Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

McCain Spends 90 Minutes on the Hill

Republican presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) talks on a cellphone as he walks to House Minority Leader John Boehner's (R-Ohio) office on Capitol Hill Sept. 26, 2008, in Washington. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

By Michael D. Shear
Sen. John McCain spent about 90 minutes on Capitol Hill this morning, stopping in his office and shuttling among the offices of Republicans, and seeking a deal on an economic rescue plan that would let him depart Washington for tonight's debate with Sen. Barack Obama.

Aides said he left his Crystal City condominium and arrived at the Senate at 9 a.m. His motorcade left to return to his Arlington headquarters at 10:30 a.m. In between, he spent about 15 minutes at Sen. Mitch McConnell's office and then moved to Rep. John Boehner's office.

Spokesman Brian Rogers said McCain also talked to Sen. Judd Gregg, Rep. Paul Ryan and Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson by phone.

"This stuff is not pretty. But it's not usually this public," Rogers said of the negotiations. "He took some heat. But he's a tough guy. He's back working on it."

Rogers said no decision had been made on traveling to the debate. And he conceded that the story that emerged out of Thursday was not good for his candidate.

"Politically -- politically yesterday was a good day for the Democrats. But this thing will be judged in the coming days, based on what actually happens, and the results," Rogers said.

He blamed the Democrats for turning Thursday's White House meeting into a circus.

"It was not John McCain's decision to turn the thing into a shouting match. They clearly hijacked it," Rogers said. "That's not the spirit that John McCain went in there. That's not the spirit that the president had either."

By Web Politics Editor  |  September 26, 2008; 11:25 AM ET
Categories:  B_Blog , John McCain  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Will McCain Join Obama for Debate?
Next: McCain Says Yes to Debate in Miss.


Leaders Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid had the power as leaders to do something about America’s national financial crisis over their last couple of years in Congress. Bush is responsible for signing bills into law, but Pelosi and Reid have the responsibility to set the country's legislative agenda and provide leadership to pass financial institution laws and banking regulations, but they both ignored the looming loan crisis until the very last minute. They failed our nation big time and should resign.

The senators and House leaders on the senate and house banking committee's should also resign because they failed to take action, when they were fully aware the country would eventually face a liquidity and banking crisis. They failed the nation along with the rest of the senate and house that relies on their banking committee to hold hearings, write banking laws and provide legislative oversight of our banking institutions.

The leadership in the White House - Bush, Senate - Harry Reid, House - Nancy Pelosi, and both Democrats and Republican's on the banking committees have failed to provide leadership and foresight to protect and regulate our nations financial system and institutions. Over the years Greenspan warned them that the increasing national debt was unsustainable that could lead to a national financial crisis if other countries lose confidence in our financial system and stop buying our national debt.

Congress just continues to overspend the nations money, give political favors to financial company's that give them political contributions, and add billions of dollars of earmarks for unneeded pork projects and possible fraud.

Did Congress and Bush really think they could run up the national debt forever and the rest of the world would continue to finance all of the nation's debt with a falling dollar? What about worthless American housing loan securities that they bought that are now becoming worthless? No! Now the world is slowly stopping to buy our debt and our nation may go bankrupt. Our only solution is to print more money to make up the difference, only leading to a lower dollar. This in turn may require the fed to increase interest rates to a premium to eventually attract more foreigners to buy more of our risky national debt due to a declining dollar at the expense of our own economy.

Bush, Pelosi and Reid had the legislative and executive power to prevent this nation’s financial crisis but they simply ignored it until the nations financial institutions practically crashed.

Now all American's will suffer, but they will now just continue to blame each other or the other political party, when they were all to blame.

Bush, Reid and Pelosi should all leave office because they over time allowed the nations financial crisis to evolve and continue to get worse until it practically crashed, all on their watch as national leaders. There is a reason that both Bush and Congress have low national approval ratings, it is because they as leaders they have failed to make American better over the years. If either Obama or McCain is elected both leaders in congress should step down so congress can start fresh with new House and Senate leadership so congress once again can gain the confidence and approval of the American public.

The "time of change is now" and we need national leaders to put the "country first" over party politics’ and corporate political donations influences that have led the country to the biggest country's financial crisis since the great depression.

Right now Obama and McCain should both be very involved with what congress is doing with the bailout because it is going to greatly impact their potential presidency in a few months and one of them will need to fix this country’s financial mess as president.

Posted by: edabelia | September 28, 2008 12:38 PM | Report abuse

John Mccain needs to get right back to D C. The Democrats are trying to include the low income housing agency already in trouble for voter fraud, ACORN, IN THE deal!

They want to give them 20% of any profit (?)! America say NO to this, to Chris Dodd, who did NOT do his job as HEAD OF THE BANKING COMMITTEE, Harry Reid and Barack OBama who has also included "community organizers" as benefiters of profits!

This is exactly why McCain was there.
The TAX and SPEND liberals Obama and Dodd! They took money in the hundreds of thousands from the same agencies they were overseeing. Dodd should have criminal charges filed against him.

Posted by: Texan2007 | September 26, 2008 8:03 PM | Report abuse

INDICT Barney Frank! INDICT Chris Dodd! INDICT Chuck Schumer! INDICT all of the idiots who said we needed to loosen the rules so that people who couldn't afford houses could buy them.

I am not paying for their mistakes!

WE NEED A TAX REVOLUTION! Refuse to pay your taxes. Don't pay for this craziness!

Posted by: gengar843 | September 26, 2008 7:49 PM | Report abuse

"We never would have signed a deal like this when I was a POW, my friends..."

Posted by: JRM2 | September 26, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

me cant wait for macain win so country can ride pallings holy rollercoaster. she speak in toungs on courick like good roller. me like safety goggle she wear all the time and big tall hairdo make her presidentiale. she major hottie!!!!! she can finish what bush start and bomb all countries who no do what we tell them starting withe russia cause its near her house. mess with her she torchur. cheney will give her lessons. too bad democracy party dummies. you lose. we win. palling macaino8!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: DaveMiner | September 26, 2008 5:54 PM | Report abuse

We will have to wait and see which bill was "better" then.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | September 26, 2008 5:13 PM | Report abuse

Wow ... thank God. I am so relieved that John McCain physically came to Capitol Hill... so he could walk around talking to members on his cell phone. When I heard he had to fly into DC to butt into the negotiations, I was afraid that along with computers nobody had told the Senator about this new-fangled invention that would have let him stay in touch with developments ... or maybe he could have used a Blackberry ... since he created it. Amazing craven political opportunistic effort by McCain. He is so erratic I am beginning to wonder about his health -- anybody else notice his left eye and eyebrow??? We can't afford to risk our future on McCain/Palin (good health or no). Amazing ...

Posted by: Omyobama | September 26, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

There was a better bill befor McCain arrived. It had oversight, accountability, help to mortgage holders facing foreclosure and CEO pay limits. Truth be told the Republicans were looking for tax brakes and less control over CEO pay. The principals of the joint statement of McCain-Obama were being met. Your post is a reiteration of the gambit that McCain tried and it failed. Bringing up McCain's failure and trying to spin it to a success confuses people who need to make a judgement on the candidates and although the McCain Charade was an error in judgement it was minor compared to the choice of Palin.

For those who are not aware of the criticism of Palin's performance by conservatives and others see:

Posted by: Gator-ron | September 26, 2008 4:19 PM | Report abuse

McCain met with Republicans and put together a coalition that will force a BETTER bill to protect Main Street, not just Wall Street. Whether you think that is a "concrete" action, or not, he did exactly what he set out to do. In my opinion, McCain he took the right action to address this crisis. The following is from his statement Wednesday:

"It has become clear that no consensus has developed to support the Administration’s proposal. I do not believe that the plan on the table will pass as it currently stands, and we are running out of time.

Tomorrow morning, I will suspend my campaign and return to Washington after speaking at the Clinton Global Initiative. I have spoken to Senator Obama and informed him of my decision and have asked him to join me.

I am calling on the President to convene a meeting with the leadership from both houses of Congress, including Senator Obama and myself. It is time for both parties to come together to solve this problem.

We must meet as Americans, not as Democrats or Republicans, and we must meet until this crisis is resolved. I am directing my campaign to work with the Obama campaign and the commission on presidential debates to delay Friday night’s debate until we have taken action to address this crisis."

Posted by: MarkInAustin | September 26, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Democrats can blame Republicans and visa versa but the real culprits are John McCain and George Bush. Neither Obama or McCain belonged there and that should have been predictable. In the same way you do not disturb a wasps nest when they are swarming you do not bring in "outsiders", those not part of the negotiation unless the person is unobtrusive which John McCain is not.

The most promising news all day is that McCain is leaving Washington. Leave the job to the legislators, their jobs are on the line if they fail.

Posted by: Gator-ron | September 26, 2008 3:19 PM | Report abuse

McCain's behavior has been dishonorable and shameful. Take heed, America. We don't need another sham of a president in office like we've had the last 8 years.

Posted by: Russell4America | September 26, 2008 3:15 PM | Report abuse

John McCain went to Washington for what reason? McCain says it was "to get the deal done". This article says he spent 90 minutes on the Hill. We saw him on the Hill. Much of that time was talking on the cell phone.

Reports regarding the White House Meeting say that he was "like a potted plant" during the meeting. He spoke at the end, the last speaker, and spoke for about 2 minutes, and said "nothing of any consequence".

Rep. Roy Blount, House Minority Whip let the cat out of the bag, today. Blount said
that McCain came to STOP the deal that was being negotiated.

We wish they would get their story right. We suspect the "Republican bloc" in the House are the real "deal killers". Blount, who is a McCain supporter,says now, that will be a deal, "any day now". Yes, we all know there will be a deal-the WHEN is what's eluding us.

One big suggestion, keep the Presidential candidates and the Presidential issue out of the negotiations...

Posted by: hwilfongjr | September 26, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

McCain straight talkin' on his motivation to put country first:

Posted by: oldgeek143 | September 26, 2008 1:00 PM . . .

Well put, oldgeek143

Posted by: tensity1 | September 26, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

I still feel like I dont have a candidate this election cycle. So I may watch the debates tonight to make up my mind. Has best debate moments.

Posted by: pastor123 | September 26, 2008 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Don't lay this Paulson/Bernanke/Bush plan on Democrats. The administration requesting this bail out is 100% Republican. And if House Repubs wanted an alternative, they should have offered one before the 11th hour. McCain looks like a Washington insider again.

Posted by: mkcornish | September 26, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Even lipstick doesn't help
the pig that is covered with chit

Posted by: TruthWalksOnWater | September 26, 2008 1:15 PM | Report abuse

just off the wire....
John McCain is asking all Avon sales agents to Mississippi. He's looking for several crates of lipstick after rolling in the mud

Posted by: TruthWalksOnWater | September 26, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

He is canceling the debates for 90 minutes, most of which, he is doing little to nothing. He can't work on this during the AM and go debate later?

McShame is falling apart and Palin is a gimmick. The polls speak volumes.

Posted by: indytucker | September 26, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

John McSame would rather destroy the global economy than lose an election. The same conservatives pushing the alternate plan are the some of the same conservatives that help put the global economy in this mess.
If you are undecided this year, just ask yourself if you are better off today than you were when Bush/Cheney took office.
If you would like to see your healthcare get destroyed, your investments disappear, your job disappear and watch how the GOP eliminates your Social Security and Medcare... go ahead and vote for McFossil. While your world is crumbling, we will probably be at war with Russia and China.

Posted by: 876jnr | September 26, 2008 1:02 PM | Report abuse

The $700 billion is a cash line of credit, the debt has already been incurred.

Thinking about it in simple terms, the Government is going to hold a garage or estate sale for debt, administered by a trust.

Some of the stuff will be pure junk and some will have some value.

Too much credit issued to fuel an economy, sell houses that were over valued and issued to people who could not pay. The selling of these loans as if they were real receivables and further used as assets to borrow against them was risky business.

The lax requirements for real financial audits and an administration more interested in taking credit (pun intended) for a growing economy and the naive belief that the private sector could be trusted to police itself the root cause.

This is not a bail out of wall street, but rather the bill collector knocking on the door of everybody who thought you could give tax cuts, remove regulations and borrow money with no consequences.

Posted by: oldgeek143 | September 26, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

rtfanning, i'm sure that your comment was very insightfully copy-and-pasted. unfortunately, no one will read it. please be reasonable about the length of comments. yeesh.

Posted by: johnsondh | September 26, 2008 12:56 PM | Report abuse

The Paulson deal is a matter of Public Record- All changes in it will be as well. By causing us to Pause and think for an extra day or week, any subsequent improvement on this bailout Will be forever recognized as John McCain's contribution to the rescue of our economy....long after the next 8 years have passed.

Posted by: thecannula | September 26, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

A Workable, Private Bank Assistance Plan or Why President Bush Should Fire Ben Bernanke and Hank Paulson
September 26, 2008

"We got to start with some other plan, not the Paulson plan."

Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL)

"Most of the banks in the US are not broke, not in trouble, but they don't trust each other because they don't know which banks are bad. We've got to get the bad ones out."

William Seidman

First we want to start with an apology to our friends at Bloomberg News, the AP and anybody else with whom we have discussed the sufficiency of the FDIC's resources over the past several months. We were not clear enough in our description of the cost of resolving the 110 banks we expect to fail between June 30 of this year and July 1, 2009 and how this cost relates to the cash resources available to the FDIC. In fact, the cost of resolving insolvent banks, the visible amount in the Deposit Insurance Fund, and the actual monies available to the FDIC, are not connected at all.

As luck would have it, the takeover of Washington Mutual by JPMorgan Chase (NYSE:JPM) after the close yesterday, an action that will result in no loss to the FDIC or depositors, provides a road map for a workable assistance plan from Washington. Let's first walk through an inventory of the vast financial resources available to the FDIC as it ramps up to handle what is going to be an increasing number of bank resolutions and sales over the next few months, resolutions that will result in losses. Then we'll comment on the impending death of the Paulson plan and provide our view of a workable alternative financed largely by the banking industry and private investors.

Why the FDIC Will Not Run Out of Money

The first line of defense for the insured depositors of US banks is regulatory takeovers and sales such as the WaMu transaction, where the acquirer assumes all deposits and buys all of the assets after a resolution by the FDIC. The FDIC takes no loss and private investors bear whatever risk remains in the assets of the failed bank. The equity and bond holders of WaMu naturally remained with the failed, publicly listed holding company and will be wiped out in bankruptcy. See our previous comment in The IRA about the difference between a bank and a bank holding company from a public company creditor/shareholder perspective ("What is to be Done?: Interview with Bert Ely").

The next line of defense for depositors in US banks is the income of the banking industry. The FDIC has open-ended authority to tax the US banking industry through deposit premiums. While the visible income of the industry is shrinking rapidly due to the diversion of funds into loan loss provisions, in the first half of 2008, provisions ($81 billion) plus net operating income totaled over $100 billion.

Moreover, behind the income of the banking industry is $1.3 trillion in tangible equity capital, a base of support that alone should be sufficient to absorb any losses the industry may generate. While the FDIC may not be able to tax the industry in real time to absorb all of these losses as and when they occur, the fact is that this capital base is the first line of defense for all depositors of all US banks - insured or otherwise.

As the FDIC noted in an open letter to Bloomberg News posted yesterday: "The fund's current balance is $45 billion - but that figure is not static. The fund will continue to incur the cost of protecting insured depositors as more banks may fail, but we continually bring in more premium income. We will propose raising bank premiums in the coming weeks to ensure that the fund remains strong. And, at the same time, we will propose higher premiums on higher risk activity to create economic incentives for poorly managed banks to change their risk profiles. The fund is 100 percent industry-backed. Our ability to raise premiums essentially means that the capital of the entire banking industry - that's $1.3 trillion - is available for support."

A final note on the FDIC's "visible" reserves, the fiscal relationship with the Treasury, and what it means in terms of the safety and soundness of bank deposits from our statement to the media yesterday:

"The FDIC does not and will not run out of money. Like all federal trust funds, the FDIC's insurance 'trust fund' does not exist. The reserves shown in the fund simply evidence the amount of money contributed by the banking industry into the fund. Like all federal trust funds, the cash raised by FDIC insurance premiums goes into the Treasury's general fund. When the agency needs cash, then the Treasury makes the money available. When the positive balance shown in the FDIC insurance fund is depleted, the FDIC simply runs a negative balance with the Treasury, a loan that the banking industry will repay over time. Indeed, the FDIC is preparing to raise the industry's insurance premiums to generate even more cash to deal with the rising levels of bank failures. Also, in the remote chance that the FDIC ever reached the statutory borrowing limit from Treasury, the Congress will simply raise the limit."

Nuff said. And yes David Evans, we still love you.

A Private Sector Alternative to the Paulson Plan

We salute Senator Dick Shelby and the House Republicans for digging in their heels and saying no to the ridiculous proposal from Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson. The Paulson Plan, which was vigorously supported by Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke, never had a chance to work because it starts from a false premise, namely that by allowing banks to swap illiquid assets for Treasury bonds, banks will sell or finance this collateral to make room for new loans.

Anyone who works in the banking industry knows that most large banks have basically shut down new business origination. The managers of these institutions, especially those with solvency issues, are still trying to avoid writing off losses on illiquid assets because they know that to do so will result in a takeover by the FDIC and career death for all of the managers who made these bad decisions. And yet it is precisely a market-based resolution that is in the best interest of the US taxpayer, the economy and the well-managed banks in the US that did not slither into the subprime, derivative swamp.

We are glad to see that President George Bush finally took our advice and invited the two presidential candidates to the White House to discuss the financial crisis. But unfortunately, Bush still does not understand that Paulson, Bernanke and the other incompetent, conflicted former Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) banksters and academic economists who populate the US Treasury and Federal Reserve Board (excluding all bank supervision personnel, naturally) are the biggest obstacles to forging a workable plan to help re-liquefy the banking system.

We hear from several sources who were in the room that the meeting between Bush, John McCain (R-AZ) and Barrack Obama (D-IL) quickly devolved into a pissing contest between the two presidential candidates. Obama initially took control of the meeting, this while Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Harry Reid (D-NV) sat in silence. McCain then began to mumble something incomprehensible about "a plan" but we see no evidence that the AZ senator has formulated a serious proposal. So nasty and sharp was the exchange between McCain and Obama that President Bush had to get in between the two men. Who says the first debate is going to be delayed?

Just look at the accomplishments of the team of Paulson and Bernanke ("P&B"), the latter of whom has been the craven lap dog of the former GS CEO from day one. The Bear, Stearns fiasco was bad enough, but failing to find a smooth transition to the troubles at Lehman Brothers makes a complete mockery of Paulson's claims to be trying to restore liquidity to the US financial system. Indeed, with friends like Paulson, Bernanke and Barney "Napoleon" Frank (D-MA), why should the American people be afraid of Al-Qaida?

You see, when P&B let Lehman be forced into a bankruptcy filing last week, more was lost than just thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in losses to shareholders and creditors. These losses are, at the end of the day, attributable to SEC Chairman Christopher Cox and the happy squirrels at the FASB. As our friend Brian Wesbury from FT Advisors in Chicago wrote:

"It seems clear that much of the current crisis has been exacerbated by mark-to-market accounting, which has created massive, and unnecessary, losses for financial firms. These losses, caused because the current price of many illiquid securities are well below the true hold-to-maturity value, could have been avoided. The current crisis is actually smaller than the 1980s and 1990s bank and savings and loan crisis, but is being made dramatically worse by the current accounting rules." Amen brother Wesbury.

When Lehman failed, what was left of the CP market, mostly paper issued by prime borrowers, got flushed down the dumper as well. We hear from the channel that once Lehman filed, nearly every prime CP issuer in the US hit their standby lines of credit with various commercial banks. So much for recapitalizing the banking system. We expect that when the Q3 data from the FDIC is released, it will show a precipitous drop in unused credit lines at some of the major domestic and foreign banks domiciled in the US. You think P&B understand this? Dream on.

But there is more. We also hear from some very well-placed sources on Capitol Hill that when the Fed's Board of Governors was presented with an $80 billion price tag for supporting Lehman the day before the bankruptcy filing, there were not five votes at the big Fed table to support the loan. When the Board does not take action, there is no record of the meeting, no transcript, no tape. Several member of the House familiar with the details reportedly will be calling for a forensic investigation of the Fed's internal records, phone and email regarding this non-decision by the central bank. But they key fact is that Ben Bernake could not make the other governors take necessary action to forestall the uncontrolled collapse of Lehman. Recalling the "leadership" role played by every Fed chairman since Arthur Burns, what use is a Fed chairman who can't get five votes when absolutely required?

As a result, it is further suggested, when JPMorgan Chase (NYSE:JPM) presented an ultimatum to Lehman management that weekend, the only choice was bankruptcy. We hear that JPM told Lehman that if they did not file, then JPM was going to put them out of business by closing down their clearing account. To get a sense for the conversation which reportedly occurred between JPM and the doomed broker dealer, recall the scene from the film The Godfather when Robert Duval gives an imprisoned capo under federal protection the option of picking the manner of his own death. Unfortunately and unlike the movie, as JPM eliminated a major investment banking competitor by compelling the suicide of a long-time clearing customer, no surety was provided for the members of the Lehman family.

The tragedy of the failure of Lehman is that by failing to obtain Fed support for an expenditure of $80 billion needed to manage an orderly sale or bank holding company conversion of the still-solvent broker dealer, P&B have created the very crisis of confidence that they now seek to solve via a $700 billion bailout of truly insolvent financial institutions. If this very public act of grotesque incompetence is not sufficient reason for President Bush immediately to demand the resignation of both Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke, then what actions would be sufficient? How much more damage must P&B commit before President Bush and the republicans in Congress demand their heads?

Fortunately, the takeover of Washington mutual by JPM last night provides the Congress and the other inhabitants of Washington a road map for a truly workable assistance package based on private capital rather than mountains of public debt and moral hazard. As Bill Seidman suggested on CNBC last night, the FDIC, backed by the Fed, OCC and Treasury, must aggressively begin to triage and close insolvent banks, large or small. Once these institutions pass through the cleansing process of an FDIC resolution and receivership, a process that cleans the assets of any legal or other liability, crowds of investors and solvent commercial banks will be waiting on the other side to finance the re-liquefaction of these assets.

We believe that the Congress should provide an initial $500 billion in authority for the new Treasury secretary to direct into capital assistance for solvent financial institutions. Institutions taking such assistance must agree to issue warrants to the Treasury, either against common equity or the upside potential of illiquid but still performing assets on the books of these banks. If these assets are sold, the warrants must convey with the assets so that the Treasury and the taxpayer benefit, at least to some degree from the upside gain as the markets recover.

Likewise, failed assets that are sold out of a resolution by the FDIC may also carry warrants for the Treasury, depending on whether the acquirers are willing to pay close to fair market value or fire sale prices for the assets and assume all insured deposits. In the case of JPM's purchase of WaMu, all depositors are fully protected and there will be no cost to the FDIC's Deposit Insurance Fund, thus no warrant cover is required. This transaction is the optimal model for cleaning up the other bad banks, to paraphrase Bill Seidman, but not all resolutions will work so smoothly and result in no loss to the FDIC.

The key principle we believe must be part of any assistance package approved by the Congress is to try, wherever possible, to keep the troubled assets of the banks in private hands. If the government must take ownership of bank assets, then the FDIC is the proper vehicle to play that role. Apart from the FDIC, which is an independent, self-funded agency, the US government has absolutely no competence when it comes to owning or managing financial assets. The GSE fiasco makes that clear. But by providing the authority for the Treasury to selectively support capital infusions into solvent banks, and the aggressive closure and sale of insolvent banks, we can quickly clean up this latest nightmare on Wall Street and get the US economy back on track.

Questions? Comments?

Posted by: rtfanning | September 26, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

700 Billion dollars. 700 Billions dollars.

This is a joke right? 2 1/2 page poorly written document requesting 700

Billion dollars? No warning? No time to work out the complexities?

What the hell has happened to us. Have we lost our sanity here? Who

the hell is running this country?

This is the Iraq war times 2.

To have voted for Bush the first time was a foolish mistake that has set

this country back 20 years or better. To have voted for him the second

time was blind, selfish ignorance. To vote for McCain is nothing short of

deliberate treason.

No wonder Iran and North Korea want nuclear weapon protection. Who

could blame them?

We've lost all sense of clarity. Get Bush the hell out of there!

Posted by: Dano111 | September 26, 2008 12:19 PM | Report abuse

While the Democrats are crying "OBSTRUCTIONISM" in the Paulson/Bernanke/Bush Wall Street Bailout plan... the Republicans are simply working to offer an alternative solution which protects the Taxpayer and does not institute a socialization of the markets.

Let's remember... the Dems HAVE ENOUGH VOTES to pass Paulson's plan all by themselves without a single Republican vote. I DARE them to do it! Of course they won't do it by themselves, because it's a BAD PLAN... so they want BiPartisan support for it!

A corollary to Murphy's Law states, "If two or more individuals have a hand in a problem, the blame will never be placed." The Dems are counting on this to allow them to pass this socialistic takeover of the financial sector, without taking the blame for it.

But the Republicans are saying, "If you want it... take it", but the Republicans hands are clean. "You buy it... you OWN it."

Check out

Posted by: edeldoug | September 26, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

The problem with what McCain did isn't that he wanted to help or that he's concerned. No one destitute that. Obama is concerned equally and want a solution also.

It's HOW McCain went about it. He injected unnecessary politics, confusion and panick in an already complex situation. Holding the debate hostage didn't help him, us or the situation. He should be capable doing both and measure or reassurance. Now everyone is making rash decisions under more pressure than there needed to be.

He also blindside Obama twice. Once in his selfish decision to grandstand and take the gesture by Obama to use to his political advantage, second by the GOP house balk. He knew what they were up to.

After all this, he just sits in the meeting with his head down while Obama runs the show. Unbelievable.

Very poor judgement on McCains part. He’s too erratic, jittery and risky to be President.

Posted by: Dano111 | September 26, 2008 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Just LOOK around YOU !

Piss-Poor State-Craft...
A Bungled Economy...

Is this the America you remember growing up?
So where does the Buck Stop NOW ?

Why would America REWARD complete Republican failure ?

We wont.

Posted by: PulSamsara | September 26, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Head of State

Thursday, September 25, 2008
Credit Where Credit Isn't Due: McCain and Bush's Kabuki Theatre

Now we know why McCain hired the Bush contingent.

It emerged in the White House briefing today that McCain called Bush and asked him to initiate a meeting today at 4 pm at the White House, putatively for him to "deal with" the crisis.

That is, McCain asked Bush to help him create an trifecta: To try to lend some credence to McCain's desperate assertion that a suspension of his campaign is necessary, in effect either avoiding a debate in which he would face critical questions about his stance on the economy or marching in claiming "victory"; attempting to co opt the financial crisis thereby trying to put an end to his plummeting in the polls created by his flailing positions on the economy--perhaps best reflected by his statement days ago that the "fundamentals of the economy are strong"; and also perhaps buying more time for Sarah Palin after her embarrassing photo op at the UN yesterday, by moving her debate forward as well.

Here's how it happened, according to Q and A at the WHB:

McCain emailed Bush asking for the 4 P.M. meeting. Now, one reasonably might ask, why is today such a necessity for McCain, if his interest is solely the national good?

Because it is before the debate. McCain hopes to stage a meeting at the White House, thereby, with Bush's cooperation, lending plausibility to his claim to need to suspend his campaign. Then, if Republicans, in their own electoral interest, can be persuaded to come to agreement, before the debate, he would claim--in an act of utter stage management--to have "resolved" the crisis. Thereby hoping to take the heat off on his past careening stances and sliding polls and staunch the bleeding on the polls--before the debate.

This is Kabuki Theatre masquerading as substance--no different than what we saw at the U.N. yesterday.

It is utterly stage managed, utterly cynical, and utterly unrelated to the substantive deliberation necessary to actually resolve these matters on the merits and for our nation's future, rather than for short-term and desperate political advantage.

These occurrences are equally important for what they indicate about McCain's governing style as they are for their impact upon democratic process: impulsive acts that rely on drama and theatrical posture rather than substantive reasoning and long-term deliberation; a strong willingness to sacrifice substantive reasoning, deliberative process, and even prior structures and agreements to immediate political need; an attempt to reach outcomes through last minute stage management rather than substantive argument.

These should create deep concern for anyone who wishes for a change in governmental process from the past eight years.

We have an economy, rather than a campaign, to rescue. Putting nation before politics means putting all attempts to resolve it before political attempts to co opt it--and to move towards one's commitments, rather than towards a more immediate and short-term salvation.

Head of State

Posted by: caraprado1 | September 26, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

John "The Stuntman" McGimmick's latest trick is backfiring at his old behind.
I'm waiting for made-up stories of his heroics in making this deal.

Posted by: thor2 | September 26, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company