the terrorists that we're going to strike them wherever they live. That's fine. But what's next? That's where there might be some comparison.
Interesting, isn't it? Well, what do we do next, Sen. McCain? Ready to spill your "secret plan" yet? This goes to the heart of not only McCain's judgement, but given the fact that Clinton was on the ball and saw Osama as a much bigger threat than John McCain, the Republicans, and George Bush did back in 2000, this goes to the heart of Republican judgement in general. The quote is undeniable. McCain says that the threat of Al qaeda was overstated by the Clinton Administration. And that was the reaction of the Republicans up until September 11, 2001. Then suddenly they tried to scramble to be the party that is on top of anti-terror and the Dems of being the ones with the pre-9/11 mindset.. Read the TIME article, we fought Al queda after 9/11 with the Clinton/Clarke plan!
Quote:
In the words of a senior Bush Administration official, the [Clarke] proposals amounted to "everything we've done since 9/11."
Yes yes, the Cole. Read the TIME article. Yes yes Monica Lewinsky. I'm not saying Clinton didn't have his own personal weaknesses and errors in personal judgment. But in matters of national security, he sure was a lot more prescient than John McCain or George Bush were at the time.
And being the party of terrorism AFTER the fact rather than before, is just flailing and reacting and not of actually having any vision or imagination. Just like being the "regulator" AFTER the economic crisis doesn't hide the long history of being the deregulator beforehand. To be fair, no one could have predicted the scope of 9/11. but it sure would have helped if everyone could have had their eye on the ball and not just came up with catchy slogans and false accusations of being the guys asleep at the switch, after the fact.
To me it just sounds like the way they describe a Rove tactic. Turn your opponents strength into a weakness and turn your weakness into a strength. And from that McCain interview and the TIME article, i see they turned Clinton being "obsessed with Osama" into the Republicans being the party of terrorism and keeping you safe.
According to that article whomod posted it seems as if McCain was saying tenyears ago it would be necessary to take out a guy like Bin Laden but that it wouldn't be enough. How is that wrong?
McCain: Life isn't fair Email|Link|Comments (122)Posted by Foon Rhee, deputy national political editor October 2, 2008 09:59 AM
Republican John McCain -- making the rounds of the morning news shows as polls show him falling behind Democratic rival Barack Obama and his running mate losing the confidence of voters -- sounded either bitter or fatalistic.
Asked why Obama has been rising as the Wall Street crisis has dominated attention, McCain said on Fox News Channel: "Because life isn’t fair.”
“He certainly did nothing for the first few days," McCain added. "I suspended my campaign, took our ads down, came back to Washington, met with the House folks and got on the phone, and also had face-to-face meetings.”
McCain also batted away speculation that he's upset that his campaign apparatus has managed running mate Sarah Palin too much leading up to tonight's one and only vice presidential debate -- and expressed confidence that she'll show up in the "Show Me" state.
"She's smart, she's tough, she's been in debates before," McCain said on "Fox & Friends." "The American people ... the more they see of her, the more they love her, and I'm confident of that at the end."
Asked about criticism and attacks on Palin, McCain said on CNN: "I think the American people decide what is fair. I know that there have been attacks on Sarah Palin, that have been remarkable to me in many ways. But I have total confidence in her. She's very comfortable in her own skin. She's had more experience in leadership than Senator Obama and Senator Biden put together. She's been a mayor, she's been a governor, she knows energy issues. She negotiated a $400 billion pipeline of natural gas to the lower 48. I'm very confident about her credentials and her vision and her strength for America. So, I'm very proud of her."
He also seemed more criticial of debate moderator Gwen Ifill, who has come under criticism because she is writing a book featuring Obama. Asked on Fox News Channel whether it would work to Palin's advantage because Ifill will be under scrutiny for any bias, McCain answered, “Frankly, I wish they had picked a moderator that isn’t writing a book favorable to Barack Obama. Let’s face it. But I have to have to have confidence that Gwen Ifill will handle this as the professional journalist that she is.”
“Life isn’t fair, as I mentioned earlier in the program,” said McCain, who is scheduled to hold a rally later today in Denver. ...
McCain is just erratic and his capaign is falling apart. Yesterday he was all over the TV talking about the need for bailout package which he then voted for.
Today he was on morning Joe on MSNBC talking about how that same bill he just voted for is a disaster. He's been trying to play both sides of the fence since this thing began and now it just looks like he himself doesn't know what position he's on.
McCain is just erratic and his capaign is falling apart.
Actually, I agree with this. The campaign has been reactive, not proactive, since the bailout started and it's really hurting his campaign.
Furthermore, as mentioned before, McCain seems to be unable to accept that Democrats (and you can't really blame them on this point) aren't going to do anything to make him look good during a partisan political campaign. He seems to think this is just like any other day in the Senate when he could collegially work with the other side to craft legislation. That's something for after an election, not during it.
As soon as this whole bailout mess started, McCain should have said (truthfully): "I've tried to get this mess reformed for years but the bureaucrats in Washington and special interests on both sides fought me, including some people in the White House. You elect me President and this is what I'll do....."). Then point out Obama's ties to the mess and inexperience. Then repeat.
As for the press, I'm not going to retract my earlier comments about the press being in the tank for Obama because it's true. The media in this country is, for all intents and purposes, trying to coronate a president.
However, even there, McCain's campaign has bungled a few things. First, as noted before, he failed to realize that his pals in the press were no longer that as soon as he became the GOP nominee. Second, instead of sending Palin out to people who might have given her a fair interview he sent her to a report (Couric) desperate to keep her own job and needing to court controversy and ratings. Why wouldn't Couric go out of her way to generate both with an unfair intereview?
Finally, there's increasing evidence of campaign finance reform violations, voter fraud and even intimidation from the Obama camp and there's no indication of McCain, or anyone on the GOP, trying to stop it.
If we lose this election, we got no one to blame but ourselves.
I was watching Fox News this morning when he said the "life isn't fair" comment. it was 100% a joke and he said it laughin and everyone got a big laugh out of it. Are you guys really that out of touch with main stream USA that the LA Times and Boston Herald is what you use to form opinions now?
I was watching Fox News this morning when he said the "life isn't fair" comment. it was 100% a joke and he said it laughin and everyone got a big laugh out of it. Are you guys really that out of touch with main stream USA that the LA Times and Boston Herald is what you use to form opinions now?
God help them if they answered "yes" about the Herald.
Uschi said: I won't rape you, I'll just fuck you 'till it hurts and then not stop and you'll cry.
MisterJLA: RACKS so hard, he called Jim Rome "Chris Everett." In Him, all porn is possible. He is far above mentions in so-called "blogs." RACK him, lest ye be lost!
"I can't even brush my teeth without gagging!" - Tommy Tantillo: Wank & Cry, heckpuppy, and general laughingstock
In other news today, McCain's Latin American experience includes 'dating' a Latin American in the 1950s. Yeah, I'll bet he went to her repeatedly for foreign policy advice too. Seriously. That's what McCain's campaign said today. His experience in the region includes, um, "dating" a Brazilian. Yes, well, I've "dated" a Brazilian too. Does that make me a Latin America expert?
In fact, I suspect this is ongoing damage control from McCain recently thinking Spain was in Latin America, and that Venezuela (which is in Latin America) was in the Middle East. But seriously, there's nothing physically or mentally wrong with McCain. Lots of Latin American experts confuse Spain and Venezuela with Mexico and Saudi Arabia.
It's also damage control for rising concerns over McCain's physical and mental health. Apparently, pointing to some Brazilian woman McCain "met" 51 years ago somehow shows how virile he is today. Yeah, we get it, he liked girls half a century ago. And this saves my 401k how?
BTW, last night and in stump speeches Sarah Palin has said "John McCain knows how to win a war." It must be asked: What war was John McCain involved in that we won?
In further news, bitter Democrats who once touted their like of McCain search for the best soundbytes to take out of context and try to build an argument against the distinguished war hero.
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
You dare question comrade whomod. I will be sure to report you when the time comes. I am assuming you are carrying the proper papers with you at all times.
McCain wants to raise taxes on every working American and make you pay taxes on your health benefits. Wow. From AP:
Quote:
Barack Obama launched a multifaceted attack on presidential rival John McCain's health care proposal Saturday, elevating an issue that has been on the back burner in the White House race but remains a top concern for voters.
Obama planned to criticize McCain's plan to tax health care benefits as "radical" during an event in Newport News, Va., while his campaign echoed the message in four new television ads, four separate mailers targeted to swing state voters, radio commercials and events in every battleground state.
The McCain plan would be a dramatic change to the way Americans get health insurance. The Republican presidential nominee, who makes opposition to tax hikes a centerpiece of his campaign, has proposed to tax the health benefits that 156 million people get through the workplace as income.
That's gonna go over well.
At least McCain doesn't have to worry about his own health care. His government provided "socialist' health care has been taking care of him since he was in the military and continued on with his Congressional "socialist" health care plan..
I wonder if comrade McCain is willing to give that up? Seeing as how he's opposed to 'socialist health care' and all.
Then there's this little jem.
if you're gonna distort, then it only stands to reason that it'd be fair to use your own methodology against you, no?
whomod, grouping large chunks of text in bold or larger sizes actually makes them more difficult to read. in that block of quoted text, you go from bold to super bold! you can't make everything stand out, because then nothing stands out. to get the neoconazis to understand, you must go easy on their eyes.
whomod, grouping large chunks of text in bold or larger sizes actually makes them more difficult to read. in that block of quoted text, you go from bold to super bold! you can't make everything stand out, because then nothing stands out. to get the neoconazis to understand, you must go easy on their eyes.
As I mentioned earlier and the McCain camp confirmed, their last desperate tactic is to try to smear obama with his "associations". Barack Obama is taking Sarah Palin and John McCain at their words. All weekend McCain sent the head of his ticket, Sarah Palin, out to talk about Barack Obama's "associations." What she meant was, she was going to talk about stories that CNN and AP and the NYT have already debunked. But Obama takes Palin at her word, and if Sarah Palin and John McCain want to talk about associations, then let's.
Monday at noon, Obama officially launches a 13-minute documentary about John McCain's huge financial ethics scandal, the Keating Five Scandal. The clip above is a teaser for the documentary that will be posted at noon Eastern on Monday.
Obama is sending out literally millions of emails, asking people to go to the Web site, read what's there, watch the video when it comes up tomorrow, and then send the link for the site to every one of your friends, telling them it's must-see information about John McCain's corrupt ethics. Remember, the Keating Five isn't just another scandal, it's a financial scandal in which John McCain and 4 other Senators did favors for big banker friends who then brought down 1,000 US banks. Sound familiar? And McCain did this at the age of 54. He was no spring chicken. By the age of 54, your ethics are pretty well established.
I gotta say guys, it's real fun dealing with a candidate who hits back, eh?
I like this doozy of a flashback better though...
Can you guys link me to the video where an elementary school aged Obama is busy engaging in terrorism with Ayers? Or the one where he's denouncing America with Reverend Wright?
Because we've got a crapload of news footage of McCain in the Keating hot seat. Now why would people care today about an old economic crisis precipitated by deregulation, followed by massive bank failures and a housing and lending bubble that popped? Who knows...
Um...weren't the other four members of the Keating Five Democrats? And, wasn't it Cranston, DeCocini (Sp?), and Reagle (Sp?) that took the biggest fall? Three Democrats! Seriously, do you really want to bring up a twenty-year old controversy that looks far worse for your OWN party?
Out of all the senators, the Dems all lost their seats and were replaced. McCain is the only one of the 5 who decided to run again or wasn't ousted. Dems cleaned house. McCain just claimed he learned something but in reality, didn't learn a damn thing judging fro his record of deregulation after the S&L crisis and up to the current one.
Actually, the four democrats served the remainder of their terms then the big three didn't run for re-election. Glenn, of course, was re-elected in 1994. Also, didn't Willie name one of the big three (Cranston, maybe?) as an appointee to the Federal Mortgage something or another during his first term? I mean, there was a lot the McCain shouldn't have been doing during that time; but the Dems weren't exactly squeeky clean themselves. I just don't see the point in saying "Twenty years ago, John McCain 'Maverickly' reached across the aisle and helped four of my fellow Democrats destroy the savings and retirement of many an elderly person and caused over 21,000 banks to fail by helping this Keating fellow."
To me, it just makes both parties look less desirable. And, by way of him being the Democratic nominee, Obama loses desirability.
Edit: Just fact checked, it was DeConcini who was placed on the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation. Better known as Freddie Mac. See, bringing this up makes Obama's fellow Democrats look like Douches, too.
Last edited by iggy; 2008-10-067:01 AM. Reason: fact checking
![[Linked Image from i6.photobucket.com]](http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y203/JoeMama13/RedSoxBanner05.png)
