Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Obama: Debate Should Go On


Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), speaks during a rally in Dunedin, Fla., Sept. 24, 2008. (Chris Carlson/Associated Press)

By Shailagh Murray
CLEARWATER, Fla. -- Speaking to reporters at a hastily called news conference here, Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama said he would press for the Friday debate to go forward. "I believe that we should continue to have the debate," he said. "I think that it makes sense for us to present ourselves before the American people, to talk about the nature of the problems that we're having in our financial system, to talk about how it relates to our global standing in the world, what implications it has for our national security, how it relates to critical questions, like the war in Iraq and Afghanistan."  
           
And if it turns out that the candidates must be present in the Senate on Friday, "We've both got big planes. We've painted our slogans on the sides of them. They can get us from Washington, D.C., to Mississippi fairly quickly."

Nevertheless, Obama and his senior campaign aides were roiled by rival John McCain's announcement, describing it as a stunning twist to what they had thought was unfolding as a quiet and deliberative effort to show bipartisan solidarity before Bush's speech tonight.

In back-to-back news conferences on Tuesday, Obama and McCain outlined nearly identical priorities for what should be included in the bailout legislation, including benefits for taxpayers, restrictions on executive pay, and bipartisan oversight. Later that evening, Obama received a phone message from Sen. Tom Coburn, a conservative Oklahoma Republican he had worked with on previous bills. According to Obama, Coburn suggested that a joint statement outlining these shared principles might be helpful.

Obama raised the issue with a few of his aides, who concurred. At 8:30 a.m. on Wednesday morning, Obama placed a call to McCain to run the idea by him.

"There are times for politics, and then there are times to rise above politics and do what's right for the country. And this is one of those times," Obama explained.

At about 2:30 p.m., Obama was leaving a rally at a minor league baseball stadium in nearby Dunedin, Fla., when McCain returned his call. In a conversation that lasted about five minutes, Obama said the two men discussed the joint statement idea and exchanged contact information so their campaign aides could follow up.

Obama said McCain also raised the idea of suspending his campaign and delaying the debate. Obama said he didn't rule out either option, but told McCain he wanted to see how events unfolded and suggested the candidates first address the immediate priority of speaking with one voice before Bush's address.

But by the time Obama returned to his hotel, about 20 minutes later, McCain had made his announcement. "I thought this was something that he was mulling over," Obama said. "Apparently, this was something that, you know, he was more decisive about in his own mind."

Obama said he was in daily contact with Democratic leaders in Congress and with Paulson, and said he would return to Washington if he thought his presence would be useful in striking a deal. But Obama said that, given the stakes, he viewed the debate as a valuable use of the candidates' time.

"It is going to be part of the president's job to deal with more than one thing at once," he said. "I think there's no reason why we can't be constructive in helping to solve this problem and also tell the American people what we believe, and where we stand, and where we want to take the country."

He continued, "So in my mind, actually, it's more important than ever that we present ourselves to the American people and try to describe where we want to take the country and where we want to take the economy, as well as dealing with some of the issues of foreign policy that were initially the subject of the debate."

A few minutes before Obama addressed reporters, his campaign sent new language for the joint statement to the McCain campaign. When pressed, aides refused to accuse McCain of bad faith.

"There's something bigger going on here," said David Axelrod, Obama's chief political strategist. "We agree on a bunch of principles and it's important that we show that."

By Web Politics Editor  |  September 24, 2008; 6:16 PM ET
Categories:  B_Blog , Barack Obama , The Debates  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: McCain's Aides Give the Tick Tock
Next: Virginians Complain of Obama Lawn Sign Shortage

Comments

skolniks, don't be surprised if McCain wins in a landslide and the Republicans take back at least one of the houses of congress. The ineptitude of the Democrats in congress will be their downfall.

Posted by: rerke | September 25, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

"Who voted for the Gramm-Leach-Bailey act?"

Don, do a little more research...

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00354

The vote you posted was the original measure, the final measure tally with the CRA provisions which are at the heart of this issue is in the above link.


Posted by: rerke | September 25, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

McCain did not put his country first, he put his own a-- first. He is grandstanding and you know it because he's behind in the polls and the lobbyists on his campaign are being revealed as the crooks that they are. You just can't face the fact that you're backing a loser. A loser who has become a changed man in the last 26 hours depending on the way the wind is blowing. And you know damn well that Obama was prepared to drop everything and go back to Washington if needed. There are senators and congresspeople in Washington who were already handling this issue and McCain was not needed. He's a weasel who speaks out of both sides of his mouth. He is panicking and you can see the fear in his eyes - because he knows his precious Republican party led by the monkey in the White House is going down and hard. Thank you.

Posted by: skolniks | September 25, 2008 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Oh come on now!

McSame's financial acumen and expertise are needed RIGHT NOW to rescue our nation!!

...like I was born yesterday.

:-)

Posted by: toritto | September 25, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Gee, a debate is much more important than the fate of our country. Obama is on a power trip and does'nt have the time for such things like country first and loyalty to his country.When he adressed the people of Europe, he said this is our time.Not much loyalty there. And I thought Bill Clinton was self absorbed.

Posted by: Jack | September 25, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

The debate on foreign issues can be put off. Liquidity has to be restored to the financial markets. This issue is being rushed because it's unlike any other financial meltdown in history. The government is being quiet about this because the freeze on capital could crush our overall economy.

Obama and the media are avoiding facing the issue directly because it was squarely caused by the Democrats under Clinton. This is where I have to stick the finger at Bill Clinton for Fannie Mae pushing suspect mortgages, and rewarding lenders for doing so trying to defeat redlining by revising the Community Re-Investment Act. The repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999 was a bipartisan agreement by Phil Grahmm, signed by Bill Clinton and fully funded by citi-bank lobbyists. This was the official de-regulation of banking, yet created many conflicts of interests by banks. Read the laws and how they were changed.

So all you Democrats have to realize that this was caused by your parties Demosocialistic irresponsibility, and the US doesn't need any more of it.

Either you can't read, or don't understand economics. I suggest you all read the laws that were created or modified by the Clinton administration, then sit back and THINK. This is how we got into this mess, and now the same Democrats are asking for oversight? I guess Washington can't learn from mistakes.

I wouldn't let Obama run my business, as he's totally inept at anything but running his mouth. His "Community Organization" is a scam and cost $100 Million dollars and had no results. And that was according to his organizations final report, which CAN'T possibly be spun. Why the Obama media can't ever post the truth is disturbing.
Just READ it and use your heads.

http://ccsr.uchicago.edu/downloads/p62.pdf

Posted by: King Pablo | September 25, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

Wow, I can't believe McCain, this man is the most cynical and craven politician i have seem in my 40 yrs. This latest move, like picking gump Palin, is so calculated, its insulting. Clearly, McCain is trying desperately to save his campaign!! Are you serious that everyone doesn't see this as a bald faced attempt to slow Obama's big Mo! You gotta be kidding me right.
Can anyone tell me why this election is so close again. You and I both know why McCain(the weakest link) is still in this. Grow up America, you have been virtually beat up for the past 8 years from the Bush incompentence and yet you are oblivious and want the same for 4 more years!!
This is incredible on so many levels. We all know why this race is still close. Admit it.

Obama is clearly the best thing since JFK, RFK and WJC. Why, America can't we see that. What a shame!!! I honestly grieve for my country if you elect McCain and Palin.

Posted by: Ron DC | September 25, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Send Sarah.

Posted by: rm | September 25, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Now MCcain is in a hurry to fix something that could have been prevented 8 years ago. NO WAY!!! THE DEBATE HAS TO GO ON!!! SORRY.

Posted by: fernando canavati | September 25, 2008 9:36 AM | Report abuse

Two respected leaders had the opportunity to choose. One chose to play a part in solving one of the greatest challenges this country has ever faced. The other chose to remain in a hotel room and prepare for a debate. McCain chose to take a leadership role and Obama chose to prepare to talk. Politics or not, I will choose leadership over talk.

Posted by: dbc | September 25, 2008 9:00 AM | Report abuse

McClone cannot debate on Friday cos he has been missing his naps and his meds. McBush needs more tutorials on the difference between the SEC and the FEC. He needs to brush up on his flipflops. He was for deregulation for 27 years and now he's against it. He was for his first wife till she got disabled and old, and then he was for the hottie young heiress whom he calls a "CU*T." He was a man of honor till he sold it as a Keating Five money-corrupt greedy pig. He sat on the Straight Talk Express till he changed it for the No Talk Crooked Broken-down Bus. He is Liar-in-Chief, who has put demented self first by choosing a dangerously unprepared conservative moose-shooting, polar-bear-killing, no-family-value, charge-rape vitims-for-their- examinations, dictatorial, loyalty-to-me-first beauty queen to be the first woman president of our beloved country. We are doomed with McSlime at the wheel, recklessly gambling our security like he gambled his five crashed planes.

Posted by: lin | September 25, 2008 8:02 AM | Report abuse

jacksmith is RIGHT..............

McCain Runs And Hides From His Past:

Barack Obama and the democrats are your best hope now. Tell your family, friends, and everyone you know to support them as best you can, and vote for them like your life, and the lives of your loved ones depends on it. Because it does. You will not survive 4 more years of Bush McCain.

Posted by: LKM2 | September 25, 2008 7:43 AM | Report abuse

McCain Runs And Hides From His Past:

John McCain running from the debate with Barack Obama is unacceptable, and COWARDICE! There are over 350 members of congress to deal with the US economic collapse. And even more capital hill aids, advisers, and experts to deal with the economic catastrophe created by the corrupt Bush McCain presidency and the past republican controlled congress.

Every American, and TRUE! patriot needs to demand that John McCain debate Barack Obama and tell the American people how he is going to fix this economic catastrophe that he (John McCain), Bush, and the past Republican controlled congress created.

Contact the news media. Your local papers. And demand that they hold John McCain accountable to debate Barack Obama. Contact all your friends and ask them to do the same. Call your senators, and congressmen and tell them that you expect "Let Them Eat Cake" John McCain to debate Barack Obama on this economic catastrophe that John McCain and "Let Them Eat Cake" BUSH! created.

It's time to get ANGRY! America. Tell John McCain you want answers, and you want those answers NOW!

He can run. But he cant hide anymore.

What ever congress does to try and fix our stunning economic catastrophe needs to be done very carefully. Congress needs to take their time, and be sure of what they are doing. Whatever is done needs to be sharply focused at helping, and protecting the best interest of the ordinary Americans. In particular the vast American middle class. 700 billion dollars is a lot of the peoples money to spend to bail out a bunch of corrupt Bush loan sharks.

My fellow human beings, just as I warned you ahead of this catastrophic economic meltdown, I must now warn you that what is a head has the potential to be even more catastrophic than what we are going through now. The worlds geopolitical landscape has been booby trapped by the Bush McCain administration and their republican allies in congress. These booby traps are poised to spring at any time.

Fortunately the Worlds Nations have been blest with many excellent leaders (except the US) who have been careful, wise, strong, and self-restrained in dealing with the provocations, and antagonism's of the Bush, McCain administration.

Barack Obama and the democrats are your best hope now. Tell your family, friends, and everyone you know to support them as best you can, and vote for them like your life, and the lives of your loved ones depends on it. Because it does. You will not survive 4 more years of Bush McCain.

JACK SMITH - WORKING CLASS...

Posted by: jacksmith | September 25, 2008 7:30 AM | Report abuse

McCain Runs And Hides From His Past:

John McCain running from the debate with Barack Obama is unacceptable, and COWARDICE! There are over 350 members of congress to deal with the US economic collapse. And even more capital hill aids, advisers, and experts to deal with the economic catastrophe created by the corrupt Bush McCain presidency and the past republican controlled congress.

Every American, and TRUE! patriot needs to demand that John McCain debate Barack Obama and tell the American people how he is going to fix this economic catastrophe that he (John McCain), Bush, and the past Republican controlled congress created.

Contact the news media. Your local papers. And demand that they hold John McCain accountable to debate Barack Obama. Contact all your friends and ask them to do the same. Call your senators, and congressmen and tell them that you expect "Let Them Eat Cake" John McCain to debate Barack Obama on this economic catastrophe that John McCain and "Let Them Eat Cake" BUSH! created.

It's time to get ANGRY! America. Tell John McCain you want answers, and you want those answers NOW!

He can run. But he cant hide anymore.

What ever congress does to try and fix our stunning economic catastrophe needs to be done very carefully. Congress needs to take their time, and be sure of what they are doing. Whatever is done needs to be sharply focused at helping, and protecting the best interest of the ordinary Americans. In particular the vast American middle class. 700 billion dollars is a lot of the peoples money to spend to bail out a bunch of corrupt Bush loan sharks.

My fellow human beings, just as I warned you ahead of this catastrophic economic meltdown, I must now warn you that what is a head has the potential to be even more catastrophic than what we are going through now. The worlds geopolitical landscape has been booby trapped by the Bush McCain administration and their republican allies in congress. These booby traps are poised to spring at any time.

Fortunately the Worlds Nations have been blest with many excellent leaders (except the US) who have been careful, wise, strong, and self-restrained in dealing with the provocations, and antagonism's of the Bush, McCain administration.

Barack Obama and the democrats are your best hope now. Tell your family, friends, and everyone you know to support them as best you can, and vote for them like your life, and the lives of your loved ones depends on it. Because it does. You will not survive 4 more years of Bush McCain.

JACK SMITH - WORKING CLASS...

Posted by: jacksmith | September 25, 2008 7:28 AM | Report abuse

It doesn't smack of good leadership for McCain to just suddenly opt out of the debates, esp. given that they were just conferring with the Obama camp about other things. Why couldn't they work out an agreement to suspend the debates, and set up a new schedule for when they would debate and when Palin/Biden would debate? It seems a little hysterical to just decide on your own that the debates must be stopped and leave the other candidate and all the other people involved in setting up the debates (organizers, moderators, media, public) hanging. It would be different if the idea was initiated by President Bush and McCain agreed but Obama didn't. This does seem like McCain acting for some unclear self-interest. Fear about losing numbers in the polls? Worries over Palin's debates? I'm all for them spending time resolving the financial mess, but why not do it in an appropriately non-partisan way? If the economy was that important to McCain, why did he create a contentious situation when there didn't need to be one?

Posted by: george | September 25, 2008 5:49 AM | Report abuse

wow... republicans sink low and just when you think they will go no lower they are making hookers turned out on meth look as wholesome Keebler Elves at snack time... No offense to hookers of course
I feel I have tarnished them to a degree just by mentioning them and repulicans in the same sentence. I apologize

Posted by: Matt | September 25, 2008 4:40 AM | Report abuse

IF YOU DONT VOTE FOR OBAMA YOU ARE A RACSIST!!!

WHITE PEOPLE DONT CARE ABOUT BLACKS!!!

WHITES ARE ALL NEOCONS DEVILS AT HEART.

TIME FOR THE BLACK MAN TO RULE THE USA!!!
--------------------------------------------
Hilarious... I wonder what type of republican nit-wit though he could incite fear by posing as a "scary" african american. Do some more I thought your stero-type was just priceless.. Only a Republican could be so witty and clever.... nice! I think you have a spot on McCains campaign, they are about as clever... cheers and I hope you get hit by a bus... softly

Posted by: erik | September 25, 2008 4:33 AM | Report abuse

Wow. Obama is a statesman and McCain is McCrazy.

Posted by: JakeD | September 25, 2008 2:16 AM | Report abuse

Brock,

Alternate realities must be a very nice place to live, unfortunately it isn't the one the reset of us are in. This is purely and simply a political stunt and most people see that. Even considerable numbers of McCain's own republican colleagues don't much care for him. Why should he be there except after a deal is worked out to vote. Something he hasn't done much of since April.

I can think of several cynical reasons why he would pull this stunt and maybe I should give him more credit. Unfortunately the 2008 version of John McCain hasn't let me down when it comes to cynical acts. He has so completely sold out from the person he was in 2000. Or maybe he has always been this person we just hadn't had the opportunity to see it before.

Posted by: usa3 | September 25, 2008 2:05 AM | Report abuse

I guess you have to see what's important to a person.

McCain goes back to Washington as he has enough seniority and experience to get something done.

Obama wants to debate, because if he hoes back to washington, he has to sit at the little kids table and listen to the adults talk about fixing real problems.

Obama, not a grape jelly, but just as important as one.

Posted by: Brock | September 25, 2008 1:08 AM | Report abuse

But seriously folks....McCain's decision to suspend his campaign is a stunt. It takes the focus off the new poll numbers. They are hoping we will soon forget that he claimed the economy is strong and we just need a Presidential Blue Ribbon Commission to report back in 18 nmonths to tell us what happened. The news about his campaign manager receiving money sounds terrible and no explanation can fool anyone with that news.

So by announcing this suspension thing he can pretend to look Presidential to his faithful flock and become the center of attention. He is garnering more news than the economic crisis.

But the downside is he must perform some miracle and emerge as the key player in resovling this issue while he suspended his campaign. Otherwise he may as well be off duck hunting with Shotgun Dick.

Can the guy who admits he is weak on economic issues pull it off? He is trying to run the table. No results on his part make this grandstanding move quite questionable. Quite confusing. And quite dangerous if the folks in the middle decided it was a hoax to get more attention and their votes.

I would argue its another example of his maverick leadership. If he is willing to put his candidacy on the line with a gutsy but maybe foolish stunt that is doomed from the start, then is he good leader?

He is willing to leave Palin in charge of the US all the while trying to convince us she is presidential material. Again gutsy and ballsy move of the Lt. Commander. But he isn't flying a single seat fighter plane any longer. He wants to be the Captain of a large transport aircraft full of lots of innocent civilians. Total different mindset and rules to live by.

So should he be making gambles like this? If he wins, he is lucky. If he loses he has shown bad judgement with his risky decisions. The odds are against him. And thus against us too.

Bold leader, questionable judgement.

Posted by: patrick10 | September 25, 2008 1:05 AM | Report abuse

Drink that Iraqi blood that was spilled, cheer over the bodies of their dead children and revel in how kind America was to bring that to the Iraqi people.

Good luck with that.

Posted by: JayKay2 | September 25, 2008 12:57 AM | Report abuse

I still think the number one question for McCain or Palin should be 'define victory in Iraq'.

You went in, took out the head guy under false pretenses and then the factions he was balancing went hell for leather on each other.

So just what is victory in Iraq?

I know what neo-con victory in Iraq is - getting trade back to USD from Euros and locking the Iraqi people into an oil law that unduly favors America interests. That is the victory in Iraq.

NOTHING to do with honor, freedom for Iraqi's or any of that other BS.

Posted by: JayKay2 | September 25, 2008 12:54 AM | Report abuse

You really want to be talking about special interets and campaign contributions after McCains campaign manager has been found receiving money from Freddie Mac years after he insisted those payments ended?

Don't do as we do, do as we say.

Posted by: patrick10 | September 25, 2008 12:47 AM | Report abuse

McCain said the fundamentals of the economy is strong. If you buy that I have a bridge in brooklyn to sell you.

Posted by: andy, MI | September 25, 2008 12:40 AM | Report abuse

I like listening to McCain debate. He is good. In fact I think they should have one debate just on the Surge,

We can listen to McCain drone on for hours and hours all about the urge and why Obama refuses to admit it was the turning point of the entire war.

How it was more important than all the Battles for Fallujah. How it was the key to winning the hearts and minds of Anbar province. How it settled the conflicts in Kirkuk between the Shiites and the Kurds. How it settled Sadr City and drove al-Qaeda from Iraq.

The Surge, Boss, the Surge!! Shutup Tattoo. It's an airplane.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 25, 2008 12:39 AM | Report abuse

McCain want to suspend his campaign and let bush fill in.

Posted by: monkeyshine | September 25, 2008 12:35 AM | Report abuse

Anonymous - who is stupid, the people that voted for the guy that said we needed to take special interests out of campaign contributions and then hit it out of the park with fundraising records when he did what members of the status quo (including Clinton) said could not be done? Not much following there was there?

Now that is change you can believe in.

BTW, are you getting enough oxygen to the brain with all that sticking your head in the sand that you are doing?

Posted by: JayKay2 | September 25, 2008 12:33 AM | Report abuse

I read where Obama called McCain and understood why he has suspended his campaign.

Then he suggested McCain suspend if for the next 65 days.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 25, 2008 12:31 AM | Report abuse

Obama is a follower.

How did he become the Democratic nominee for President by being a follower?

Oh that's right, millions of stupid Democrats voted for him. I should have know that answer.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 25, 2008 12:29 AM | Report abuse

"America's 1st Reaction -- Friday's McCain-Obama Debate Should Still Be Held On Friday, But Perhaps with New Focus: Immediately after John McCain's announcement at 3 pm ET today, Wednesday 09/24/08, that he was suspending his campaign and seeking to postpone Friday's scheduled presidential debate, SurveyUSA interviewed 1,000 adults nationwide. Key findings:

A majority of Americans say the debate should be held on Friday. Just 10% say the debate should be postponed. A sizable percentage of Americans, 36%, think the focus of the debate should be modified to focus more on the economy. 3 of 4 Americans say the presidential campaigns should continue. Just 14% say the presidential campaigns should be suspended. If Friday's debate does not take place, 46% of Americans say that would be bad for America."

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportUC.aspx?g=54d651a7-a62b-4420-bb32-9dd6b2df8c02

Posted by: Anonymous | September 25, 2008 12:28 AM | Report abuse

McCain is a compulsive gambler. He need help

Posted by: brock101 | September 25, 2008 12:27 AM | Report abuse

theirs no need to fear sarah parrot is here.

Posted by: brock101 | September 25, 2008 12:25 AM | Report abuse

McCain is scaring bigots into voting for obama. I think obama will win in a land slide. 322 electorial votes.

Posted by: circus monkey | September 25, 2008 12:24 AM | Report abuse

Who voted for the Gramm-Leach-Bailey act?

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=106&session=1&vote=00105

Alphabetical by Senator Name
Abraham (R-MI), Yea
Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Ashcroft (R-MO), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Nay
Bayh (D-IN), Nay
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Breaux (D-LA), Nay
Brownback (R-KS), Yea
Bryan (D-NV), Nay
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burns (R-MT), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Nay
Campbell (R-CO), Yea
Chafee, J. (R-RI), Yea
Cleland (D-GA), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Coverdell (R-GA), Yea
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Daschle (D-SD), Nay
DeWine (R-OH), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Nay
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Edwards (D-NC), Nay
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Fitzgerald (R-IL), Present
Frist (R-TN), Yea
Gorton (R-WA), Yea
Graham (D-FL), Nay
Gramm (R-TX), Yea
Grams (R-MN), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Helms (R-NC), Yea
Hollings (D-SC), Yea
Hutchinson (R-AR), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Not Voting
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Jeffords (R-VT), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Nay
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerrey (D-NE), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Nay
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (D-CT), Nay
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay
Lott (R-MS), Yea
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Mack (R-FL), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Moynihan (D-NY), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Nay
Nickles (R-OK), Yea
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Robb (D-VA), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Roth (R-DE), Yea
Santorum (R-PA), Yea
Sarbanes (D-MD), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Nay
Sessions (R-AL), Yea
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-NH), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Thomas (R-WY), Yea
Thompson (R-TN), Yea
Thurmond (R-SC), Yea
Torricelli (D-NJ), Nay
Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Wellstone (D-MN), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Nay

Posted by: Don | September 25, 2008 12:19 AM | Report abuse

Look guys - it comes down to this. The guy says if US had to stay in Iraq for up to 100 years then so be it, but then McCain rocks up in Iraq and says Iran Shiites are helping Sunni Al Qaeda!!!!

Now NO-ONE would have said that if they had the faintest inkling of what was going on in Iraq, that anyone SHOULD HAVE by now, but PARTICULARLY someone running for President.

McCain SHAMED America when he made that mistake and made himself something to be both feared (for incompetence) and laughed at around the world.

But it is really no laughing matter - he bears the hallmarks of another puppet President. He has the right combination of ignorance and arrogance to continue the destruction of America that happened under Bush.

Now America snubs the rest of the world saying 'elect Obama', the largest debtor nation in the world! Your economy is in tatters and yes, it does fall squarely on Republican philosophies that feed the rich and rape the poor, also taking the lives of the poor in prosecution of their wars that they get rich from, denying the tax on that money to trickle down to those who sacrificed as they send it off to tax havens, sipping on their margaritas, living in their multiple homes, manipulating religion to their purpose, laughing at the everyday fools that supported them.

DO NOT LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN!

You have enough problems on your plate without making it worse because you refuse to pull your head out of the sand. It is going to be a painful course correction on the economy without alienating international support when you are the biggest debtor nation in the world.

For goodness sake - save yourselves! Wise up!

Posted by: JayKay2 | September 25, 2008 12:18 AM | Report abuse

Who said the fundamentals of the economy is strong less then a week ago?

McCain is a poor leader. The more he talk the worse it gets. Is it obama fault mccain is getting bad advice?

McCain is a train wreck.

Posted by: chitown | September 25, 2008 12:16 AM | Report abuse

Lincoln:

By stalling the debate he can wait until the
conversation shifts, and of course the stall
itself is a great way to change the subject.
Answering questions is something he'd like to
avoid. He gets a bonus for hanging out in the
Capitolwhere there are lots of cameras available
for carefully staged photo ops. Add in the
potential no-win situation for the Obama campaign
and he would appear to have won all the way
around.

That all assumes the public doesn't get it,
and that is a big assumption. Letterman already
called him out, the clips are all over the
internet. The blow back should be in full force
tomorrow.


Posted by: dd1 | September 25, 2008 12:16 AM | Report abuse

Thats all mccain do is talk. He rolled the dice boom snake eyes. He did'nt act presidential and now he want to suspend his campaign.

Just because you have a bad week you don't go running to GW.

Posted by: brock101 | September 25, 2008 12:10 AM | Report abuse

Why lead when you can talk about leading?

Sen. Obama offers no solutions for us, just hypotheticals.

This would be the perfect time to put "Change" and "Hope" into practice. Instead, they're still catchphrases.

Posted by: Kid in the crowd | September 24, 2008 11:59 PM | Report abuse

whoever gets in the first sound bite wins?

Things were already in motion with Democrats and Republicans talking.

McCain is grabbing the spot light since his poll numbers are dropping. His handlers are doing right by him. But by calling off the debate could look like he's chickening out. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Posted by: Lincoln | September 24, 2008 11:55 PM | Report abuse

Mark,

Who's fault is this? I agree that the Democrats had a hand in this but so did the Republicans.

Reagan - started deregulation of the banking and investment industries
Clinton - kept going to deregulate the financial sector
The Banks - For loaning out to buyer who could afford loans
Homeowners who got loans for more than they can afford.

There's plenty of blame to go around.

But right now we need to figure a solution to this mess.
I don't think a hand out of 700 billion with no strings attached is the solution. What's your solution?

Posted by: Lincoln | September 24, 2008 11:51 PM | Report abuse

Obama said: "Call me if you need me, John. I'll be around."

LOL! Obama is a joke.


Meanwhile, the real man of the people, John McCain is busting through concrete walls in DC to fix the crisis.


Obama is a follower.


McCain is a leader.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 11:50 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats caused this mess.


In 2003, the Republicans wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused!


Here's the New York Times article from September 11, 2003.


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.


Proof!


The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.


Note the Barney Frank quote on page 2 of the article. It's very revealing!


It was the Democrats who pushed for this deregulation -- because the liberals feared that regulations placed on Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac would deny home loans to poor minorities.


A vote for Obama in November is a vote for unprecedented financial DISASTER. You ain't seen nothing yet!


The Democrats caused this financial mess with their stupid deregulation of the mortgage industry via liberal policies of forcing lenders to lend to poor people who can't possibly pay back.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 11:42 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats caused this mess.


In 2003, the Republicans wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused!


Here's the New York Times article from September 11, 2003.


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.


Proof!


The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.


Note the Barney Frank quote on page 2 of the article. It's very revealing!


It was the Democrats who pushed for this deregulation -- because the liberals feared that regulations placed on Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac would deny home loans to poor minorities.


A vote for Obama in November is a vote for unprecedented financial DISASTER. You ain't seen nothing yet!


The Democrats caused this financial mess with their stupid deregulation of the mortgage industry via liberal policies of forcing lenders to lend to poor people who can't possibly pay back.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 11:40 PM | Report abuse

I can't wait for the treason charges to be brought against Obama for his undermining the agreement and treaty process with Iraq.
It's coming folks....He asked Iraq to stall US troop withdrawl until after he was elected...So he could look like the hero...what a putz.

Posted by: Ron E | September 24, 2008 11:37 PM | Report abuse

Once Mel Brooks played a Young Senator McCain in the movie "History of the
World Part One".

I think his line was "ForK THE POOR!"

It still is.

Posted by: republican | September 24, 2008 11:19 PM | Report abuse

As David Letterman said why don't you go to your bench - Palin - ooops forgot that she lives in a cone of silence

Posted by: Grah | September 24, 2008 11:18 PM | Report abuse

Play pin the depression on the democrat.

we all lose

Posted by: republican | September 24, 2008 11:16 PM | Report abuse

It's time to stick a fork in the John McCain myth.
By now it should be obvious.

What we are seeing here is a man with no
principles and no honor. Every day he gets called
out for lying and yet he just keeps on going.
It's no wonder he doesn't want to debate and
doesn't want to talk to the press.

Cowardice takes many forms, and lying is one them.
Time to see this man for what he is.

Posted by: dd1 | September 24, 2008 11:14 PM | Report abuse

This is another bizarre John McSame stunt. It's frightening that a man with such luney tuney behavior is running for president and has support. I find it very suspicious that McSame wants to reschedule the presidential debate to next thursday - the scheduled date for the vice presidential debate. Could it be that McSame is protecting Pain from having to stand on her own 2 feet and answer questions without being told what to say.... John McSame is a disingenuous buffoon. Like John McSame can go to Washington and save the day when he owns as much responsibility for the financial mess as any other republican.

Posted by: Lois | September 24, 2008 11:08 PM | Report abuse

Obama wasn't concerned with debating McCain in the 10 to 12 Town Hall Settings McCain proposed. So why is it more important to debate now, when the economy is at risk?

McCain = Country First
Obama = Obama first

Looking back at EXACTLY who was responsible for this mess:

Jim Johnson, Chris Dodd, Barney Franks, Franklin Raines, and Jamie Gorelick.

Of Course Obama disagrees!

These people should go to jail for a VERY long time!

Posted by: GeraldD | September 24, 2008 11:01 PM | Report abuse

McCain is a coward. He has shown his true cowardice ways today. Instead of facing the American public on what needs to be done which we as Americans need to hear, he is running from the actual issues and debates. He is rushing to help out his friends at Wall Street. First he and his friends caused the crisis, now he is running to washington to make sure he protects the information and help out his rich friends and screw the american people

Posted by: Rony | September 24, 2008 10:52 PM | Report abuse

McCain advisor Phil Gramm's bank deregulation and Enron loophole have facilitated the republicans' looting of the economy.
How to throw up a smoke screen? Simple.
Act crazy and call off the campaign and the debates.
McCain- Insane in the Damn-Brain.

Posted by: seems to me | September 24, 2008 10:44 PM | Report abuse

"John McCain, like George Bush, insisted on forcing deregulation of the banks on the country. They and their friends in the republican party have profited obscenely driving millions of families into debt and foreclosure."

It's not deregulation that caused this, it's the lack of congressional over-site on the part of both parties. They were responsible for making sure this didn't happen. BTW many in the Democratic party profited obscenely as well. To put it all on the republicans is being very dishonest. Families are in debt and foreclosure because they were living beyond their means, not because of any thing these banks did. Just as always it's the governments fault when people do stupid stuff huh? How about people take responsibility for their own stupid actions?Lastly the de-regulation took place in 1999, long before Bush took office...think about that.

Posted by: Ron E | September 24, 2008 10:44 PM | Report abuse

McCain is afraid to debate because he knows he is behind this deregulation mess!

Posted by: Don | September 24, 2008 10:37 PM | Report abuse

Let's elect McCain, the guy who can't walk and chew gum at the same time.

It's not like we might ever face two crises at the same time, or anything.

Posted by: drossless | September 24, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

Quote Obama: "With respect to the debates, it’s my belief that this is exactly the time when the American people need to hear from the person who, in approximately 40 days, will be responsible for dealing with this mess."

Actually B.O. whom ever should win 40 days from now won't be responsible until the end of January next year, what an arrogant empty hole in the ground. But he is right people need to hear from the person who will be responsible in February of next year. The best way to hear from them is to go do your job and try to fix the problem.

Posted by: Ron E | September 24, 2008 10:32 PM | Report abuse

John McCain, like George Bush, insisted on forcing deregulation of the banks on the country. They and their friends in the republican party have profited obscenely driving millions of families into debt and foreclosure.
Hiding behind false patriotism, he, like
Bush, will bear most of blame for America's financial downfall.
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
After 26 years in power so is John McCain corrupted.

Posted by: seems to me | September 24, 2008 10:26 PM | Report abuse

Obama08:

I heard your press conference today. Do you REALLY think the President-Elect gets any Constitutional authority in "some 40 days"?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 10:25 PM | Report abuse

seems to me, WE KNOW NOW.

Posted by: mavisdarling | September 24, 2008 10:20 PM | Report abuse

Sadly, now the rescue package has become all about politics. Just keep in mind that America won't die because GWBush's corrupt deal.. supported by McCain... doesn't pass on Friday. Our country will still be here next Monday. The good thing is, election day will be even closer and we can finally eject all the corrupt Republicans from office including McCain. America will be a better place for it.

Posted by: David S. Robins | September 24, 2008 10:20 PM | Report abuse

I'm getting worried. Sarah Palin seems like the mature,level headed one on the republican ticket today.
What I'm trying to say is; If McCain goes crazy, how will we know?

Posted by: seems to me | September 24, 2008 10:17 PM | Report abuse

OBAMA FIRST!

Love me like I love me.

Who gives a damn about this country as long as I preside.

Am I even required to visit the Oval Office every day?

The Pres does not need to vote, right? So I don't need to say present anymore.

I am Barack Obama, I love myself and I approve this message.

Posted by: Obama08 | September 24, 2008 10:16 PM | Report abuse

Just for fun, let's talk about Warren Buffett, who is one of Obama's economic advisers. Buffett endorsed Obama months ago.

Buffett is the second richest man in America. Yesterday, he infused 5 BILLION dollars into Goldman-Sachs on Wall Street to avoid another bankruptcy. As a good patriot, Warren did what he had to do. He stepped up to the plate. Yeah, he will make money, but he also took a big risk on a flailing corporation.

Buffett predicted this Wall Street meltdown long ago. It's no coincidence that Warren Buffett, friend of Obama, is in the news today as the White Knight of Goldman, the SAME day McCain pulls this stunt.

Just a note about Buffett: He is filthy rich, but he also realizes that the little people are the backbone of the country. He believes the filthy rich, INCLUDING himself, should pay much higher taxes. It's the PATRIOTIC thing to do.

McCain isn't being patriotic, he is shirking his responsibility to debate.

Posted by: mavisdarling | September 24, 2008 10:15 PM | Report abuse

It appears to me that Mark could be you know who??? "It's gotta be my way or no way"
This is definately what can be expected of a neo-con. The republicans have been caught and do not like it!!

Posted by: LKM2 | September 24, 2008 10:15 PM | Report abuse

Ron E - you're right that greed and corruption is not limited to Republicans. But if you want to choose which party is most responsible for the deregulation and huge corruption that is demolishing the markets on a scale never seen before and will eventually trash the US dollar - as well as the war based on proven Presidential misrepresentations that killed so many and has also been filled with tremendous corruption and theft from the Treasury with contracts to big Republican donors - then it's absolutely no contest. Republicans win hands down.

Posted by: kelvinator | September 24, 2008 10:13 PM | Report abuse

Only republicans call Obama "the one"

you are no independent.

Posted by: Gary | September 24, 2008 10:12 PM | Report abuse

"Now I would say to any Republican that is on a modest income but has supported Republicans because of your religious beliefs, please wake up!

They co-opted your positions to get your vote, they manipulated religious beliefs to their purpose and then acted with unbridled greed."


Sounds like the Democrats class warfare ploy has taken over your brain....Very nice. Remember Democrats were running Fanny and Freddie and took huge severance packages when they left? Unbridled greed is not limited to Republicans I'm afraid.

Posted by: Ron E | September 24, 2008 10:08 PM | Report abuse

When asked by Jay Leno "for one million dollars how many houses do you own?" McCain came up with a answer that made no sense. He said when he was a POW he had no kitchen table or chairs in his little cell. It effectively blocked any further discussion but it raised the question of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and what makes McCain tick.

His erratic behavior and bad temperament have been explained away as that of a "maverick", but many of his colleagues think otherwise.

The bizarre way he has run his campaign has been mind-boggling.
First he was all about deregulation.
Then experience was his name.
Then he was drill here, drill now.
Then he was Born Again Change.
Then he was a Palin feminist.
Then he was The One to catch Bin Laden.
Then he was about "sound fundamentals"

Lately he has been the man with a plan to regulate his financial meltdown.

Finally he wants to postpone the campaign and the debates so as to force "the fix" down the country's throat.

When McCain debates Obama, watch for signs senility and madness.

Posted by: seems to me | September 24, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

McCain is pulling another fast one; flying back to Washington on Thursday, when most of the work has already been done, conveniently avoiding the debate but making it look like he's really needed in Washington, which he ISN'T.

If McCain was REALLY needed, I'm sure his party would have called him back LAST WEEK. He is NOT on the Banking Committee. What is he going to DO, exactly??

If McCain doesn't show up to the debate, Obama can use that time to address the American people. I'm sure the debate organizers will happily give him that forum if McCain stands them up.

Posted by: mavisdarling | September 24, 2008 10:03 PM | Report abuse

Whoops Mccain's doing it again trying to bail out of a debate when he is falling behind in the polls.

McCain is a fraud he has so many skeltons in his closet he got alot of nerve to try to tie Senator Obama with Freddie Mac & Fannie Mae dealings.

What about the scandel with Keating 5 Senator McCain was involved in it up to his neck he got a pass in the S&L scam.

For all of the McCainans you should know your history before critsizing Senator Obama.

McCain can't win on the economny so he uses silly ploys to cover up his mishaps.

Let's take a look at McCains bad judgment calls.

Announces Sarah Palin as VP.
States the econmony is strong.
Blames the media for bashing Sarah.
Cancels the debate on short notice.
Too many gaffes to mention....

Posted by: Jacie- California | September 24, 2008 9:59 PM | Report abuse

Reply to MKoch: Everything you say is the absolute TRUTH!!! I agree with you 100%.

Posted by: LKM2 | September 24, 2008 9:58 PM | Report abuse

Once again, here is the Republican policy stance, based on conservative economic theory. You'll find it mirrors precisely the crises we are currently experiencing.

"Government interference in the markets exacerbates problems in the marketplace and causes the free market to take longer to correct itself.""

– The 2008 Republican Party Platform, adopted earlier this month.

Liberals believe in regulations. In 2003, Republicans controlled all three branches of government. They had the ability to override Democrats, and often did.

Think a little before you post.

Posted by: MKoch | September 24, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who pays attention to the big picture knows very well that the Repubs, while talking a good game about "elitists and intellectuals" to stir up hate in evangelicals and small towners, is the party of the rich and has been forever. It's amazing that they can fool people as well as they can to even consider another view.

They deregulated this country into the ground before the Depression and the did it again since Reagan with the help of Clinton who actually did a good job of supporting alot of Republican BS.

Now, thanks to their "free market is God and gov't is always bad" philosophy, they've cratered the US economy in a way so huge that few understand it yet, but that our grandchildren will still be dealing with many years from now.

It's no accident that they oppose every support for the poorest of us all - no healthcare, a birthright in every other developed country, no minimum wage, privatized social security so we can turn that over to their Wall Street buddies.

Now they want to cover their tracks but good. They deserve to be booted out on their rear ends - and after all we've been through, if Americans can't see clearly enough to do that, I feel sorry for what will become of us and the country.

Posted by: kelvinator | September 24, 2008 9:57 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Jake D. The debate is set for Friday.

McCain is flying back to Washington on THURSDAY.

ONE DAY BEFORE THE DEBATE.

Get a grip, Jake D. McCain is finished.

Posted by: mavisdarling | September 24, 2008 9:55 PM | Report abuse

Mark, copy & paste are good tools, and I'm happy you were able to master them, but you need to work on your content.

Once you've been proven to be wrong, repeating the same stuff again and again make you sound like a four year old.

If that's the face you want to put on conservatism, that's all well and good, but you're not convincing anyone that you're right, just that you're repetitive and a little slow.

Posted by: MKoch | September 24, 2008 9:53 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats caused this mess.


In 2003, the Republicans wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused!


Here's the New York Times article from September 11, 2003.


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.


Proof!


The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.


Note the Barney Frank quote on page 2 of the article. It's very revealing!


It was the Democrats who pushed for this deregulation -- because the liberals feared that regulations placed on Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac would deny home loans to poor minorities.


A vote for Obama in November is a vote for unprecedented financial DISASTER. You ain't seen nothing yet!


The Democrats caused this financial mess with their stupid deregulation of the mortgage industry via liberal policies of forcing lenders to lend to poor people who can't possibly pay back.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 9:49 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats caused this mess.


In 2003, the Republicans wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused!


Here's the New York Times article from September 11, 2003.


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.


Proof!


The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.


Note the Barney Frank quote on page 2 of the article. It's very revealing!


It was the Democrats who pushed for this deregulation -- because the liberals feared that regulations placed on Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac would deny home loans to poor minorities.


A vote for Obama in November is a vote for unprecedented financial DISASTER. You ain't seen nothing yet!


The Democrats caused this financial mess with their stupid deregulation of the mortgage industry via liberal policies of forcing lenders to lend to poor people... who can't possibly pay back.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 9:47 PM | Report abuse

Mark, reposting the same confused post doesn't bolster your argument.

"We do not support government bailouts of private institutions. Government interference in the markets exacerbates problems in the marketplace and causes the free market to take longer to correct itself."

– The 2008 Republican Party Platform, adopted earlier this month.


Your post reminds of what my conservative friends told me in 1992 - that if Clinton were elected, I had better move to Canada because the United States was finished. Instead, we had the best decade economically and socially in recent history, with expansion rivaling the post war boom.

Of course, these conservative friends also told me Saddam had WMDs and that Iraq would be a "cakewalk", so forgive me if I fail to appreciate your dire predictions.

Posted by: MKoch | September 24, 2008 9:43 PM | Report abuse

Mark, I'm just adding my voice to the chorus that is singing about how big a fraud and liar you are.

You are wrong Wrong WRONG!

Republicans got us into this mess. Do some research on the Republican platform. They wanted less regulation. Less regulation directly led us into this mess.

Now, Republicans are asking YOU (and me) to pay a trillion dollars in new taxes to fix their mess.

Get a CLUE!

Posted by: mark, how stupid do you think we are? | September 24, 2008 9:41 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats caused this mess.


In 2003, the Republicans wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused!


Here's the New York Times article from September 11, 2003.


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.


Proof!


The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.


Note the Barney Frank quote on page 2 of the article. It's very revealing!


It was the Democrats who pushed for this deregulation -- because the liberals feared that regulations placed on Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac would deny home loans to poor minorities.


A vote for Obama in November is a vote for unprecedented financial DISASTER. You ain't seen nothing yet!


The Democrats caused this financial mess with their stupid deregulation of the mortgage industry via liberal policies of forcing lenders to lend to poor people who can't possibly pay back.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

I call BS on those trying to blame this on the democrats based on a 2004 scenario. Note the key word 'affordable housing' for low income people - not unaffordable. Note also that the price of homes continued to shoot up after 2004 and I don't see the Dems as having a crystal ball do you? Note also that in 2004 the Republicans were controlling the majority in the house and the presidency. If the Reps had wanted those measures to be passed they would have been passed - so stop with the BS already.

Posted by: JayKay2 | September 24, 2008 9:40 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats caused this mess.


In 2003, the Republicans wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused!


Here's the New York Times article from September 11, 2003.


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.


Proof!


The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.


Note the Barney Frank quote on page 2 of the article. It's very revealing!


It was the Democrats who pushed for this deregulation -- because the liberals feared that regulations placed on Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac would deny home loans to poor minorities.


A vote for Obama in November is a vote for unprecedented financial DISASTER. You ain't seen nothing yet!


The Democrats caused this financial mess with their stupid deregulation of the mortgage industry via liberal policies of forcing lenders to lend to poor people... who can't possibly pay back.


Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 9:38 PM | Report abuse

It is apparent that McCain is not in his right mind. He is so wishy washy, flippy floppy. This is a no brainer that the debate should go on. He strongly sends the message that he, McCain, could not handle a debate with an intellectual and is clearly not prepared. This is obviously a GWB move, "It's gotta be my way or no way!"
When are people going to wake up and smell the lies, greed and inability to lead???? It does not take a genius to see this.

Posted by: lkm2 | September 24, 2008 9:37 PM | Report abuse

Mark, you're a little confused. It's liberal policy to believe that markets need regulation, it's conservative policy to believe deregulation improves the marketplace.

"We do not support government bailouts of private institutions. Government interference in the markets exacerbates problems in the marketplace and causes the free market to take longer to correct itself."

– The 2008 Republican Party Platform, adopted earlier this month.

Posted by: MKoch | September 24, 2008 9:35 PM | Report abuse

The people who are trying to blame this current crises on Clinton puzzle me.

It's not as if there weren't six solid years of solid conservative power, and it's not as if the Bush Administration had any problem reversing other Clinton initiatives. They reversed many. But from retaliating on Bin Ladin (for the Cole,) to the economy, the Republicans had six years with no opposition and two more years with tepid opposition to "right" things. (Eight months to retaliate on the Cole bombing, before 9-11.)

They chose not to.

There are certainly bi-partisan roots to the entire economic problem, but it comes from an abandonment of liberal philosophy and an embracing of conservative attitudes.

The market needs regulation, or it becomes subject to uncontrolled bubbles and collapses.


Posted by: MKoch | September 24, 2008 9:32 PM | Report abuse

mavisdarling:

The debate had been set for Friday, not tomorrow.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 9:31 PM | Report abuse

FACT:


The Democrats caused this mess.


In 2003, the Republicans wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused!


Here's the New York Times article from September 11, 2003.


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123B F932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.


Proof!


The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.


Note the Barney Frank quote on page 2 of the article. It's very revealing!


It was the Democrats who pushed for this deregulation -- because the liberals feared that regulations placed on Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac would deny home loans to poor minorities.


A vote for Obama in November is a vote for unprecedented financial DISASTER. You ain't seen nothing yet!


The Democrats caused this financial mess with their stupid deregulation of the mortgage industry via liberal policies of forcing lenders to lend to poor people... who can't possibly pay back.


Consider liberalism as a fiscal policy debunked!

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 9:31 PM | Report abuse

PEOPLE: There is not much McCain can do except stall things further if he goes back. He is NOT on the Senate Banking Committee that is handling this.

GET A GRIP PEOPLE!

He did this ONE DAY before the debate.

Too little, too late. He "rushes" back to Washington NOW to "Save The Day"? If he was serious, he should have done this last week.

It's another gimmick. Don't fall for it.
Let the old fart DEBATE TOMORROW!!

He is trampling on a very sacred institution: The Presidential Debate.

We The People deserve to hear the debate, AS PLANNED. We bought the beer and chips already!!!!!

Posted by: mavisdarling | September 24, 2008 9:24 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: The Real One | September 24, 2008 9:07 PM

"WHITE PEOPLE DONT CARE ABOUT BLACKS!!!
WHITES ARE ALL NEOCONS DEVILS AT HEART.

TIME FOR THE BLACK MAN TO RULE THE USA!!!"

A little obvious, no? This is obviously a GOP troll. Sorry, we have brains. I think it was obvious from the Democratic convention that Obama has support from people from all walks of life.

Posted by: Ryan | September 24, 2008 9:19 PM | Report abuse

Speaktruth, whoops you got your facts wrong, Clinton never vetoed the bill, it passed congress by a veto proof bipartisan majority. In addition former Clinton Treasury Secretaries Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers, both Obama advisers, supported and helped negotiate the bill. At the November 1999 signing of the legislation, Summers praised it as “a major step forward to the 21st century.”

Please look up "Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act"

Posted by: Ron E | September 24, 2008 9:19 PM | Report abuse

Now I would say to any Republican that is on a modest income but has supported Republicans because of your religious beliefs, please wake up!

They co-opted your positions to get your vote, they manipulated religious beliefs to their purpose and then acted with unbridled greed. Remember that saying that money is the root of all evil? Some serious greed/evil has been done and it has a terrific price for the people to pay.

One of the defining moments in the life of Jesus was when he cleared the temple of money makers. Christians, you need to clear the temple of the money makers.

Posted by: JayKay2 | September 24, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

feastorfamine - I'm not in favor of anyone who repeatedly pastes ultra long posts in a format like this - I don't have problems with long written posts, it's the repeated pasting that jams other people.

Posted by: kelvinator | September 24, 2008 9:09 PM

--------------------
What you dont get Kev is that is EXACTLY why i was posting. Annonymous was posting and entire article OVER and OVER, the same article from the New York times suggesting that deregulation was somehow a Dem platform and a matter of policy. PURE RUBBISH so i posted a lifetime of McCain deregulation quotes in the same fashion. See its called fighting fire with fire. No offense but i dont need to be lectured on blogging etiquette. I say this with the uttmost respect to a fellow proggressive.

Posted by: feastorafamine | September 24, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Senator McCain, there's no time out when one is President. You have to be prepared to be engaged with more than one crisis at once. (i.e. dealing with North Korea/Iran/Afghanistan/Iraq/Economy).

We understand your scared about your upcoming debate, but just take your medicine that's about to be dealt out.....

Posted by: Ryan | September 24, 2008 9:16 PM | Report abuse

Economy Scheconomy. Did you hear the news? Clay Aiken is gay! I think both campaigns should take a week off to assess this situation.

Posted by: IvanH | September 24, 2008 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Man, it's too bad that John McCain didn't invent a way to stay in touch with people while not in their presence or at home.

OH, WAIT....

Posted by: Rich | September 24, 2008 9:13 PM | Report abuse

It's just awful fishy-looking that McCain has to go back to Washington THE DAY BEFORE the debates. Like, why didn't he do this LAST week, or on Monday?

Economics is not his strong point. He's not on the Banking Committee and neither is Obama. How exactly were they supposed to help? Sounds like a case of 'too little, too late'.

And anyway, people don't like it when big events get cancelled. People get upset. He's dodging.

Posted by: mavisdarling | September 24, 2008 9:10 PM | Report abuse

feastorfamine - I'm not in favor of anyone who repeatedly pastes ultra long posts in a format like this - I don't have problems with long written posts, it's the repeated pasting that jams other people.

Posted by: kelvinator | September 24, 2008 9:09 PM | Report abuse

IF YOU DONT VOTE FOR OBAMA YOU ARE A RACSIST!!!

WHITE PEOPLE DONT CARE ABOUT BLACKS!!!

WHITES ARE ALL NEOCONS DEVILS AT HEART.

TIME FOR THE BLACK MAN TO RULE THE USA!!!

Posted by: The Real One | September 24, 2008 9:07 PM | Report abuse

I don't know what you are all so worried about. Mr. McCain is simply doing what is needed to save his beloved country from peril. Mr. McCain is a man of principle! He said so. He is a war hero for GODS SAKE! He gets to be angry and self righteuos about his sacrfice for the REST of his LIFE, and we need to NEVER FORGET that 35 years ago he suffered for all of us!!
We might as well accept that he is, at the moment, the closest living example to Jesus Christ that we have. Selflessly giving up on his own personal ambitions to make yet another sacrifice for the country that he loves. Shame on all you liberal pinkos for suspecting Mr. MCain of political sleaze tactics! Wake up people- he is our country's savior! We need to wake up and smell the proverbial coffee before it is too late. EVERYTHING he does is for the love of his fellow citizens- just like JESUS! Like when he dumped his first wife and abandonded his children to hook up with a younger super rich trophy wife with a famiily fortune built on liquor distribution-THAT was for the love of his country!! Or when he was indicted for the last financial meltdown that rocked our country-Mr. McCain was one of the Keating Five as you may recall- he was personally indicted for influence peddling to bankers making illegal and fraudulent use of our money. That was for the love of his country too! And who could forget when Mr. McCain voted AGAINST having a day set aside to honor Martin Luther King!? Now if that isn't LOVE of your country, really, WHAT WAS IT?! And if you should have any more doubt that EVERYTHING Mr. McCain does is for the LOVE of his country-- well, just LOOK at the most important decision of his entire campaign- the choice of our next Vice President! Wow. Mr. McCain chose, out of love for ALL of us, a person who will step in and stand as our nation's COMMANDER IN CHIEF (just in case the 72 year old 4 time cancer victim with early warning signs of mild onset of senile dementia should have some unfortunate health "event" occur for example).__She is SO INCREDIBLY CAPABLE she needs to be SHIELDED from the press!! No doubt Mr. McCain did this to PROTECT us all from her AWESOMENESS!! She is a PITBULL IN LIPSTICK! Oh my GOD that is SO EXCITING!! MR McCain keeps saying he just cannot WAIT to introduce "Sarah" to Washington! And now I CAN"T WAIT EITHER!! Mr. McCain chose her as the MOST capable, the most prepared, the best and brightest person out of an entire country of potential candidates. She MUST BE INCREDIBLE! I know, because EVERYTHING Mr. McCain does is for the LOVE of his country. He said so, and I believe him.

Posted by: thinktwice | September 24, 2008 9:07 PM | Report abuse

Oddly, McCain was doing far better than he had any right to, up until last week. Then he had to repeat and repeat statements that the media had already debunked as untrue. That was the beginning. Now his attempt to escape debate, after spending months accusing Obama of dodging debates just comes off as sad and embarrassing.

Oh, he'll try to pass it off as doing his duty or some such thing, but what he needed to accomplish would have been done, bi-partisanship and all, by issuing the joint statement with Obama.

Showing up on the Senate floor to say the same thing is just grandstanding, while managing to dodge a debate with a more polished, articulate speaker.

The people who are claiming this has turned them off of Obama were never going to vote for him anyway. These "PUMAs" and "centrists" are Republican volunteers, paid to barrage blogs and newspapers. They've been outed.

Posted by: MKoch | September 24, 2008 9:06 PM | Report abuse

feastorfamine and anonymous have been reported to Washington Post abuse for cramming activities (pasting long posts to push down and obliterate others). Like the McCain campaign, they attempt to drown out other views and the truth by making loud, obnoxious noises.

Posted by: kelvinator | September 24, 2008 9:00 PM
----------------------
The truth is ugly isnt it? By the way saying i am like the McCain campaign only proves you arent actually reading my posts. If you HAD you would see that my posts are in response to annonymous's continual posts about ONE article, while my posts are quotes from McCains ENTIRE political lifetime of deregulation.

Posted by: feastorafamine | September 24, 2008 9:04 PM | Report abuse

Speaktruth
This bailout bill is much more than bush's legacy. It gives unquestioned powers to the secretary of treasury it's being rushed for the same reason the patriot act was. not only that but the climate is similarly polarized in that there is an attempt by the whitehouse to say if you arent for this bill you arent for the economy

Posted by: Charlie | September 24, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Clearly the whining dem "kelvinator" has never heard of free IP anonymizing. Complain all you want. LMAO

But to more important matters: BWAHAHAHAHAHA. The rank novice Obama has just announced (reported by CNN) that HE will "now go to Washington." Way to go, demrats, caught flatfooted and clueless again, playing catchup, or should I say "catcher" which is what you always do best.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

People also have to remember that both McCain and Obama are not on the economic boards of their respective congress members and George W Bush is STILL the president. This situation has arisen under his watch and it is being dealt with in a bi-partisan manner by the people currently charged with dealing with this issue.

The idea that McCain, deregulator and someone who does not know much about the economy, charging to Washington as somehow being critical to sort of this issue, is laughable. It is political posturing and as fairly pointed out by senior democrats who are charged with dealing with this issue, it would just be a photo op, bring the campaign to Washington at a delicate time to gain points, stunt. There is NOTHING honorable in that.

As senators, if they are called to the vote, they shall go to the vote, but the idea that a campaign must be suspended and a debate canceled is not necessary. McCain does not have the power of veto, neither does Obama, their votes at this point are the same as any other senator.

If it was the case that the campaigns needed to be suspended then this should have happened immediately upon the bailout first being proposed. It did not happen that way - so this is political opportunism and nothing more.

I saw this issue arising two years ago - I saw this coming. I'm sure I am not the only one - something had to give, it just happens to be giving in large style right now. I think there are more blows ahead, the bailout idea will not be the end of it, and as unpalatable as reality is, you still need to choose the next leader of your country.

Posted by: JayKay2 | September 24, 2008 9:03 PM | Report abuse

I agree. The debates should go on.
It's been planned for months.
TV time has been booked on all the major networks.
The location has been booked
Families all across America had planned on sitting down in front of the television and making up their minds about the candidates.
Anyone with any sense of organization knows that you just don't up and cancel something that involves so many people...and do it unilaterally.

It's like planning wedding and the bride says she's not showing up at the last minute because she has important things to do at work.

Come on. Multitask!!

Posted by: Norris Hall | September 24, 2008 9:02 PM | Report abuse

IF YOU DONT VOTE FOR OBAMA YOU ARE A RACSIST!!!
Posted by: The Real One | September 24, 2008 8:49 PM
~~~~~~~
I guess that makes me a racist now. I will wear the banner proudly. I voted for a Democrat in the Primaries. I was waiting for one of them to take the reins and show they were ready to actually serve. Lead. To show us we would be right to place our confidence in them. To work across the table in this crisis for "US". To place this country and her people above himself. One man just did McCain. He has earned my vote.

Posted by: Crickets | September 24, 2008 9:02 PM | Report abuse

During the taping of tonight's show, Letterman told the audience that McCain had called him personally to apologize for standing him up and said he was rushing to the airport to get back to Washington. The late-night host called McCain “an honest-to-God hero,” and questioned why he needed to halt his campaign. Couldn’t his running mate, Sarah Palin, take over while he was in Washington? Letterman asked.

“I’m more than a little disappointed by John’s behavior,” he said. “Is he suspending the campaign. because there’s an economic crisis or his poll numbers are sliding?” “You don’t suspend your campaign,” Letterman added. “Do you suspend your campaign? No, because that makes me think, well, you know, maybe there will be other things down the road if he’s in the White House, he could just suspend being president. I mean, we've got a guy like that now!” And guess who would replace him?

Things got worse for McCain when Letterman, in the midst of interviewing substitute guest Keith Olbermann, learned that the GOP candidate was actually still in New York, about five blocks away at the CBS News headquarters, sitting down for a last-minute exclusive interview with Katie Couric.

Incredulous, Letterman interrupted his chat with Olbermann to show the audience a live shot on the internal CBS news feed of McCain getting touched up by a makeup artist as he waited to talk to Couric. “He doesn’t seem to be racing to the airport, does he?” Letterman said, shouting at the television monitor: “Hey John, Do you need a ride to the airport?”

Posted by: jack | September 24, 2008 9:02 PM | Report abuse

Amerikkkans (all humans actually) are by and large dumb as dirt. It is to be on the outside to be intelligent. What is one to do? "Forgive them cause they know not what they do" as they hammer in the nails. THIS MEANS YOU, ignorant christians, dogmatic herd. When is the last tim eYOU knocked over a change table? You miss the whole point. You are not going to be "saved" from yourself, you are basically too stupid.

Posted by: Miss Guided Missive | September 24, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

"He is going to make us all even and get rid of rich people that are greedy. We need the government to help give poor people more instead of ignoring us."


So you support a policy of stealing money from people who work for it and giving that money to those that don't. This is known as legal plunder...

Posted by: Ron E | September 24, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

feastorfamine and anonymous have been reported to Washington Post abuse for cramming activities (pasting long posts to push down and obliterate others). Like the McCain campaign, they attempt to drown out other views and the truth by making loud, obnoxious noises.

Posted by: kelvinator | September 24, 2008 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Obama's is finished now to the swing votes. I thought he stood for hope but clearly he's not interested in bi-partisan problem solving. He's not even interested in being a senator in this crisis. His only focus is on promoting his own ambitions. It's a sad day today and I won't be voting for him.

Posted by: Kate | September 24, 2008 8:57 PM | Report abuse

John McCain knew this next day of reckoning was coming, the day of the first debate. He is trying to get out of the debate by using the financial crisis as an excuse. Get on with the talking, the debate, old man. Take your Geritol and pep up. McCain is hoping to postpone the debate until after the financial situation has been taken care of; that would take away from Obama's strength and even out the playing field. Step up and look presidential. John McCain is trying to take away Obama's momentum. Make that geezer debate. Good for you Barack. Barack for president. Oh by the way, that McCain is such a liar about everything. And Palin too.

Posted by: RadianChalant | September 24, 2008 8:57 PM | Report abuse

Whoops, anonymous, you got your facts wrong. while the debacle did, in fact, get its start in the Clinton years, Congress was controlled by the republicans and Clinton vetoed the deregulatory bill and congress overrode the veto.

Posted by: Speaktruth | September 24, 2008 8:57 PM | Report abuse

Obama, get used to it. McCain's been sticking it to his fellow Republicans after agreeing in private to something else for years. He has 2 faces and then some.

Posted by: justme | September 24, 2008 8:57 PM | Report abuse

LITTLE GEMS ARE LARGER THAN THE THINGS YOU HAVE HANGING BETWEEN YOUR LEGS

How about this New York Times example of the traitorous DemRats and their risky schemes?

------------------------
Thats all you got? ONE article?
WHOOHOO!
How about some brand NEW quotes i havent posted yet? How about a LIFETIME of blocking regulation by McCain and the GOP?

McCain: “I Am A Deregulator. I Believe In Deregulation.” While speaking about the cable and satellite television during an appearance on CNN’s “On the Money,” John McCain said, “I am a deregulator. I believe in deregulation.” [CNN, “In the Money,” 7/13/03]

McCain: “The Basic Core Principles Of The Republican Party… Less Government Is Best Government, Less Regulation.” When asked how the Republican Party can recover after the losses in the 2006 election, John McCain said, “By returning to the basic core principles of the Republican Party, very careful stewardship of tax dollars, less government is best government, less regulation, lower taxes, strong national defense, community and family values.” [CNN, “CNN Newsroom,” 11/8/06]

McCain: “I Have A Long Voting Record In Support Of Deregulation.” The St. Petersburg Times quoted McCain at a Senate Commerce Committee hearing as having said, “I have a long voting record in support of deregulation.” [St. Petersburg Times, 6/5/03]

McCain: “I Continue To Believe In A Strong National Defense, Free Trade, Deregulation.” During an appearance on CNN’s “Wolf Blitzer Reports,” John McCain said, “I continue to believe in a strong national defense, free trade, deregulation. I’m pro-life. There are many, many issues that I feel would make it very difficult for Democrats to embrace me.” [CNN, “Wolf Blitzer Reports,” 5/8/02; emphasis added]

McCain: “Keep The Regulation Of The Government As Much As Possible Out Of People’s Lives.” During an appearance on PBS’s “NewsHour with Jim Lehrer,” John McCain said, “If you inspect my 17-year voting record, it’s a proud conservative Republican who acts on principles and one who obviously has a very strong commitment to the leadership role the United States has to play… I think that’s probably one of our first efforts - keep the regulation of the government as much as possible out of people’s lives.” [PBS, “NewHour with Jim Lehrer,” 2/2/00]

McCain: “I Believe In Smaller Government… Less Regulation.” During an interview on PBS’s “NewsHour with Jim Lehrer,” John McCain said, “, I would argue that I have 17 years of legislative experience with a clear voting record of a strong conservative. I believe in smaller government, stronger defense, lower taxes, less regulation, encouragement of entrepreneurship, encouragement of legal immigration. I think that my fundamental philosophies and beliefs are very clear, and I’ve articulated them for years and years. And most importantly, I voted on them.” [PBS, “NewsHour with Jim Lehrer,” 10/15/99]

McCain: “I’ve Been A Good Party Member. I Agree On Most Issues, Fundamentals Of Lower Taxes, Less Regulation.” During an appearance on CNN’s “Crossfire,” John McCain said, “I’ve been a good party member. I agree on most issues, fundamentals of lower taxes, less regulation, smaller government, coherent foreign policy, strong national defense.” [CNN, “Crossfire,” 9/13/99]

McCain Supports Deregulation Whenever Possible. The Journal of Commerce reported, “A McCain aide notes in the past he has supported deregulation of other industries. ‘Any time you can responsibly deregulate, Sen. McCain wants to deregulate,’ the aide said.” [Journal of Commerce, 1/6/97]

I HAVE MORE BUDDY.....
GOT ANYTHING MORE BUT ONE ARTICLE?
OR JUST MORE INSULTS?
I have a LIFETIME of quotes for ya

Posted by: feastorafamine | September 24, 2008 8:56 PM | Report abuse

Bush is the worst president in American history. Hoover can finally rest in peace.

Posted by: hamishdad | September 24, 2008 8:55 PM | Report abuse

I think this is the end of McCain's campaign. He jumped the shark last week and this just ends it. You can try to paint it differently if you like, but it just comes off as desperate.

It's a sad end for a man I once respected.


Posted by: MKoch | September 24, 2008 8:54 PM | Report abuse

LITTLE GEMS ARE LARGER THAN THE THINGS YOU HAVE HANGING BETWEEN YOUR LEGS

How about this New York Times example of the traitorous DemRats and their risky schemes?

"New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae"

From The New York Times
By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: September 11, 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

''There is a general recognition that the supervisory system for housing-related government-sponsored enterprises neither has the tools, nor the stature, to deal effectively with the current size, complexity and importance of these enterprises,'' Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told the House Financial Services Committee in an appearance with Housing Secretary Mel Martinez, who also backed the plan.

Mr. Snow said that Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies, a sign that the administration is less concerned about the perks of patronage than it is about the potential political problems associated with any new difficulties arising at the companies.

The administration's proposal, which was endorsed in large part today by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, would not repeal the significant government subsidies granted to the two companies. And it does not alter the implicit guarantee that Washington will bail the companies out if they run into financial difficulty; that perception enables them to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. Nor would it remove the companies' exemptions from taxes and antifraud provisions of federal securities laws.

The proposal is the opening act in one of the biggest and most significant lobbying battles of the Congressional session.

After the hearing, Representative Michael G. Oxley, chairman of the Financial Services Committee, and Senator Richard Shelby, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, announced their intention to draft legislation based on the administration's proposal. Industry executives said Congress could complete action on legislation before leaving for recess in the fall.

''The current regulator does not have the tools, or the mandate, to adequately regulate these enterprises,'' Mr. Oxley said at the hearing. ''We have seen in recent months that mismanagement and questionable accounting practices went largely unnoticed by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight,'' the independent agency that now regulates the companies.

''These irregularities, which have been going on for several years, should have been detected earlier by the regulator,'' he added.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which is part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, was created by Congress in 1992 after the bailout of the savings and loan industry and concerns about regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which buy mortgages from lenders and repackage them as securities or hold them in their own portfolios.

At the time, the companies and their allies beat back efforts for tougher oversight by the Treasury Department, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Federal Reserve. Supporters of the companies said efforts to regulate the lenders tightly under those agencies might diminish their ability to finance loans for lower-income families. This year, however, the chances of passing legislation to tighten the oversight are better than in the past.

Reflecting the changing political climate, both Fannie Mae and its leading rivals applauded the administration's package. The support from Fannie Mae came after a round of discussions between it and the administration and assurances from the Treasury that it would not seek to change the company's mission.

After those assurances, Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chief executive, endorsed the shift of regulatory oversight to the Treasury Department, as well as other elements of the plan.

''We welcome the administration's approach outlined today,'' Mr. Raines said. The company opposes some smaller elements of the package, like one that eliminates the authority of the president to appoint 5 of the company's 18 board members.

Company executives said that the company preferred having the president select some directors. The company is also likely to lobby against the efforts that give regulators too much authority to approve its products.

Freddie Mac, whose accounting is under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission and a United States attorney in Virginia, issued a statement calling the administration plan a ''responsible proposal.''

The stocks of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae fell while the prices of their bonds generally rose. Shares of Freddie Mac fell $2.04, or 3.7 percent, to $53.40, while Fannie Mae was down $1.62, or 2.4 percent, to $66.74. The price of a Fannie Mae bond due in March 2013 rose to 97.337 from 96.525.Its yield fell to 4.726 percent from 4.835 percent on Tuesday.

Fannie Mae, which was previously known as the Federal National Mortgage Association, and Freddie Mac, which was the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, have been criticized by rivals for exerting too much influence over their regulators.

''The regulator has not only been outmanned, it has been outlobbied,'' said Representative Richard H. Baker, the Louisiana Republican who has proposed legislation similar to the administration proposal and who leads a subcommittee that oversees the companies. ''Being underfunded does not explain how a glowing report of Freddie's operations was released only hours before the managerial upheaval that followed. This is not world-class regulatory work.''

Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:52 PM | Report abuse

Name rhymes with "Osama"
Middle name is Hussein
He is an Islamic
Did I mention (Hushed tone) "He is black"
Degree from Commie Harvard school
Smarter than the average hick
Eloquent (a plot)
Wife is "uppity" (code = black)
Friends with hippies
Did drugs
Secretly wants to surrender to Russia

We need a book banner / Pentacostal to save us from this "Obamanation"

And an old hot head millionaire autocrat who is "one of us"!

(I can't debate wif him, he sca-wez me, he is bwack, wahhh!!) Mommie !!

As long as they kow-tow to my insipid religious dogma, they get my vote.

And as a backup, we have DIEBOLD VOTING MACHINES! Thank GOD for the Amerikkkan weigh!

An election stolen in the name of non-existant deity is good for Amerikkka! I can't fornicate, so it is a sin!!! Let's go to McDonald's!! Everything is going to be OK, I have prayed for it, and God sent a voice! Did I mention? He is black!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:52 PM | Report abuse

Okay - Anonymous has been reported to Washington Post abuse for cramming the space with pasted material and pushing down (drowning out) others reponses...

Posted by: kelvinator | September 24, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

Bush wanted to rush through a $700 bilion bailout that was vague and nonspecific. Why, because he doesn't care if it works, it just needs to keep the economy going for JUST TWO MORE MONTHS... then he's outta here and it's someone else's problem.

I am glad that Congress is taking a longer look at it than Bush wants, and the two candidates need to stay away from the process. It needs to be bipartisan and their participation will only make the attempt to solve this important issue polarized and partisan

Posted by: Speaktruth | September 24, 2008 8:51 PM | Report abuse

"In 2003, Republicans controlled the White House and both houses of Congress. Then and now, both Freddie and Fannie were overseen by HUD - an executive department of the Bush administration."

Absolutely, just as it was under the Clinton Administration when this debacle started. Additionally The Democrats in congress in 2003 blocked any changes to the way oversite was conducted for Fannie and Freddie. Barney Frank said that Fannie and Freddie were fine....working as they should...no problem needed fixing....What a dumb ass that guy is.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:50 PM | Report abuse

hey Big Picture

Do you really believe McChiken needs to be in Washington to help out? Obama has been multi tasking on this for days, talking to all the major players...

McChicken is scared....you must be totally naive to believe otherwise...it's the same reason they won't Palin toalk to the press...


Posted by: jj | September 24, 2008 8:49 PM | Report abuse

Must seem like a non-event to other Senators. McCain has been in the Senate for +26 yrs and has certainly had his weird days there - for all to see over those 26 yrs. What must his colleagues, the other Senators, think privately when he adopts the lone Batman cape, dropping all business to head for the Senate? Is McCain the economic elixir that negotiators have all been waiting for? His is the mind-set that contains the necessary formulas that will glue opposing elements together?

Doubt it very much.

Or just a very senior professional politician (McCain) pretending the American voter want him to be an energetic Hollywood hero with silver bullets and in a jiffy he alone transforms the cancerous, economic disaster into Camelot - fast food at McDo's: tastes somewhat & very salty, but impossible to digest.

The McCain/Palin ticket takes the voters for (mindless?) ecstatic fans of their overly-simplistic, Republican Yellow Submarine Tour.

Posted by: hadeze | September 24, 2008 8:49 PM | Report abuse

IF YOU DONT VOTE FOR OBAMA YOU ARE A RACSIST!!!

WHITE PEOPLE DONT CARE ABOUT BLACKS!!!

WHITES ARE ALL NEOCONS AT HEART.

Posted by: The Real One | September 24, 2008 8:49 PM | Report abuse

There is a difference between campaigning and governing. It is the difference between politics and statesmanship. McCain just demonstrated once again that he understands that difference. Obama just demonstrated again that he does not.

If anyone reading this does not understand the full implications of the current crisis to both the national and world economies, then you have not been paying attention. McCain obviously has.

If the rescue package proposed by Benanke, who is a student of the Great Depression, and Paulson is not well on its way to passage by the end of the week, we are facing the possibility of a massive Black Friday on Wall Street. Debating foreign affairs and "America's stature" at a college auditorium in Mississippi on a day when the Dow falls a 1000 points or more would be fairly absurd. McCain understands this clearly, Obama apparently still does not.

Once again, as he did with Russia's Georgia invasion, John McCain has stepped up and spoken clearly - while Barak Obama has once again stepped away to "consult with his advisors". Leadership does not carry the option to "vote present". Hillary Clinton was correct: when the call comes at 3:00 am, the reply of "let me meet with my staff and get back to you" is a non-starter.

I do not doubt that the junior Senator from Illinois has many fine and admirable qualities. Decisive leadership in a crisis is demonstrably not one of them.

Posted by: jemerick | September 24, 2008 8:48 PM | Report abuse

I think the debate would help open up the discourse on what is happening now with the bailout bill, bringing more eyes to it. Even if these two candidates had little new to say maybe it would energize the public to become more aware of this bill many are calling the economic equivalent to the patriot act.

Posted by: Charlie | September 24, 2008 8:48 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous is just a right wing noise machine filling the comment space repeatedly with garbage and trying to drown out other views - does that remind you of someone --- oh yeah, the McCain/Palin campaign.

I'm going to report Anonymous to Post abuse

Posted by: kelvinator | September 24, 2008 8:48 PM | Report abuse

IF YOU DONT VOTE FOR OBAMA YOU ARE A RACSIST!!!

WHITE PEOPLE DONT CARE ABOUT BLACKS!!!

WHITES ARE ALL NEOCONS AT HEART.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:48 PM | Report abuse

ANNONYMOUS IS A BUMPER STICKER PRINTED ON A BROKEN RECORD>

How about these little gems? And from the guy actually running for POTUS....

McCain Supported A Banking Bill Because It Eliminated “The Tremendous Regulatory Burden Imposed On Financial Institutions.” While speaking in favor of bank deregulation on the floor of the senate, John McCain said, “This legislation takes a small but important step toward eliminating the tremendous regulatory burden imposed on financial institutions… One principal reason banks are unable to make loans is the bewildering array of statutory and regulatory restrictions and paperwork requirements imposed by Congress and the regulatory agencies. While a case can certainly be made that every law and regulation is intended to serve a laudable purpose, the aggregate effect of the rapidly increasing regulatory burden imposed on banks is to cause them to devote substantial time, energy and money to compliance rather than meeting the credit needs of the community.” [Congressional Record, 11/19/93; emphasis added]

McCain Supported A Bill To “Takes A Small Step Forward Toward Eliminating Unnecessary Regulatory Burdens Imposed On Banks.” While speaking in favor of bank deregulation on the floor of the senate, John McCain said, “While a case can certainly be made that every law and regulation is intended to serve a laudable purpose, the aggregate effect of the rapidly increasing regulatory burden imposed on banks is to cause them to devote substantial time, energy and money to compliance rather than meeting the credit needs of the community … This bill recognizes this fact, and takes a small step forward toward eliminating unnecessary regulatory burdens imposed on banks.” [Congressional Record, 11/19/93; emphasis added]

McCain Said The Best Thing Government Can Do For Business Is “Stay Out Of Its Way.” While speaking about the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act on the floor on the Senate in 2000, John McCain said, “I am convinced that the best thing government can often do to advance the fortunes of the private sector is to stay out of its way. I support this bill because it makes progress toward that end, by improving companies’ flexibility to hire the talent they need, while providing for the regulatory framework and new educational opportunities to protect and promote American workers.” [Congressional Record, 10/3/00; emphasis added]

In 1999, McCain Supported Phil Gramm’s Banking Deregulation Bill. In 1999, John McCain voted for passage of the Senate version of a bill that would eliminate current barriers erected by the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act and other laws that impede affiliations between banking, securities, insurance and other firms. The bill also would exempt small, non-urban banks from the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), revise the Federal Home Loan Bank system and require that owners of automated teller machines (ATMs) provide notice on the ATM and on-screen of any charges imposed for the use of the terminal. The bill passed 54-44. [S. 900, Vote #105, 5/6/99]

McCain Missed The Vote For Final Passage Because He Was Campaigning In New Hampshire. John McCain missed the final vote on Phil Gramm’s banking deregulation bill because he was campaigning in New Hampshire. [NPR, “Morning Edition,” 11/5/99; S. 900, Vote #354, 11/4/99]

McCain Has Based His 2008 Campaign On Promoting Less Regulation
McCain: “I Don’t Think Anyone Who Wants To Increase The Burden Of Government Regulation And Higher Taxes Has Any Real Understanding Of Economics.” During a McCain Town Hall in Inez, Kentucky, John McCain said, “When we come out of this recession and we will because I believe that the fundamentals of our economy are good … Sen. Clinton wants the government to make the decisions for you on your health care, I want the families to make the decisions on their health care. I don’t think anyone who wants to increase the burden of government regulation and higher taxes has any real understanding of economics and the economy and what is needed in order to ensure the future of this country.” [McCain Town Hall in Inez, Kentucky, 4/23/08; emphasis added]


McCain: “I Understand Why The AFL-CIO And Maybe Other Unions May Oppose My Free Market, Less Regulation, Right To Work.” During an appearance on Fox’s “Special Report with Brit Hume,” John McCain said, “I understand why the AFL-CIO and maybe other unions may oppose my free market less regulation right to work. I think we have honest differences of opinion. I respect those labor unions, but I’m sure that those differences are very intense and very real.” [Fox News,” Special Report with Brit Hume,” 3/12/08]

McCain: “Let’s Reduce Regulation.” While speaking about the economy in St. Louis, Missouri, John McCain said, “I’m asked all the time are we in a recession or not in a recession. And I don’t know the answer to that because it’s kind of a technical term… I do not believe we should raise your taxes. I think it would be the worst thing we could do. And that means to me I think the tax cuts need to be made permanent. When you’ve got a bad economy, the worst thing you can do is increase people’s tax burden. Let’s reduce it. Let’s reduce regulation.” [CNN, “Ballot Bowl, 3/15/08]

McCain: “We Need To Return To The Reagan Years… We Need Less Regulation.” As shown on PBS’s “Washington Week,” John McCain said, “We need to return to the Reagan years. We need to have fiscal conservatism. We need less government. We need less regulation. We need to end of spending spree which has eroded our base of Republican support.” [PBS, “Washington Week,” 1/25/08]

McCain Promised To “Give Them Lower Taxes, Less Regulation, Less Government In Their Lives.” As shown on CNN’s “CNN Newsroom,” John McCain said, “We’ve got to do the other things necessary to encourage business and give them lower taxes, less regulation, less government in their lives, and that means a simpler, fairer — tax code. The tax code in America is broken and it needs to be fixed.” [CNN, “CNN Newsroom,” 2/14/08]

To Fix the Economy, McCain Would “We’ve Got To Take Specific Actions, Keep Their Taxes Low, Less Regulation.” As shown on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” John McCain said, “That our economy is in terrible shape, that we’ve got to take specific actions, keep their taxes low, less regulation, get - start exploring and exploiting offshore oil deposits.” [ABC, “Good Morning America,” 7/2/08]

McCain Said The Difference Between Obama & Himself Would Be “More Regulation Or Less Regulation.” During a media availability in Phoenix, Arizona, John McCain said, “I think the important thing is that there will be stark differences between either Senator [Clinton] or Senator Obama and me because they are liberal Democrats and I’m a conservative Republican… whether we pursue the present strategy in Iraq or whether we — or whether we set a date for withdrawal, which will mean Al Qaida wins; whether we have more regulation or less regulation.” [McCain Media Availability via CQ Transcriptions, 3/3/08; emphasis added]

Oh i have a GIANT list more for ya if interested.
You quote an article from 2003 on ONE Bill that was opposed by Dems because of a wrinkle in the bill that may have hurt low income home owners. But more importantly it actually DEREGULATED the institutions by taking away congressional oversight and placing it into the hands of a new Bush department. ..however John McCain and the GOP has a lifetime of voting against deregulation. To say otherwise would be akin to saying that the GOP is the pro-choice party.
KOO KOO
KOO KOO
go back into your little clock

Posted by: feastorafamine | September 24, 2008 8:47 PM | Report abuse

It is about time one of these men decided to show some leadership skills. That they're more concerned about this country and it's people than they are with campaigning. Not a single doubt left in my mind now. McCain it is.

Posted by: Crickets | September 24, 2008 8:47 PM | Report abuse

Now McCain is concerned about fixing something. What a coincidence.

Neither candidate is needed. There are enough suits down there already.

McCain, this is shameless. Just forfeit if your tired.

Posted by: Kyle | September 24, 2008 8:47 PM | Report abuse

Good point, Big Picture. Obama is NOT actually doing 2 things at once, unless you count dropping the ball of leadership yet again to engage in mindless babble about "hope" while real men and women struggle to solve our nation's crisis.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

Bush's speech tonight - here's what he will say...

He'll use the words "American People" many times...even though the $700 Billion bailout is headed to the pockets of the same crooks that ripped us off.

- He'll say that the "American People" need action now...which really means give us the money you suckers...we have no interest in protecting your interest.

- He'll call Paulson and Bernacke good and hard working men, - really? To go ask for $700 billion is heroic?..like Juliani being the hero after 911??

- It's hard work, but will get it done...what a bunch self ingratiating losers...wow it really takes lot of guts to indebt our children and future generations with $700 billion more in debt...and on the heels of doubling out debt level to over 10 trillion...where did all this money go? Easy..how do you think the rich get super rich and the poor get super poor?

Only a mellon head would votye for McChicken and Palin

Posted by: jj | September 24, 2008 8:46 PM | Report abuse

TAKE THE 700 BILLION..BUILD WINDMIL AND SOLAR ENERGY FARMS..BUILD NEW BRIDGES..ROADS..DAMS..PUT SOME IN SOCIAL SECURITY..HEALTHCARE..THESE BANKS WILL FAIL ANYWAY..UNLESS WE PAY WHAT THE BANKS PAID FOR THESE HOUSES..A 300,000 HOUSE NOW IS SELLING FOR 160,000 ( THE TRUE VALUE )SO WE WILL ALREADY LOSE 50% ON THE 700 BILLION..NEW LOANS WILL GO BACK TO THE 20% DOWN AND A1 CREDIT..WHO WILL THEY SELL ALL THESE HOUSES TOO..UNLESS PRICES COME DOWN FURTHER..65% LOSS ON THE 700 BILLION..DON'T BE FOOLED

Posted by: america_first | September 24, 2008 8:45 PM | Report abuse

I am a gay black liberal. I love Obama. He is the one. He is going to save us. He is going to make us all even and get rid of rich people that are greedy. We need the government to help give poor people more instead of ignoring us.

Posted by: NY Slimes | September 24, 2008 8:45 PM | Report abuse

Thanks, Speaktruth - It's not a wonder that people have a hard time picking their way through the blizzard of non-stop lies and smokescreens put out by the Bush administration, and now by the McCain campaign.

McCain is just a little shock & awe machine - with Palin, with false ads, now with this "no debate" stunt. Heaven forbid that people actually settle down and pay attention to what and who he represents. He has no policy other than a slight variation from the Bush policies (see his voting record, support for uber wealthy tax cuts, privatized social security, no health care) and is suddenly making noises as though he's a populist reformer. He has a Freddie Mac lobbyist running his campaign, paid through last month, the Sen. Phil Gramm slimebag who helped cause this financial crisis by deregulating banks as his close friend and advisor. This guy does not want people to understand anything real about where he has been coming from for the past decades, so why not shock & awe and distract?

Posted by: kelvinator | September 24, 2008 8:45 PM | Report abuse

Act stupid:
don't appear smarter than the sucker voter
Beat war drum
Tell Amerikkkanz "They are the best"
Lie
Boast about false DEITY
Wear Israel on sleeve
Beat war drum harder
Have an "Aw shucks" attitude
Drag XX chromosome into race =
supplicate hillary whiners
Fill bowl and ignore these jit wads

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:45 PM | Report abuse

Give me a break!!! There you go again McCain,down in the polls and alot of screw ups last week so now (OH GOD I'M NOT GOING TO DEBATE,I'M NOT READY,WAH WAH!!!)He pulls these stumps so he can turn around and say Obama would rather win an election than country first.The commitee even said that an agreement is coming along between Democrats and Republicans.The people need to hear the positions between both canidates on this issues going on.No but McCain calls Bush and has him make a statement that he needs to talk to both McCain and Obama.McCain all of a sudden has morals for this financial disater,he he partially to blame being against regulation since he has been senator until last week.HE IS SO DESPERAT!!!!!!

Posted by: Gail | September 24, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

"New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae"

From The New York Times
By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: September 11, 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

''There is a general recognition that the supervisory system for housing-related government-sponsored enterprises neither has the tools, nor the stature, to deal effectively with the current size, complexity and importance of these enterprises,'' Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told the House Financial Services Committee in an appearance with Housing Secretary Mel Martinez, who also backed the plan.

Mr. Snow said that Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies, a sign that the administration is less concerned about the perks of patronage than it is about the potential political problems associated with any new difficulties arising at the companies.

The administration's proposal, which was endorsed in large part today by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, would not repeal the significant government subsidies granted to the two companies. And it does not alter the implicit guarantee that Washington will bail the companies out if they run into financial difficulty; that perception enables them to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. Nor would it remove the companies' exemptions from taxes and antifraud provisions of federal securities laws.

The proposal is the opening act in one of the biggest and most significant lobbying battles of the Congressional session.

After the hearing, Representative Michael G. Oxley, chairman of the Financial Services Committee, and Senator Richard Shelby, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, announced their intention to draft legislation based on the administration's proposal. Industry executives said Congress could complete action on legislation before leaving for recess in the fall.

''The current regulator does not have the tools, or the mandate, to adequately regulate these enterprises,'' Mr. Oxley said at the hearing. ''We have seen in recent months that mismanagement and questionable accounting practices went largely unnoticed by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight,'' the independent agency that now regulates the companies.

''These irregularities, which have been going on for several years, should have been detected earlier by the regulator,'' he added.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which is part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, was created by Congress in 1992 after the bailout of the savings and loan industry and concerns about regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which buy mortgages from lenders and repackage them as securities or hold them in their own portfolios.

At the time, the companies and their allies beat back efforts for tougher oversight by the Treasury Department, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Federal Reserve. Supporters of the companies said efforts to regulate the lenders tightly under those agencies might diminish their ability to finance loans for lower-income families. This year, however, the chances of passing legislation to tighten the oversight are better than in the past.

Reflecting the changing political climate, both Fannie Mae and its leading rivals applauded the administration's package. The support from Fannie Mae came after a round of discussions between it and the administration and assurances from the Treasury that it would not seek to change the company's mission.

After those assurances, Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chief executive, endorsed the shift of regulatory oversight to the Treasury Department, as well as other elements of the plan.

''We welcome the administration's approach outlined today,'' Mr. Raines said. The company opposes some smaller elements of the package, like one that eliminates the authority of the president to appoint 5 of the company's 18 board members.

Company executives said that the company preferred having the president select some directors. The company is also likely to lobby against the efforts that give regulators too much authority to approve its products.

Freddie Mac, whose accounting is under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission and a United States attorney in Virginia, issued a statement calling the administration plan a ''responsible proposal.''

The stocks of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae fell while the prices of their bonds generally rose. Shares of Freddie Mac fell $2.04, or 3.7 percent, to $53.40, while Fannie Mae was down $1.62, or 2.4 percent, to $66.74. The price of a Fannie Mae bond due in March 2013 rose to 97.337 from 96.525.Its yield fell to 4.726 percent from 4.835 percent on Tuesday.

Fannie Mae, which was previously known as the Federal National Mortgage Association, and Freddie Mac, which was the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, have been criticized by rivals for exerting too much influence over their regulators.

''The regulator has not only been outmanned, it has been outlobbied,'' said Representative Richard H. Baker, the Louisiana Republican who has proposed legislation similar to the administration proposal and who leads a subcommittee that oversees the companies. ''Being underfunded does not explain how a glowing report of Freddie's operations was released only hours before the managerial upheaval that followed. This is not world-class regulatory work.''

Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:44 PM | Report abuse

From Wikipedia:
In the United States Presidential election of 1864 at a very crucial faze of the Civil war, the bloodiest time in our history, Abraham Lincoln was re-elected as president. Lincoln had been a Republican but he ran under the National Union Party banner against his former top Civil War general, the Democratic candidate, George B. McClellan , and the Radical Republican Party candidate, John C. Fremont. Did Lincoln ask his political opponents to postpone the campaign?

In 1936 did Franklin Delano Roosevelt ask his political opponents to postpone the Campaign,? It was the height of the Depression. Again in 1943 did Roosevelt ask his political opponents to postpone the campaign at a crucial time in WWII?. The answer to all the questions is of course not.

So why would McCain suggest such a radical idea? It could be He has two motives. The first to help his buddies in High financial circles get the most money with the least control. The second being to delay and perhaps avoid answering some hard questions about his lack of knowledge about anything having to do with the Economy which includes a 3 trillion dollar (and growing) endless war program he supports.

Posted by: vet240 | September 24, 2008 8:43 PM | Report abuse

'Jake' wants to know how does one debate himself? Even repeated the question several times. I have posted the response elsewhere, but here it is again. There are three easy solutions:

1. The 'no-show' sends in the second. In McCain's case that would be Palin (as an aside, it would be useful to see her in an unscripted situation. I have seen more from Ahmadinedjad the past month than her);

2. The one who shows-up, simply quotes what the 'no-show' has said about the topic in the past, and then provides his responses. After all, I at least assume that McCain knows and means what he says;

3. Point out that the 'no show' cannot handle two events at the same time (akin to he cannot walk and chew gum), and then hold a press conference.

The world does not come to an end simply because one fellow cannot understand economics.

Posted by: AMviennaVA | September 24, 2008 8:43 PM | Report abuse

Hey Dems, it's called LEADERSHIP.

McCain is a senator. When congress is reconstructing a large part of the entire economy McCain felt that maybe, as a member of congress, he should BE THERE. Obama decided it would be okay to let others deal with it. Obama "can do 2 things at once" because HE'S NOT ACTUALLY DOING ANYTHING. He's gonna vote "present."

All Obama had to do was agree with McCain to postpone the debate. (Not CANCEL, postpone.) He could then put out press releases claiming it was HIS idea and they could argue back and forth about that for political points. Instead Obama decided to try and embarrass McCain for political points. And he's gonna bring us all together?

Posted by: Big Picture | September 24, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

From the New York Times of September 11, 2003:

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.


Posted by: Anonymous OVER AND OVER AND OVER

------------------AGAIN
How about these little gems? And from the guy actually running for POTUS....

McCain Supported A Banking Bill Because It Eliminated “The Tremendous Regulatory Burden Imposed On Financial Institutions.” While speaking in favor of bank deregulation on the floor of the senate, John McCain said, “This legislation takes a small but important step toward eliminating the tremendous regulatory burden imposed on financial institutions… One principal reason banks are unable to make loans is the bewildering array of statutory and regulatory restrictions and paperwork requirements imposed by Congress and the regulatory agencies. While a case can certainly be made that every law and regulation is intended to serve a laudable purpose, the aggregate effect of the rapidly increasing regulatory burden imposed on banks is to cause them to devote substantial time, energy and money to compliance rather than meeting the credit needs of the community.” [Congressional Record, 11/19/93; emphasis added]

McCain Supported A Bill To “Takes A Small Step Forward Toward Eliminating Unnecessary Regulatory Burdens Imposed On Banks.” While speaking in favor of bank deregulation on the floor of the senate, John McCain said, “While a case can certainly be made that every law and regulation is intended to serve a laudable purpose, the aggregate effect of the rapidly increasing regulatory burden imposed on banks is to cause them to devote substantial time, energy and money to compliance rather than meeting the credit needs of the community … This bill recognizes this fact, and takes a small step forward toward eliminating unnecessary regulatory burdens imposed on banks.” [Congressional Record, 11/19/93; emphasis added]

McCain Said The Best Thing Government Can Do For Business Is “Stay Out Of Its Way.” While speaking about the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act on the floor on the Senate in 2000, John McCain said, “I am convinced that the best thing government can often do to advance the fortunes of the private sector is to stay out of its way. I support this bill because it makes progress toward that end, by improving companies’ flexibility to hire the talent they need, while providing for the regulatory framework and new educational opportunities to protect and promote American workers.” [Congressional Record, 10/3/00; emphasis added]

In 1999, McCain Supported Phil Gramm’s Banking Deregulation Bill. In 1999, John McCain voted for passage of the Senate version of a bill that would eliminate current barriers erected by the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act and other laws that impede affiliations between banking, securities, insurance and other firms. The bill also would exempt small, non-urban banks from the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), revise the Federal Home Loan Bank system and require that owners of automated teller machines (ATMs) provide notice on the ATM and on-screen of any charges imposed for the use of the terminal. The bill passed 54-44. [S. 900, Vote #105, 5/6/99]

McCain Missed The Vote For Final Passage Because He Was Campaigning In New Hampshire. John McCain missed the final vote on Phil Gramm’s banking deregulation bill because he was campaigning in New Hampshire. [NPR, “Morning Edition,” 11/5/99; S. 900, Vote #354, 11/4/99]

McCain Has Based His 2008 Campaign On Promoting Less Regulation
McCain: “I Don’t Think Anyone Who Wants To Increase The Burden Of Government Regulation And Higher Taxes Has Any Real Understanding Of Economics.” During a McCain Town Hall in Inez, Kentucky, John McCain said, “When we come out of this recession and we will because I believe that the fundamentals of our economy are good … Sen. Clinton wants the government to make the decisions for you on your health care, I want the families to make the decisions on their health care. I don’t think anyone who wants to increase the burden of government regulation and higher taxes has any real understanding of economics and the economy and what is needed in order to ensure the future of this country.” [McCain Town Hall in Inez, Kentucky, 4/23/08; emphasis added]


McCain: “I Understand Why The AFL-CIO And Maybe Other Unions May Oppose My Free Market, Less Regulation, Right To Work.” During an appearance on Fox’s “Special Report with Brit Hume,” John McCain said, “I understand why the AFL-CIO and maybe other unions may oppose my free market less regulation right to work. I think we have honest differences of opinion. I respect those labor unions, but I’m sure that those differences are very intense and very real.” [Fox News,” Special Report with Brit Hume,” 3/12/08]

McCain: “Let’s Reduce Regulation.” While speaking about the economy in St. Louis, Missouri, John McCain said, “I’m asked all the time are we in a recession or not in a recession. And I don’t know the answer to that because it’s kind of a technical term… I do not believe we should raise your taxes. I think it would be the worst thing we could do. And that means to me I think the tax cuts need to be made permanent. When you’ve got a bad economy, the worst thing you can do is increase people’s tax burden. Let’s reduce it. Let’s reduce regulation.” [CNN, “Ballot Bowl, 3/15/08]

McCain: “We Need To Return To The Reagan Years… We Need Less Regulation.” As shown on PBS’s “Washington Week,” John McCain said, “We need to return to the Reagan years. We need to have fiscal conservatism. We need less government. We need less regulation. We need to end of spending spree which has eroded our base of Republican support.” [PBS, “Washington Week,” 1/25/08]

McCain Promised To “Give Them Lower Taxes, Less Regulation, Less Government In Their Lives.” As shown on CNN’s “CNN Newsroom,” John McCain said, “We’ve got to do the other things necessary to encourage business and give them lower taxes, less regulation, less government in their lives, and that means a simpler, fairer — tax code. The tax code in America is broken and it needs to be fixed.” [CNN, “CNN Newsroom,” 2/14/08]

To Fix the Economy, McCain Would “We’ve Got To Take Specific Actions, Keep Their Taxes Low, Less Regulation.” As shown on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” John McCain said, “That our economy is in terrible shape, that we’ve got to take specific actions, keep their taxes low, less regulation, get - start exploring and exploiting offshore oil deposits.” [ABC, “Good Morning America,” 7/2/08]

McCain Said The Difference Between Obama & Himself Would Be “More Regulation Or Less Regulation.” During a media availability in Phoenix, Arizona, John McCain said, “I think the important thing is that there will be stark differences between either Senator [Clinton] or Senator Obama and me because they are liberal Democrats and I’m a conservative Republican… whether we pursue the present strategy in Iraq or whether we — or whether we set a date for withdrawal, which will mean Al Qaida wins; whether we have more regulation or less regulation.” [McCain Media Availability via CQ Transcriptions, 3/3/08; emphasis added]

Oh i have a GIANT list more for ya if interested.
You quote an article from 2003 on ONE Bill that was opposed by Dems because of a wrinkle in the bill that may have hurt low income home owners...however John McCain and the GOP has a lifetime of voting against deregulation. To say otherwise would be akin to saying that the GOP is the pro-choice party.
KOO KOO
KOO KOO
go back into your little clock


WANT SOME MORE? OH I HAVE PLENTY.


Posted by: feastorafamine | September 24, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

"New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae"

From The New York Times
By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: September 11, 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

''There is a general recognition that the supervisory system for housing-related government-sponsored enterprises neither has the tools, nor the stature, to deal effectively with the current size, complexity and importance of these enterprises,'' Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told the House Financial Services Committee in an appearance with Housing Secretary Mel Martinez, who also backed the plan.

Mr. Snow said that Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies, a sign that the administration is less concerned about the perks of patronage than it is about the potential political problems associated with any new difficulties arising at the companies.

The administration's proposal, which was endorsed in large part today by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, would not repeal the significant government subsidies granted to the two companies. And it does not alter the implicit guarantee that Washington will bail the companies out if they run into financial difficulty; that perception enables them to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. Nor would it remove the companies' exemptions from taxes and antifraud provisions of federal securities laws.

The proposal is the opening act in one of the biggest and most significant lobbying battles of the Congressional session.

After the hearing, Representative Michael G. Oxley, chairman of the Financial Services Committee, and Senator Richard Shelby, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, announced their intention to draft legislation based on the administration's proposal. Industry executives said Congress could complete action on legislation before leaving for recess in the fall.

''The current regulator does not have the tools, or the mandate, to adequately regulate these enterprises,'' Mr. Oxley said at the hearing. ''We have seen in recent months that mismanagement and questionable accounting practices went largely unnoticed by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight,'' the independent agency that now regulates the companies.

''These irregularities, which have been going on for several years, should have been detected earlier by the regulator,'' he added.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which is part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, was created by Congress in 1992 after the bailout of the savings and loan industry and concerns about regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which buy mortgages from lenders and repackage them as securities or hold them in their own portfolios.

At the time, the companies and their allies beat back efforts for tougher oversight by the Treasury Department, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Federal Reserve. Supporters of the companies said efforts to regulate the lenders tightly under those agencies might diminish their ability to finance loans for lower-income families. This year, however, the chances of passing legislation to tighten the oversight are better than in the past.

Reflecting the changing political climate, both Fannie Mae and its leading rivals applauded the administration's package. The support from Fannie Mae came after a round of discussions between it and the administration and assurances from the Treasury that it would not seek to change the company's mission.

After those assurances, Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chief executive, endorsed the shift of regulatory oversight to the Treasury Department, as well as other elements of the plan.

''We welcome the administration's approach outlined today,'' Mr. Raines said. The company opposes some smaller elements of the package, like one that eliminates the authority of the president to appoint 5 of the company's 18 board members.

Company executives said that the company preferred having the president select some directors. The company is also likely to lobby against the efforts that give regulators too much authority to approve its products.

Freddie Mac, whose accounting is under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission and a United States attorney in Virginia, issued a statement calling the administration plan a ''responsible proposal.''

The stocks of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae fell while the prices of their bonds generally rose. Shares of Freddie Mac fell $2.04, or 3.7 percent, to $53.40, while Fannie Mae was down $1.62, or 2.4 percent, to $66.74. The price of a Fannie Mae bond due in March 2013 rose to 97.337 from 96.525.Its yield fell to 4.726 percent from 4.835 percent on Tuesday.

Fannie Mae, which was previously known as the Federal National Mortgage Association, and Freddie Mac, which was the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, have been criticized by rivals for exerting too much influence over their regulators.

''The regulator has not only been outmanned, it has been outlobbied,'' said Representative Richard H. Baker, the Louisiana Republican who has proposed legislation similar to the administration proposal and who leads a subcommittee that oversees the companies. ''Being underfunded does not explain how a glowing report of Freddie's operations was released only hours before the managerial upheaval that followed. This is not world-class regulatory work.''

Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:41 PM | Report abuse

Several posts have reffered to a 2003 NYT article about the Bush proposal to alter oversight of Freddie and Fannie. The article speaks for itself, but the implication is misleading.

In 2003, Republicans controlled the White House and both houses of Congress. Then and now, both Freddie and Fannie were overseen by HUD - an executive department of the Bush administration. The Bush proposal, like most Bush proposals, was billed as one thing, but actually did another. Bush called it a regulatory overhaul, but it actually DEREGULATED the institutions by taking away congressional oversight and placing it into the hands of a new Bush department.

You will also note that at the time the proposal was shelved, Freddie and Fannie's main lobbyist was Mark Davis, now McCain's main campaign guy.

Posted by: Speaktruth | September 24, 2008 8:40 PM | Report abuse

"New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae"

From The New York Times
By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: September 11, 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

''There is a general recognition that the supervisory system for housing-related government-sponsored enterprises neither has the tools, nor the stature, to deal effectively with the current size, complexity and importance of these enterprises,'' Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told the House Financial Services Committee in an appearance with Housing Secretary Mel Martinez, who also backed the plan.

Mr. Snow said that Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies, a sign that the administration is less concerned about the perks of patronage than it is about the potential political problems associated with any new difficulties arising at the companies.

The administration's proposal, which was endorsed in large part today by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, would not repeal the significant government subsidies granted to the two companies. And it does not alter the implicit guarantee that Washington will bail the companies out if they run into financial difficulty; that perception enables them to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. Nor would it remove the companies' exemptions from taxes and antifraud provisions of federal securities laws.

The proposal is the opening act in one of the biggest and most significant lobbying battles of the Congressional session.

After the hearing, Representative Michael G. Oxley, chairman of the Financial Services Committee, and Senator Richard Shelby, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, announced their intention to draft legislation based on the administration's proposal. Industry executives said Congress could complete action on legislation before leaving for recess in the fall.

''The current regulator does not have the tools, or the mandate, to adequately regulate these enterprises,'' Mr. Oxley said at the hearing. ''We have seen in recent months that mismanagement and questionable accounting practices went largely unnoticed by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight,'' the independent agency that now regulates the companies.

''These irregularities, which have been going on for several years, should have been detected earlier by the regulator,'' he added.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which is part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, was created by Congress in 1992 after the bailout of the savings and loan industry and concerns about regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which buy mortgages from lenders and repackage them as securities or hold them in their own portfolios.

At the time, the companies and their allies beat back efforts for tougher oversight by the Treasury Department, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Federal Reserve. Supporters of the companies said efforts to regulate the lenders tightly under those agencies might diminish their ability to finance loans for lower-income families. This year, however, the chances of passing legislation to tighten the oversight are better than in the past.

Reflecting the changing political climate, both Fannie Mae and its leading rivals applauded the administration's package. The support from Fannie Mae came after a round of discussions between it and the administration and assurances from the Treasury that it would not seek to change the company's mission.

After those assurances, Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chief executive, endorsed the shift of regulatory oversight to the Treasury Department, as well as other elements of the plan.

''We welcome the administration's approach outlined today,'' Mr. Raines said. The company opposes some smaller elements of the package, like one that eliminates the authority of the president to appoint 5 of the company's 18 board members.

Company executives said that the company preferred having the president select some directors. The company is also likely to lobby against the efforts that give regulators too much authority to approve its products.

Freddie Mac, whose accounting is under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission and a United States attorney in Virginia, issued a statement calling the administration plan a ''responsible proposal.''

The stocks of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae fell while the prices of their bonds generally rose. Shares of Freddie Mac fell $2.04, or 3.7 percent, to $53.40, while Fannie Mae was down $1.62, or 2.4 percent, to $66.74. The price of a Fannie Mae bond due in March 2013 rose to 97.337 from 96.525.Its yield fell to 4.726 percent from 4.835 percent on Tuesday.

Fannie Mae, which was previously known as the Federal National Mortgage Association, and Freddie Mac, which was the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, have been criticized by rivals for exerting too much influence over their regulators.

''The regulator has not only been outmanned, it has been outlobbied,'' said Representative Richard H. Baker, the Louisiana Republican who has proposed legislation similar to the administration proposal and who leads a subcommittee that oversees the companies. ''Being underfunded does not explain how a glowing report of Freddie's operations was released only hours before the managerial upheaval that followed. This is not world-class regulatory work.''

Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:39 PM | Report abuse

Magic Negro Nobama, Uncle Tom, Empty Suit!!!

Uh, um, oh, uh, uh, um, why do i have to be in Washington when my Master Pelosi is there?

Posted by: 3iser | September 24, 2008 8:39 PM | Report abuse

What's more important is we understand who will be navigating America during the next four years. We need to understand the differences clearly so we can make a sound judgement. It is even more important to campaign and share exactly what kind of change they will bring and how.

At this crucial point, McCain opts out of establishing a connection with Americans. This does not show leadership because neither canidate has yet to communicate clearly their plans for the next four years. Americans do not want to elect blindly a commander and chief.

http://butasforme.com/2008/09/24/outrage-a-letter-to-my-representative-on-the-bailouts/

Posted by: Wes | September 24, 2008 8:39 PM | Report abuse

From the New York Times of September 11, 2003:

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative BARNEY FRANK, DEMOCRAT of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative MELVIN L. WATT, DEMOCRAT of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:38 PM | Report abuse


From the New York Times of September 11, 2003:

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.


Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:36 PM

------------------AGAIN
How about these little gems? And from the guy actually running for POTUS....

McCain Supported A Banking Bill Because It Eliminated “The Tremendous Regulatory Burden Imposed On Financial Institutions.” While speaking in favor of bank deregulation on the floor of the senate, John McCain said, “This legislation takes a small but important step toward eliminating the tremendous regulatory burden imposed on financial institutions… One principal reason banks are unable to make loans is the bewildering array of statutory and regulatory restrictions and paperwork requirements imposed by Congress and the regulatory agencies. While a case can certainly be made that every law and regulation is intended to serve a laudable purpose, the aggregate effect of the rapidly increasing regulatory burden imposed on banks is to cause them to devote substantial time, energy and money to compliance rather than meeting the credit needs of the community.” [Congressional Record, 11/19/93; emphasis added]

McCain Supported A Bill To “Takes A Small Step Forward Toward Eliminating Unnecessary Regulatory Burdens Imposed On Banks.” While speaking in favor of bank deregulation on the floor of the senate, John McCain said, “While a case can certainly be made that every law and regulation is intended to serve a laudable purpose, the aggregate effect of the rapidly increasing regulatory burden imposed on banks is to cause them to devote substantial time, energy and money to compliance rather than meeting the credit needs of the community … This bill recognizes this fact, and takes a small step forward toward eliminating unnecessary regulatory burdens imposed on banks.” [Congressional Record, 11/19/93; emphasis added]

McCain Said The Best Thing Government Can Do For Business Is “Stay Out Of Its Way.” While speaking about the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act on the floor on the Senate in 2000, John McCain said, “I am convinced that the best thing government can often do to advance the fortunes of the private sector is to stay out of its way. I support this bill because it makes progress toward that end, by improving companies’ flexibility to hire the talent they need, while providing for the regulatory framework and new educational opportunities to protect and promote American workers.” [Congressional Record, 10/3/00; emphasis added]

In 1999, McCain Supported Phil Gramm’s Banking Deregulation Bill. In 1999, John McCain voted for passage of the Senate version of a bill that would eliminate current barriers erected by the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act and other laws that impede affiliations between banking, securities, insurance and other firms. The bill also would exempt small, non-urban banks from the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), revise the Federal Home Loan Bank system and require that owners of automated teller machines (ATMs) provide notice on the ATM and on-screen of any charges imposed for the use of the terminal. The bill passed 54-44. [S. 900, Vote #105, 5/6/99]

McCain Missed The Vote For Final Passage Because He Was Campaigning In New Hampshire. John McCain missed the final vote on Phil Gramm’s banking deregulation bill because he was campaigning in New Hampshire. [NPR, “Morning Edition,” 11/5/99; S. 900, Vote #354, 11/4/99]

McCain Has Based His 2008 Campaign On Promoting Less Regulation
McCain: “I Don’t Think Anyone Who Wants To Increase The Burden Of Government Regulation And Higher Taxes Has Any Real Understanding Of Economics.” During a McCain Town Hall in Inez, Kentucky, John McCain said, “When we come out of this recession and we will because I believe that the fundamentals of our economy are good … Sen. Clinton wants the government to make the decisions for you on your health care, I want the families to make the decisions on their health care. I don’t think anyone who wants to increase the burden of government regulation and higher taxes has any real understanding of economics and the economy and what is needed in order to ensure the future of this country.” [McCain Town Hall in Inez, Kentucky, 4/23/08; emphasis added]


McCain: “I Understand Why The AFL-CIO And Maybe Other Unions May Oppose My Free Market, Less Regulation, Right To Work.” During an appearance on Fox’s “Special Report with Brit Hume,” John McCain said, “I understand why the AFL-CIO and maybe other unions may oppose my free market less regulation right to work. I think we have honest differences of opinion. I respect those labor unions, but I’m sure that those differences are very intense and very real.” [Fox News,” Special Report with Brit Hume,” 3/12/08]

McCain: “Let’s Reduce Regulation.” While speaking about the economy in St. Louis, Missouri, John McCain said, “I’m asked all the time are we in a recession or not in a recession. And I don’t know the answer to that because it’s kind of a technical term… I do not believe we should raise your taxes. I think it would be the worst thing we could do. And that means to me I think the tax cuts need to be made permanent. When you’ve got a bad economy, the worst thing you can do is increase people’s tax burden. Let’s reduce it. Let’s reduce regulation.” [CNN, “Ballot Bowl, 3/15/08]

McCain: “We Need To Return To The Reagan Years… We Need Less Regulation.” As shown on PBS’s “Washington Week,” John McCain said, “We need to return to the Reagan years. We need to have fiscal conservatism. We need less government. We need less regulation. We need to end of spending spree which has eroded our base of Republican support.” [PBS, “Washington Week,” 1/25/08]

McCain Promised To “Give Them Lower Taxes, Less Regulation, Less Government In Their Lives.” As shown on CNN’s “CNN Newsroom,” John McCain said, “We’ve got to do the other things necessary to encourage business and give them lower taxes, less regulation, less government in their lives, and that means a simpler, fairer — tax code. The tax code in America is broken and it needs to be fixed.” [CNN, “CNN Newsroom,” 2/14/08]

To Fix the Economy, McCain Would “We’ve Got To Take Specific Actions, Keep Their Taxes Low, Less Regulation.” As shown on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” John McCain said, “That our economy is in terrible shape, that we’ve got to take specific actions, keep their taxes low, less regulation, get - start exploring and exploiting offshore oil deposits.” [ABC, “Good Morning America,” 7/2/08]

McCain Said The Difference Between Obama & Himself Would Be “More Regulation Or Less Regulation.” During a media availability in Phoenix, Arizona, John McCain said, “I think the important thing is that there will be stark differences between either Senator [Clinton] or Senator Obama and me because they are liberal Democrats and I’m a conservative Republican… whether we pursue the present strategy in Iraq or whether we — or whether we set a date for withdrawal, which will mean Al Qaida wins; whether we have more regulation or less regulation.” [McCain Media Availability via CQ Transcriptions, 3/3/08; emphasis added]

Oh i have a GIANT list more for ya if interested.
You quote an article from 2003 on ONE Bill that was opposed by Dems because of a wrinkle in the bill that may have hurt low income home owners...however John McCain and the GOP has a lifetime of voting against deregulation. To say otherwise would be akin to saying that the GOP is the pro-choice party.
KOO KOO
KOO KOO
go back into your little clock

Posted by: feastorafamine | September 24, 2008 8:38 PM | Report abuse

I've changed my mind. I am voting for Obama. God Bless America. Really, just like that...da dahh...

Posted by: BrianK | September 24, 2008 8:38 PM | Report abuse

Anonymus must be french for town idiot....

Posted by: Ron E | September 24, 2008 8:38 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the leadership, Senator McCain. Senator Obama can take the next two days to cram for a debate while serious leaders in Washington tackle serious problems. It is hard to believe that during a crisis of historic proportion, we are worried about a Friday night debate. What a misunderstanding of the dimensions of this disaster.

Posted by: DONBC | September 24, 2008 8:37 PM | Report abuse

From the New York Times of September 11, 2003:

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:36 PM | Report abuse

Carol:

I don't answer "Anonymous" or fake "JakeD" questions. What's you excuse for not answering my question to you (this will be the last time I ask you):

Is "The One" going to debate himself?

Posted by: JakeD
*****************************
I got a better idea - why don't you stop pretending that your views are soooooooo important that they require a follow-up? You're not in front of Congress, chuckles...


jaysus, you're pompous...

Posted by: poor repukes | September 24, 2008 8:36 PM | Report abuse

Obama said, "I believe that we should continue to have the debate. I think that it makes sense for us to present ourselves before the American people, to TALK about the nature of the problems that we're having in our financial system, to TALK about how it relates to our global standing in the world, what implications it has for our national security, how it relates to critical questions, like the war in Iraq and Afghanistan."

Yeah. Barack is good at TALK. When it comes to ACTION, he's a no-show. 100 or so days of actual Congressional experience isn't enough to help hammer-out a pressing issue that must be taken care of TODAY, not later. Barry was also a no-show for the attempted recall of summer break to hammer-out the Energy Bill.

I was undecided until today. I'm voting McCain. God Bless America.

Posted by: BrianK | September 24, 2008 8:36 PM | Report abuse

"New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae"

From The New York Times
By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: September 11, 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

''There is a general recognition that the supervisory system for housing-related government-sponsored enterprises neither has the tools, nor the stature, to deal effectively with the current size, complexity and importance of these enterprises,'' Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told the House Financial Services Committee in an appearance with Housing Secretary Mel Martinez, who also backed the plan.

Mr. Snow said that Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies, a sign that the administration is less concerned about the perks of patronage than it is about the potential political problems associated with any new difficulties arising at the companies.

The administration's proposal, which was endorsed in large part today by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, would not repeal the significant government subsidies granted to the two companies. And it does not alter the implicit guarantee that Washington will bail the companies out if they run into financial difficulty; that perception enables them to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. Nor would it remove the companies' exemptions from taxes and antifraud provisions of federal securities laws.

The proposal is the opening act in one of the biggest and most significant lobbying battles of the Congressional session.

After the hearing, Representative Michael G. Oxley, chairman of the Financial Services Committee, and Senator Richard Shelby, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, announced their intention to draft legislation based on the administration's proposal. Industry executives said Congress could complete action on legislation before leaving for recess in the fall.

''The current regulator does not have the tools, or the mandate, to adequately regulate these enterprises,'' Mr. Oxley said at the hearing. ''We have seen in recent months that mismanagement and questionable accounting practices went largely unnoticed by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight,'' the independent agency that now regulates the companies.

''These irregularities, which have been going on for several years, should have been detected earlier by the regulator,'' he added.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which is part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, was created by Congress in 1992 after the bailout of the savings and loan industry and concerns about regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which buy mortgages from lenders and repackage them as securities or hold them in their own portfolios.

At the time, the companies and their allies beat back efforts for tougher oversight by the Treasury Department, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Federal Reserve. Supporters of the companies said efforts to regulate the lenders tightly under those agencies might diminish their ability to finance loans for lower-income families. This year, however, the chances of passing legislation to tighten the oversight are better than in the past.

Reflecting the changing political climate, both Fannie Mae and its leading rivals applauded the administration's package. The support from Fannie Mae came after a round of discussions between it and the administration and assurances from the Treasury that it would not seek to change the company's mission.

After those assurances, Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chief executive, endorsed the shift of regulatory oversight to the Treasury Department, as well as other elements of the plan.

''We welcome the administration's approach outlined today,'' Mr. Raines said. The company opposes some smaller elements of the package, like one that eliminates the authority of the president to appoint 5 of the company's 18 board members.

Company executives said that the company preferred having the president select some directors. The company is also likely to lobby against the efforts that give regulators too much authority to approve its products.

Freddie Mac, whose accounting is under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission and a United States attorney in Virginia, issued a statement calling the administration plan a ''responsible proposal.''

The stocks of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae fell while the prices of their bonds generally rose. Shares of Freddie Mac fell $2.04, or 3.7 percent, to $53.40, while Fannie Mae was down $1.62, or 2.4 percent, to $66.74. The price of a Fannie Mae bond due in March 2013 rose to 97.337 from 96.525.Its yield fell to 4.726 percent from 4.835 percent on Tuesday.

Fannie Mae, which was previously known as the Federal National Mortgage Association, and Freddie Mac, which was the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, have been criticized by rivals for exerting too much influence over their regulators.

''The regulator has not only been outmanned, it has been outlobbied,'' said Representative Richard H. Baker, the Louisiana Republican who has proposed legislation similar to the administration proposal and who leads a subcommittee that oversees the companies. ''Being underfunded does not explain how a glowing report of Freddie's operations was released only hours before the managerial upheaval that followed. This is not world-class regulatory work.''

Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Posted by: DemRats are Dickless, Your Responses Worthless | September 24, 2008 8:35 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:35 PM | Report abuse

Name rhymes with "Osama"
Middle name is Hussein
He is an Islamic
Did I mention (Hushed tone) "He is black"
Degree from Commie Harvard school
Smarter than the average hick
Eloquent (a plot)
Wife is "uppity" (code = black)
Friends with hippies
Did drugs
Secretly wants to surrender to Russia

We need a book banner / Pentacostal to save us from this "Obamanation"

An an old hot head millionaire autocrat who is "one of us"!

As long as they kow-tow to my insipid religious dogma, they get my vote.

And as a backup, we have DIEBOLD VOTING MACHINES! Thank GOD for the Amerikkkan weigh!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:35 PM | Report abuse

anyone need a good laugh..follow the link

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/achievement/

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Anyone want a good laugh..follow this link

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/achievement/

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Anyone want a good laugh..follow this link

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/achievement/

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Anyone want a good laugh..follow this link

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/achievement/

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Anyone want a good laugh..follow this link

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/achievement/

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

McCain is the problem so he should stay away. He said, "I don't understand crap about economy and finances."

Besides his campaign manager was still getting 'funny money' from Feddie or Fannie Mac.

Is McCain afraid to go before the American public and tell them his involvrment in this sordid mess?


McCain is trying to scare the voter and he has. They will go vote against the guy because he is the scary one.

Posted by: jethromayham | September 24, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Of course B.O. does not want to stop and focus on helping to resolve the wall street mess... THE WORSE IT GETS, THE CLOSER HE COMES TO WINNING THE ELECTION. Right now the only American who's celebrating our Country's financial crisis
is the Democratic candidate. And his supporters are relying on him to put our country on its road to recovery and prosperity? Someone who says "Me first, Country second" ?? Plus, debates are mere words; but helping to make tough decisions is what this country needs right now from a presidential candidate !!!

Posted by: susan | September 24, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Of course B.O. does not want to stop and focus on helping to resolve the wall street mess... THE WORSE IT GETS, THE CLOSER HE COMES TO WINNING THE ELECTION. Right now the only American who's celebrating our Country's financial crisis
is the Democratic candidate. And his supporters are relying on him to put our country on its road to recovery and prosperity? Someone who says "Me first, Country second" ?? Plus, debates are mere words; but helping to make tough decisions is what this country needs right now from a presidential candidate !!!

Posted by: susan | September 24, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Of course B.O. does not want to stop and focus on helping to resolve the wall street mess... THE WORSE IT GETS, THE CLOSER HE COMES TO WINNING THE ELECTION. Right now the only American who's celebrating our Country's financial crisis
is the Democratic candidate. And his supporters are relying on him to put our country on its road to recovery and prosperity? Someone who says "Me first, Country second" ?? Plus, debates are mere words; but helping to make tough decisions is what this country needs right now from a presidential candidate !!!

Posted by: susan | September 24, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

"It's stupid that people are accusing Obama of being hypocritical for not accepting McCain's invitation to join his McCampaign."

What's hypocritical is that if it was Obama's Idea to suspend the campaign's and postpone the debates the Obama supporters here would be praising it as genius...

Posted by: Ron E | September 24, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

From the New York Times of September 11, 2003:

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

From the New York Times of September 11, 2003:

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

KEATING FIVE
KEATING FIVE
KEATING FIVE
KEATING FIVE
KEATING FIVE

John McCain is a criminal who sold the U.S. out once during the S&L crisis, and he'll do it again. If you really love your country, you'll vote for Obama.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

From the NY Times Article of 09/11/2003:

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''


Posted by: No Server Problem | September 24, 2008 8:23 PM

---------------------------
How about these little gems? And from the guy actually running for POTUS....

McCain Supported A Banking Bill Because It Eliminated “The Tremendous Regulatory Burden Imposed On Financial Institutions.” While speaking in favor of bank deregulation on the floor of the senate, John McCain said, “This legislation takes a small but important step toward eliminating the tremendous regulatory burden imposed on financial institutions… One principal reason banks are unable to make loans is the bewildering array of statutory and regulatory restrictions and paperwork requirements imposed by Congress and the regulatory agencies. While a case can certainly be made that every law and regulation is intended to serve a laudable purpose, the aggregate effect of the rapidly increasing regulatory burden imposed on banks is to cause them to devote substantial time, energy and money to compliance rather than meeting the credit needs of the community.” [Congressional Record, 11/19/93; emphasis added]

McCain Supported A Bill To “Takes A Small Step Forward Toward Eliminating Unnecessary Regulatory Burdens Imposed On Banks.” While speaking in favor of bank deregulation on the floor of the senate, John McCain said, “While a case can certainly be made that every law and regulation is intended to serve a laudable purpose, the aggregate effect of the rapidly increasing regulatory burden imposed on banks is to cause them to devote substantial time, energy and money to compliance rather than meeting the credit needs of the community … This bill recognizes this fact, and takes a small step forward toward eliminating unnecessary regulatory burdens imposed on banks.” [Congressional Record, 11/19/93; emphasis added]

McCain Said The Best Thing Government Can Do For Business Is “Stay Out Of Its Way.” While speaking about the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act on the floor on the Senate in 2000, John McCain said, “I am convinced that the best thing government can often do to advance the fortunes of the private sector is to stay out of its way. I support this bill because it makes progress toward that end, by improving companies’ flexibility to hire the talent they need, while providing for the regulatory framework and new educational opportunities to protect and promote American workers.” [Congressional Record, 10/3/00; emphasis added]

In 1999, McCain Supported Phil Gramm’s Banking Deregulation Bill. In 1999, John McCain voted for passage of the Senate version of a bill that would eliminate current barriers erected by the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act and other laws that impede affiliations between banking, securities, insurance and other firms. The bill also would exempt small, non-urban banks from the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), revise the Federal Home Loan Bank system and require that owners of automated teller machines (ATMs) provide notice on the ATM and on-screen of any charges imposed for the use of the terminal. The bill passed 54-44. [S. 900, Vote #105, 5/6/99]

McCain Missed The Vote For Final Passage Because He Was Campaigning In New Hampshire. John McCain missed the final vote on Phil Gramm’s banking deregulation bill because he was campaigning in New Hampshire. [NPR, “Morning Edition,” 11/5/99; S. 900, Vote #354, 11/4/99]

McCain Has Based His 2008 Campaign On Promoting Less Regulation
McCain: “I Don’t Think Anyone Who Wants To Increase The Burden Of Government Regulation And Higher Taxes Has Any Real Understanding Of Economics.” During a McCain Town Hall in Inez, Kentucky, John McCain said, “When we come out of this recession and we will because I believe that the fundamentals of our economy are good … Sen. Clinton wants the government to make the decisions for you on your health care, I want the families to make the decisions on their health care. I don’t think anyone who wants to increase the burden of government regulation and higher taxes has any real understanding of economics and the economy and what is needed in order to ensure the future of this country.” [McCain Town Hall in Inez, Kentucky, 4/23/08; emphasis added]


McCain: “I Understand Why The AFL-CIO And Maybe Other Unions May Oppose My Free Market, Less Regulation, Right To Work.” During an appearance on Fox’s “Special Report with Brit Hume,” John McCain said, “I understand why the AFL-CIO and maybe other unions may oppose my free market less regulation right to work. I think we have honest differences of opinion. I respect those labor unions, but I’m sure that those differences are very intense and very real.” [Fox News,” Special Report with Brit Hume,” 3/12/08]

McCain: “Let’s Reduce Regulation.” While speaking about the economy in St. Louis, Missouri, John McCain said, “I’m asked all the time are we in a recession or not in a recession. And I don’t know the answer to that because it’s kind of a technical term… I do not believe we should raise your taxes. I think it would be the worst thing we could do. And that means to me I think the tax cuts need to be made permanent. When you’ve got a bad economy, the worst thing you can do is increase people’s tax burden. Let’s reduce it. Let’s reduce regulation.” [CNN, “Ballot Bowl, 3/15/08]

McCain: “We Need To Return To The Reagan Years… We Need Less Regulation.” As shown on PBS’s “Washington Week,” John McCain said, “We need to return to the Reagan years. We need to have fiscal conservatism. We need less government. We need less regulation. We need to end of spending spree which has eroded our base of Republican support.” [PBS, “Washington Week,” 1/25/08]

McCain Promised To “Give Them Lower Taxes, Less Regulation, Less Government In Their Lives.” As shown on CNN’s “CNN Newsroom,” John McCain said, “We’ve got to do the other things necessary to encourage business and give them lower taxes, less regulation, less government in their lives, and that means a simpler, fairer — tax code. The tax code in America is broken and it needs to be fixed.” [CNN, “CNN Newsroom,” 2/14/08]

To Fix the Economy, McCain Would “We’ve Got To Take Specific Actions, Keep Their Taxes Low, Less Regulation.” As shown on ABC’s “Good Morning America,” John McCain said, “That our economy is in terrible shape, that we’ve got to take specific actions, keep their taxes low, less regulation, get - start exploring and exploiting offshore oil deposits.” [ABC, “Good Morning America,” 7/2/08]

McCain Said The Difference Between Obama & Himself Would Be “More Regulation Or Less Regulation.” During a media availability in Phoenix, Arizona, John McCain said, “I think the important thing is that there will be stark differences between either Senator [Clinton] or Senator Obama and me because they are liberal Democrats and I’m a conservative Republican… whether we pursue the present strategy in Iraq or whether we — or whether we set a date for withdrawal, which will mean Al Qaida wins; whether we have more regulation or less regulation.” [McCain Media Availability via CQ Transcriptions, 3/3/08; emphasis added]

Oh i have a GIANT list more for ya if interested.
You quote an article from 2003 on ONE Bill that was opposed by Dems because of a wrinkle in the bill that may have hurt low income home owners...however John McCain and the GOP has a lifetime of voting against deregulation. To say otherwise would be akin to saying that the GOP is the pro-choice party.
KOO KOO
KOO KOO
go back into your little clock

Posted by: feastorafamine | September 24, 2008 8:30 PM | Report abuse

"New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae"

From The New York Times
By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: September 11, 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

''There is a general recognition that the supervisory system for housing-related government-sponsored enterprises neither has the tools, nor the stature, to deal effectively with the current size, complexity and importance of these enterprises,'' Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told the House Financial Services Committee in an appearance with Housing Secretary Mel Martinez, who also backed the plan.

Mr. Snow said that Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies, a sign that the administration is less concerned about the perks of patronage than it is about the potential political problems associated with any new difficulties arising at the companies.

The administration's proposal, which was endorsed in large part today by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, would not repeal the significant government subsidies granted to the two companies. And it does not alter the implicit guarantee that Washington will bail the companies out if they run into financial difficulty; that perception enables them to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. Nor would it remove the companies' exemptions from taxes and antifraud provisions of federal securities laws.

The proposal is the opening act in one of the biggest and most significant lobbying battles of the Congressional session.

After the hearing, Representative Michael G. Oxley, chairman of the Financial Services Committee, and Senator Richard Shelby, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, announced their intention to draft legislation based on the administration's proposal. Industry executives said Congress could complete action on legislation before leaving for recess in the fall.

''The current regulator does not have the tools, or the mandate, to adequately regulate these enterprises,'' Mr. Oxley said at the hearing. ''We have seen in recent months that mismanagement and questionable accounting practices went largely unnoticed by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight,'' the independent agency that now regulates the companies.

''These irregularities, which have been going on for several years, should have been detected earlier by the regulator,'' he added.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which is part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, was created by Congress in 1992 after the bailout of the savings and loan industry and concerns about regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which buy mortgages from lenders and repackage them as securities or hold them in their own portfolios.

At the time, the companies and their allies beat back efforts for tougher oversight by the Treasury Department, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Federal Reserve. Supporters of the companies said efforts to regulate the lenders tightly under those agencies might diminish their ability to finance loans for lower-income families. This year, however, the chances of passing legislation to tighten the oversight are better than in the past.

Reflecting the changing political climate, both Fannie Mae and its leading rivals applauded the administration's package. The support from Fannie Mae came after a round of discussions between it and the administration and assurances from the Treasury that it would not seek to change the company's mission.

After those assurances, Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chief executive, endorsed the shift of regulatory oversight to the Treasury Department, as well as other elements of the plan.

''We welcome the administration's approach outlined today,'' Mr. Raines said. The company opposes some smaller elements of the package, like one that eliminates the authority of the president to appoint 5 of the company's 18 board members.

Company executives said that the company preferred having the president select some directors. The company is also likely to lobby against the efforts that give regulators too much authority to approve its products.

Freddie Mac, whose accounting is under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission and a United States attorney in Virginia, issued a statement calling the administration plan a ''responsible proposal.''

The stocks of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae fell while the prices of their bonds generally rose. Shares of Freddie Mac fell $2.04, or 3.7 percent, to $53.40, while Fannie Mae was down $1.62, or 2.4 percent, to $66.74. The price of a Fannie Mae bond due in March 2013 rose to 97.337 from 96.525.Its yield fell to 4.726 percent from 4.835 percent on Tuesday.

Fannie Mae, which was previously known as the Federal National Mortgage Association, and Freddie Mac, which was the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, have been criticized by rivals for exerting too much influence over their regulators.

''The regulator has not only been outmanned, it has been outlobbied,'' said Representative Richard H. Baker, the Louisiana Republican who has proposed legislation similar to the administration proposal and who leads a subcommittee that oversees the companies. ''Being underfunded does not explain how a glowing report of Freddie's operations was released only hours before the managerial upheaval that followed. This is not world-class regulatory work.''

Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Posted by: Obama And His Running Dogs | September 24, 2008 8:30 PM | Report abuse

I'm disappointed that Obama cannot rise above his own personal ambition...
Posted by: Kathy | September 24, 2008 8:27 PM

Kathy, do some research before you post this nonsense. Honestly. Read up. You're a misguided lemming.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:29 PM | Report abuse

McChicken is pathetic...running away...only a f----ing stupid bird brain would beleive he's doing this to help the negotaitions...what a joke..

- Championed more deregulation, just as early as 3 months ago.
- Wants to privatize Social Security, borrow trillions to invest it in wall street..can you imagine. What a genius..
- Wants to have health credits - which will effectively rid companies of doing their part to pay medical for employees.,just like 401K's got rid of their pension obligations...

I challenge any of you neo con McChicken lovers that make under $150K a year to tell me how you've benefited under the Republican's...and please keep it to concrete benefits, not any wild raving halucenations...just one example

Posted by: JJ | September 24, 2008 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Hey JakeD - I thought that the expenditures on the wars takes a toll on the national debt. What are your thoughts?

Posted by: theodosia1 | September 24, 2008 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Last week, the "fundamentals of the economy" were strong. This week, the economy is in such a crisis, the presidential contest must be postponed.

Which is it? Is this senility setting in?

Posted by: David | September 24, 2008 8:27 PM | Report abuse

I'm disappointed that Obama cannot rise above his own personal ambition, even for a couple days, and do what he was elected ALREADY to do--work in the Senate to fashion a bi-partisan solution to our problem. I was going to vote for him but now I see he's even worse than Hillary. Just blind ambition with no real care or change. He had the perfect opportunity to shift into a positive collaborative mode today. He flunked, in my opinion. If he can't rise to the level necessary now, how in the heck can this man lead? Answer is, to my sorrow, he cannot.

Posted by: Kathy | September 24, 2008 8:27 PM | Report abuse


Is McCain for real?!!
He wants to stop EVERYTHING to help cram another 700 Billion dollars of debt down our throats without properly checking it out first. "Hurry, Hurry, Stop Thinking, Just do what I say Now!" has always been the Bush administration's way of doing things,......Why is it so imperative to act immediately? This screw up has taken time to develop, so think about what it is and the long term effects of ALL of the solutions before jumping blindly into it like Bush and friends would have us do. His guidance hasn't been exactly stellar so far has it? But McCain's already on the bus and honking the horn.

Remember,...If it smells like Bovine Feces,...........

SLOW DOWN AMERICA!

Posted by: Olddog | September 24, 2008 8:26 PM | Report abuse

As long as you believe in the mythical deity that THEY do, you will be on the side of right. You can throw LOGIC out the window. You can spew hatred, for the DEITY inspired you to do so. We should elimate all non - believers, except for the Jews of course, who are the elect. We have the bombs to do this. We will still have McDonald's and malls, so we will be OK. Lets outlaw art too, it is a commie plot. Did I mention, his middle name is Hussein and his name rhymes with Osama! What more PROOF do you need?

Posted by: misguided one | September 24, 2008 8:25 PM | Report abuse

Something is wrong with the Manchurian Candidate's thought processes. If he does get to be president, they better keep him away from the launch buttons.
McCains first act after being sworn in will be to Bomb,Bomb,Bomb Iran.

Posted by: seems to me | September 24, 2008 8:24 PM | Report abuse

McCain is afraid that the focus will shift from the crisis itself to who's to blame for it. He doesn't want to explain how he spent the last 20 years being a deregulation hawk - how he had a role in deregulating the savings and loans years ago and was a strong proponent of the deregulation that allowed this whole mortgage mess.

So, how does he change the focus? Rush back to Washington and make sure to be in the room when anything is announced so he can take credit for it, and then claim to have saved the day. What a fraud!

Posted by: Speaktruth | September 24, 2008 8:24 PM | Report abuse

I agree, SouthernDemocrat. After reading all these posts, I’m glad that McCain cancelled — this was indeed supposed to be the foreign policy debate — now it is clear that Obama was going to sandbag McCain on the economy. Much better that BOTH SENATORS go to the Senate and pass legislation than simply debate about it, even in Mississippi.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 8:23 PM | Report abuse

McCain: The Most Reprehensible of the Keating Five

The story of "the Keating Five" has become a scandal rivaling Teapot Dome and Watergate

By Tom Fitzpatrick
Published on November 29, 1989

You're John McCain, a fallen hero who wanted to become president so desperately that you sold yourself to Charlie Keating, the wealthy con man who bears such an incredible resemblance to The Joker. Obviously, Keating thought you could make it to the White House, too.

He poured $112,000 into your political campaigns. He became your friend. He threw fund raisers in your honor. He even made a sweet shopping-center investment deal for your wife, Cindy. Your father-in-law, Jim Hensley, was cut in on the deal, too.

Nothing was too good for you. Why not? Keating saw you as a prime investment that would pay off in the future.

So he flew you and your family around the country in his private jets. Time after time, he put you up for serene, private vacations at his vast, palatial spa in the Bahamas. All of this was so grand. You were protected from what Thomas Hardy refers to as "the madding crowd." It was almost as though you were already staying at a presidential retreat.

Like the old song, that now seems "Long ago and far away."

Since Keating's collapse, you find yourself doing obscene things to save yourself from the Senate Ethics Committee's investigation. As a matter of course, you engage in backbiting behavior that will turn you into an outcast in the Senate if you do survive.

They say that if you put five lobsters into a pot and give them a chance to escape, none will be able to do so before you light the fire. Each time a lobster tries to climb over the top, his fellow lobsters will pull him back down. It is the way of lobsters and threatened United States senators.

And, of course, that's the way it is with the Keating Five. You are all battling to save your own hides. So you, McCain, leak to reporters about who did Keating's bidding in pressuring federal regulators to change the rules for Lincoln Savings and Loan.

When the reporters fail to print your tips quickly enough--as in the case of your tip on Michigan Senator Donald Riegle--you call them back and remind them how important it is to get that information in the newspapers.

The story of "the Keating Five" has become a scandal rivaling Teapot Dome and Watergate. The outcome will be decided, not in a courtroom, but probably on national television.

Those who survive will be the sociopaths who can tell a lie with the most sincere, straight face. You are especially adept at this.

Last Friday night, on The John McLaughlin Show, which features well-known Washington journalists, the subject of the Keating Five was discussed. Panelist Jack Germond suggested that three of the Keating Five were probably already through in politics.

So you spend your days desperately trying to make sure you will be one of the survivors. You keep volunteering to go on radio and television stations to protest your innocence. Last week you made ABC's Nightline.

Not long before that you somehow managed to get James Kilpatrick, the national columnist, to write a favorable paragraph about you. Last Sunday morning, you made it to national television again; this time on ABC's This Week With David Brinkley. You smiled at the panel with your usual studied insouciance. Sitting next to you was Senator John Glenn of Ohio.

Brinkley, Sam Donaldson, and George Will were the interrogators.
It was a sobering scene. There you sat with Glenn, both sweating before the cameras, waiting to answer questions: two badly tarnished American icons.

No one forgets that Glenn was the first American astronaut to orbit the Earth. You won't let anyone forget that you were a prisoner of war. But you have played that tune too long. By now your constant reminders about your war record make you seem like a modern version of Arthur Miller's tragic failure Willy Loman.

Clearly, both you and Glenn sold your fame for Charles Keating's money.

It was a Faustian bargain. It was also a bad joke on the rest of us and a disaster for many old people who lost their life's savings to Keating.

The money was never really Keating's to give. But he never would have got his hands on it if you and the rest of the Keating Five didn't halt the government takeover for two long years while Keating's people continued their looting.

And now, the tab for the Savings and Loan heist must be paid from taxpayer pockets.

On Sunday, Senators Dennis DeConcini, Alan Cranston, and Riegle refused offers to appear on the Brinkley show. What must we make of that?

You, the closest of them to Keating and the deepest in his debt, have chosen the path of the hard sell. You may even make it out of the pot, but to many, your protestations of innocence taste like gall.

You are determined to bluff your way. You will stick to your story that you were acting to help a constituent and intended to do nothing improper. The very fact you attended the meeting makes you guilty, just as every man who entered the Brinks vault went to prison.

You insist that an accounting firm Keating hired told you Lincoln was sound. Alan Greenspan, who Keating also hired, wrote a report saying it was sound. Why shouldn't you believe the people Keating hired? You were, after all, fellow employees. Perhaps you might silence your own conscience about all this someday.

Just keep telling everyone that it was your wife's money invested in that shopping center with Keating and that you knew nothing about it.

Keep saying that cynical newspaper people don't understand that every move you make has always been for the enrichment of Arizona . . . the education of our Native Americans on the reservations . . . for the love of the elderly in Sun City and Green Valley.

Keep telling them that it wasn't that you were bought off but that Charlie Keating got special help only because he was one of the biggest employers in the state.

Just keep sitting there and staring into the camera and denying that Keating bought you for money and jet plane trips and vacations.

So what if he gave you $112,000? Just keep smiling at the cameras and saying you did nothing wrong.

Maybe the voters will understand you took those tiring trips to Charlie's place in the Bahamas in their behalf. Certainly, they can understand you wanted to take your family along. A senator deserves to travel on private jets, removed from the awful crush of public transportation.

You sought out a master criminal like Keating and became his friend. Now you've discarded him. It shouldn't be surprising that you are now in the process of selling out your senatorial accomplices.

You're John McCain, clearly the guiltiest, most culpable and reprehensible of the Keating Five. But you know the power of television and you realize this is the only way you can possibly save your political career.

Posted by: JOHN MCCAIN=KEATING FIVE | September 24, 2008 8:23 PM | Report abuse

There is no problem with the server at The Post or with duplicate posts. This is the only post worth reading for objective, rational people. The DemRat have no answer for this worth reading.

From the NY Times Article of 09/11/2003:

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Posted by: No Server Problem | September 24, 2008 8:23 PM | Report abuse

Barney Frank still doesn't get it. This guy went to Harvard? Affordable housing comes with the ability to pay the mortgage, not get one.

As for Obama. The Debate must go on! Sounds like an old Hollywood movie. Hey kids, let's run for President!

http://www.bop-o-rama.com

Posted by: acarponzo | September 24, 2008 8:23 PM | Report abuse

Last week, the "fundamentals of the economy" were strong. This week, the economy is in such a crisis, the presidential context must be postponed.

Which is it? Is this senility setting in?

Posted by: David | September 24, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

Wow, I have changed my vote to McCain! It's shocking that obama say the debate should go on, like he doesn't even realize that this debate is to be about foreign policy! Plus he thinks campaigning is more important than our imploding economy. McCain 2008!

Posted by: SouthernDemocrat | September 24, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

Don't bow to DemRat lies and misdirection. This was how the New York Times reported the growing mess of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac in 2003. You must not give these people power.

NYT September 11, 2003:

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:21 PM | Report abuse

There seems to be a problem with the server for this comment page. There are a lot of duplicates and I don't think people are deliberately posting multiple times. I think it's the server and we'll just have to deal until the Post fixes it.

Posted by: PleaseChange | September 24, 2008 8:20 PM | Report abuse

VOTE McCAIN-PALIN in NOVEMBER 2008!!!

Why? Here's why...

From the same NY Times Article in 2003:

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:19 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats created this mess.


In 2003, the Bush administration wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused!


See this New York Times article from September 11, 2003.


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.


Proof!


The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.


Note the Barney Frank quote on page 2 of the New York Times article from September 11, 2003. It's very revealing!


It was the Democrats who pushed for this deregulation -- because the liberals feared that regulations placed on Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac would deny home loans to poor minorities.

A vote for Obama in November is a vote for unprecedented financial DISASTER. You ain't seen nothing yet!


The Democrats caused this financial mess with their deregulation of the mortgage industry via liberal policies of forcing lenders to lend to poor people... who can't possibly pay back.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 8:19 PM | Report abuse

JayKay2 has it spot on. The only way we can bolster our economy and enter back into the global competition is by supporting our future. It starts with good education, health care and giving tax breaks to the working class. Obama will do this for us. Obviously the economy won't change overnight, but I think Obama has the right policies to lead us to a better America in the future.

GO OBAMA!!!

Posted by: politicqueen | September 24, 2008 8:18 PM | Report abuse

Carol:

I don't answer "Anonymous" or fake "JakeD" questions. What's you excuse for not answering my question to you (this will be the last time I ask you):

Is "The One" going to debate himself?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 8:18 PM | Report abuse

Anonymous - those who seek to hide are members of the Invisible Empire of the Ku Klux Klan.

Posted by: theodosia1 | September 24, 2008 8:18 PM | Report abuse

To you Bastard Scum Demrats...

From the same NY Times Article in 2003:

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:17 PM | Report abuse

>>>

Another huge mistake by the McCain campaign. Now McCain can't back down now because it will look like he "lost" the challenge to Obama. So the debate will have to be postponed because the university is not going to have a debate without both candidates. But this is perfect because now the first debate will be between Palin and Biden. By then the Dow will be under 10,000 and all those 401k's will be bleeding cash. The first question of the VP debate will be "Ms. Palin, have you ever heard of the stock market, or would you like to take a minute to check with your teachers before answering the question?"

Posted by: Dan Rains | September 24, 2008 7:34 PM

No problem with no McCain...as an alternative, invite Bob Barr and Ron Paul to the debates to provide the conservative viewpoint. Add Nader, too, for another left of center view on the foreign policy issues of the day. I bet McCain will get his behind back to Mississippi.

Posted by: ldsw | September 24, 2008 8:17 PM | Report abuse

McCain is disingenuous.

As usual.

I'm glad Obama called it as he saw it. And in a gracious way.

Posted by: Adrian | September 24, 2008 8:17 PM | Report abuse

MCCAIN CAMPAIGN JUST CAME OUT WITH A STATEMENT..MCCAIN SAID HE WANTS TO MOVE THE FIRST DEBATE TO NOVEMBER 5TH 2008..NOW WHITE HOUSE TRYING TO COVER MCCAINS GIMMICK BY ASKING OBAMA AND MCCAIN TO COME TO WHITE HOUSE TOMORROW..WHAT A JOKE.

Posted by: america_first | September 24, 2008 8:16 PM | Report abuse

At least McCain has a voting record
Obama doesn't
He stands on his teleprompter

He is doing what I would expect an ex-POW to do.
Something for the country.

Obama- Osama - the difference is the BS

Posted by: JWinGeorgia | September 24, 2008 8:16 PM | Report abuse

"New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae"

From The New York Times
By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: September 11, 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

''There is a general recognition that the supervisory system for housing-related government-sponsored enterprises neither has the tools, nor the stature, to deal effectively with the current size, complexity and importance of these enterprises,'' Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told the House Financial Services Committee in an appearance with Housing Secretary Mel Martinez, who also backed the plan.

Mr. Snow said that Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies, a sign that the administration is less concerned about the perks of patronage than it is about the potential political problems associated with any new difficulties arising at the companies.

The administration's proposal, which was endorsed in large part today by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, would not repeal the significant government subsidies granted to the two companies. And it does not alter the implicit guarantee that Washington will bail the companies out if they run into financial difficulty; that perception enables them to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. Nor would it remove the companies' exemptions from taxes and antifraud provisions of federal securities laws.

The proposal is the opening act in one of the biggest and most significant lobbying battles of the Congressional session.

After the hearing, Representative Michael G. Oxley, chairman of the Financial Services Committee, and Senator Richard Shelby, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, announced their intention to draft legislation based on the administration's proposal. Industry executives said Congress could complete action on legislation before leaving for recess in the fall.

''The current regulator does not have the tools, or the mandate, to adequately regulate these enterprises,'' Mr. Oxley said at the hearing. ''We have seen in recent months that mismanagement and questionable accounting practices went largely unnoticed by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight,'' the independent agency that now regulates the companies.

''These irregularities, which have been going on for several years, should have been detected earlier by the regulator,'' he added.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which is part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, was created by Congress in 1992 after the bailout of the savings and loan industry and concerns about regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which buy mortgages from lenders and repackage them as securities or hold them in their own portfolios.

At the time, the companies and their allies beat back efforts for tougher oversight by the Treasury Department, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Federal Reserve. Supporters of the companies said efforts to regulate the lenders tightly under those agencies might diminish their ability to finance loans for lower-income families. This year, however, the chances of passing legislation to tighten the oversight are better than in the past.

Reflecting the changing political climate, both Fannie Mae and its leading rivals applauded the administration's package. The support from Fannie Mae came after a round of discussions between it and the administration and assurances from the Treasury that it would not seek to change the company's mission.

After those assurances, Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chief executive, endorsed the shift of regulatory oversight to the Treasury Department, as well as other elements of the plan.

''We welcome the administration's approach outlined today,'' Mr. Raines said. The company opposes some smaller elements of the package, like one that eliminates the authority of the president to appoint 5 of the company's 18 board members.

Company executives said that the company preferred having the president select some directors. The company is also likely to lobby against the efforts that give regulators too much authority to approve its products.

Freddie Mac, whose accounting is under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission and a United States attorney in Virginia, issued a statement calling the administration plan a ''responsible proposal.''

The stocks of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae fell while the prices of their bonds generally rose. Shares of Freddie Mac fell $2.04, or 3.7 percent, to $53.40, while Fannie Mae was down $1.62, or 2.4 percent, to $66.74. The price of a Fannie Mae bond due in March 2013 rose to 97.337 from 96.525.Its yield fell to 4.726 percent from 4.835 percent on Tuesday.

Fannie Mae, which was previously known as the Federal National Mortgage Association, and Freddie Mac, which was the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, have been criticized by rivals for exerting too much influence over their regulators.

''The regulator has not only been outmanned, it has been outlobbied,'' said Representative Richard H. Baker, the Louisiana Republican who has proposed legislation similar to the administration proposal and who leads a subcommittee that oversees the companies. ''Being underfunded does not explain how a glowing report of Freddie's operations was released only hours before the managerial upheaval that followed. This is not world-class regulatory work.''

Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Posted by: Demrats Killed Us in 2003 | September 24, 2008 8:16 PM | Report abuse

How dare he use our crisis as a political stunt.,..
Shame on him...
He is going to panic the American people and make things worse.

Posted by: Gary | September 24, 2008 8:16 PM | Report abuse

"New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae"

From The New York Times
By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: September 11, 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

''There is a general recognition that the supervisory system for housing-related government-sponsored enterprises neither has the tools, nor the stature, to deal effectively with the current size, complexity and importance of these enterprises,'' Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told the House Financial Services Committee in an appearance with Housing Secretary Mel Martinez, who also backed the plan.

Mr. Snow said that Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies, a sign that the administration is less concerned about the perks of patronage than it is about the potential political problems associated with any new difficulties arising at the companies.

The administration's proposal, which was endorsed in large part today by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, would not repeal the significant government subsidies granted to the two companies. And it does not alter the implicit guarantee that Washington will bail the companies out if they run into financial difficulty; that perception enables them to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. Nor would it remove the companies' exemptions from taxes and antifraud provisions of federal securities laws.

The proposal is the opening act in one of the biggest and most significant lobbying battles of the Congressional session.

After the hearing, Representative Michael G. Oxley, chairman of the Financial Services Committee, and Senator Richard Shelby, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, announced their intention to draft legislation based on the administration's proposal. Industry executives said Congress could complete action on legislation before leaving for recess in the fall.

''The current regulator does not have the tools, or the mandate, to adequately regulate these enterprises,'' Mr. Oxley said at the hearing. ''We have seen in recent months that mismanagement and questionable accounting practices went largely unnoticed by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight,'' the independent agency that now regulates the companies.

''These irregularities, which have been going on for several years, should have been detected earlier by the regulator,'' he added.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which is part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, was created by Congress in 1992 after the bailout of the savings and loan industry and concerns about regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which buy mortgages from lenders and repackage them as securities or hold them in their own portfolios.

At the time, the companies and their allies beat back efforts for tougher oversight by the Treasury Department, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Federal Reserve. Supporters of the companies said efforts to regulate the lenders tightly under those agencies might diminish their ability to finance loans for lower-income families. This year, however, the chances of passing legislation to tighten the oversight are better than in the past.

Reflecting the changing political climate, both Fannie Mae and its leading rivals applauded the administration's package. The support from Fannie Mae came after a round of discussions between it and the administration and assurances from the Treasury that it would not seek to change the company's mission.

After those assurances, Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chief executive, endorsed the shift of regulatory oversight to the Treasury Department, as well as other elements of the plan.

''We welcome the administration's approach outlined today,'' Mr. Raines said. The company opposes some smaller elements of the package, like one that eliminates the authority of the president to appoint 5 of the company's 18 board members.

Company executives said that the company preferred having the president select some directors. The company is also likely to lobby against the efforts that give regulators too much authority to approve its products.

Freddie Mac, whose accounting is under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission and a United States attorney in Virginia, issued a statement calling the administration plan a ''responsible proposal.''

The stocks of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae fell while the prices of their bonds generally rose. Shares of Freddie Mac fell $2.04, or 3.7 percent, to $53.40, while Fannie Mae was down $1.62, or 2.4 percent, to $66.74. The price of a Fannie Mae bond due in March 2013 rose to 97.337 from 96.525.Its yield fell to 4.726 percent from 4.835 percent on Tuesday.

Fannie Mae, which was previously known as the Federal National Mortgage Association, and Freddie Mac, which was the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, have been criticized by rivals for exerting too much influence over their regulators.

''The regulator has not only been outmanned, it has been outlobbied,'' said Representative Richard H. Baker, the Louisiana Republican who has proposed legislation similar to the administration proposal and who leads a subcommittee that oversees the companies. ''Being underfunded does not explain how a glowing report of Freddie's operations was released only hours before the managerial upheaval that followed. This is not world-class regulatory work.''

Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Posted by: Let the Demrats Rot | September 24, 2008 8:15 PM | Report abuse

"New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae"

From The New York Times
By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: September 11, 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

''There is a general recognition that the supervisory system for housing-related government-sponsored enterprises neither has the tools, nor the stature, to deal effectively with the current size, complexity and importance of these enterprises,'' Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told the House Financial Services Committee in an appearance with Housing Secretary Mel Martinez, who also backed the plan.

Mr. Snow said that Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies, a sign that the administration is less concerned about the perks of patronage than it is about the potential political problems associated with any new difficulties arising at the companies.

The administration's proposal, which was endorsed in large part today by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, would not repeal the significant government subsidies granted to the two companies. And it does not alter the implicit guarantee that Washington will bail the companies out if they run into financial difficulty; that perception enables them to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. Nor would it remove the companies' exemptions from taxes and antifraud provisions of federal securities laws.

The proposal is the opening act in one of the biggest and most significant lobbying battles of the Congressional session.

After the hearing, Representative Michael G. Oxley, chairman of the Financial Services Committee, and Senator Richard Shelby, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, announced their intention to draft legislation based on the administration's proposal. Industry executives said Congress could complete action on legislation before leaving for recess in the fall.

''The current regulator does not have the tools, or the mandate, to adequately regulate these enterprises,'' Mr. Oxley said at the hearing. ''We have seen in recent months that mismanagement and questionable accounting practices went largely unnoticed by the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight,'' the independent agency that now regulates the companies.

''These irregularities, which have been going on for several years, should have been detected earlier by the regulator,'' he added.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, which is part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, was created by Congress in 1992 after the bailout of the savings and loan industry and concerns about regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which buy mortgages from lenders and repackage them as securities or hold them in their own portfolios.

At the time, the companies and their allies beat back efforts for tougher oversight by the Treasury Department, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or the Federal Reserve. Supporters of the companies said efforts to regulate the lenders tightly under those agencies might diminish their ability to finance loans for lower-income families. This year, however, the chances of passing legislation to tighten the oversight are better than in the past.

Reflecting the changing political climate, both Fannie Mae and its leading rivals applauded the administration's package. The support from Fannie Mae came after a round of discussions between it and the administration and assurances from the Treasury that it would not seek to change the company's mission.

After those assurances, Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chief executive, endorsed the shift of regulatory oversight to the Treasury Department, as well as other elements of the plan.

''We welcome the administration's approach outlined today,'' Mr. Raines said. The company opposes some smaller elements of the package, like one that eliminates the authority of the president to appoint 5 of the company's 18 board members.

Company executives said that the company preferred having the president select some directors. The company is also likely to lobby against the efforts that give regulators too much authority to approve its products.

Freddie Mac, whose accounting is under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission and a United States attorney in Virginia, issued a statement calling the administration plan a ''responsible proposal.''

The stocks of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae fell while the prices of their bonds generally rose. Shares of Freddie Mac fell $2.04, or 3.7 percent, to $53.40, while Fannie Mae was down $1.62, or 2.4 percent, to $66.74. The price of a Fannie Mae bond due in March 2013 rose to 97.337 from 96.525.Its yield fell to 4.726 percent from 4.835 percent on Tuesday.

Fannie Mae, which was previously known as the Federal National Mortgage Association, and Freddie Mac, which was the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, have been criticized by rivals for exerting too much influence over their regulators.

''The regulator has not only been outmanned, it has been outlobbied,'' said Representative Richard H. Baker, the Louisiana Republican who has proposed legislation similar to the administration proposal and who leads a subcommittee that oversees the companies. ''Being underfunded does not explain how a glowing report of Freddie's operations was released only hours before the managerial upheaval that followed. This is not world-class regulatory work.''

Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Posted by: Democrats Suck | September 24, 2008 8:14 PM | Report abuse

It is disgusting that McCain thinks his impute in Washington is really going to make a difference considering his voting record.
He needs to stay out of it..
He has done enough damage.
He is doing everything he can to get out of the debates because he knows his voting record has caused this crisis..


Posted by: lisa | September 24, 2008 8:13 PM | Report abuse

"HOW ABOUT YOU JUST SHORTER VERSION; "Anus". IT FITS YOU PROFILE ALSO." -Anonymous

Anyway, kudos to Obama. He's quickly showing me that age may be an issue from now in when selecting a president. Obama is quick and transparent, and not a little bit idealistic, which is good.

McCain behaves like a freak. I don't know what to make of him. Sometimes I look at his image, reflect on the RNC, then think to myself, "Evil con artist".

Something about the depths he'll stoop to to gain control of the nation keeps me queasy.

Posted by: Crystal | September 24, 2008 8:13 PM | Report abuse

I guess BHO feels the the do nothing Dem Houses can mess this up w/o his help. On the other hand JM is where he needs to be as an elected official.McCain/Palin have it right Country First...

Posted by: ME | September 24, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

Yea, watch ...John "The Fundamentals are Strong" McCain is about to deliver a "PLATITUDE" about why he is morally superior and more American since he is willing to finally go to Washington after 5 mos. when the real reason is that Grandpa McLame just needs a nap before he can multitask...Yea, that's a real leader there!

Posted by: Justin McC | September 24, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

This is about suspending the election not just the debates.

Posted by: John Cash | September 24, 2008 8:12 PM | Report abuse

America is debating


So why not them?


=

Posted by: Tim | September 24, 2008 8:11 PM | Report abuse

I'm very disappointed in McCain on this one. Obama and McCain were similar on what they thought should be added to the bailout deal - oversight, relief for homeowners, etc. By making a joint statement that was bi-partisan they could have politically made the crisis a non-issue for both of them instead of trying to get political leverage out of it.

But McCain is obviously looking for political leverage by jumping the gun on what should have been a joint statement - the wild guy taking the high risks again. Big win if right, big loss if wrong. Do you want to gamble your future continuously for the next 4 years with this kind of leadership style?

A bi-partisan position is the moral thing to do when the consequences of what is happening on Wall Street are so large. It seems to me that Mr Deregulator is trying to gauge what might give him political advantage first and foremost. He has been part of the problem, lacking the foresight of what was to come.

Now this 700 billion bail out is tricky. Business models/conventional wisdoms have to change whether you conduct a bail out or not and there is a high chance that the bailout will not stop the financial recession/depression that is on the horizon. It may just serve to make a debtor nation that much more in debt.

When the inevitable pain trickles down on Main Street the blame game is going to have two potential options: the bill is not passed, you did not support it, we fell into a recession/depression - bad choice on your part. Versus, the bail out was passed but we still fell into a recession/depression so you put us even more in debt that we were, we should have just taken our medicine as it came, so that is a bad choice on your part.

However, here is the tricky thing. It is unlikely that we will know whether the bail out had any significant impact on the end consequence until after the election so it will fall down on prevailing public opinion. I think McCain is trying to figure out where to fall to gain him votes and that is probably so far as his interests hold him.

I think it is a challenge for Obama as well, but I think he will weigh the pros and cons for the country and not just political advantage. Remember that McCain is in the weak position here because of his past endorsement of de-regulation and various other gaffs. Obama is giving him a safe solution for him, by offering to come forward together in a bi-partisan spirit on the issue, so that blaming one candidate or another is a non-issue. However, because McCain is on the down side in history his need to gamble is larger in order to take the chance of having an upper hand.

The honorable thing for McCain to do is admit his thinking on things was wrong in the past but that he is committed to ensuring that does not happen again in the future then let the chips fall as they may.

My feeling is that everyone needs to take part of the blame for what has happened. People have been living high on the hog beyond their means and went along with the creation of this issue and now the piper has to be paid - he was always going to have to be paid.

Now who do I want as a leader to navigate the future? Do I want someone who was supportive of the big business greed and deregulation or do I want someone that I already know understands the value of strengthening economy not on GDP but on the health of community by community? Because this bottom up model of being self-sustaining and supportive within the smaller communities, building up from the bottom to the top, is exactly what America needs to return to in order to correct the balance.

Posted by: JayKay2 | September 24, 2008 8:10 PM | Report abuse

McCain is running back to Washington because he perceives that his PARTY needs leadership. They are not buying into Bush's plan or the limited compromises his administration is unwilling to make. McCain is not interested in taxpayer needs. Again, he is serving his own needs.

Posted by: PleaseChange | September 24, 2008 8:10 PM | Report abuse

McCain is running back to Washington because he perceives that his PARTY needs leadership. They are not buying into Bush's plan or the limited compromises his administration is unwilling to make. McCain is not interested in taxpayer needs. Again, he is serving his own needs.

Posted by: PleaseChange | September 24, 2008 8:10 PM | Report abuse

Finally some leadership
McCain is taking the correct action.
BRAVO
BRAVO
Obama and Biden need to be in DC
But on this one Oby can't vote present
That is what he is afraid off.

Obama - Osama - The difference is the BS

Posted by: JWinGeorgia | September 24, 2008 8:10 PM | Report abuse

Obama can multitask:

while a senator in Illinois, he multitasked to buy a mansion from Rezko under the table.

he multitasked on his first Illinois senate run to pick and invalidate the people's votes for his opponent.

he multitasks by not showing to work. He's still a senator, but his presidential ambitions are more important. Ergo, no need to go to work. We pay him for not doing his work.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:10 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats created this mess.


In 2003, the Bush administration wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused!


See this New York Times article from September 11, 2003...


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.


Proof!


The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.


Note the Barney Frank quote in the last paragraph. It's very revealing!

It was the Democrats who pushed for this deregulation -- because the liberals feared that regulations placed on Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac would deny home loans to poor minorities.

A vote for the Democrats in November is a vote for unprecedented financial DISASTER. You ain't seen nothing yet!


The Democrats caused this financial mess with their complete deregulation of the mortgage industry via liberal policies of forcing lenders to lend to poor people... who can't possibly pay back.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

McCain wants to DELAY the debate on Friday. Why? Because of the economic crisis. You mean the crisis he will NOT comment on? The crisis he will not say one way or the other if he supports the bail out? The crisis his deregulation caused? The crisis that his supply-side economic friends caused? The crisis he is already very familiar with given the Keating five scandal? The crisis that shouldn’t exist because the "economy is fundamentally strong"
The crisis that according to Phil Graham is a figment of our imaginations?

Please by all means cancel the debate. God only knows we cant have a debate AND deal with this crisis. That would be like walking and chewing gum at the same time.

BUT MOST IMPORTANT
Why delay the debate?
Because it distracts us from this....

One of the giant mortgage companies at the heart of the credit crisis paid $15,000 a month from the end of 2005 through last month to a firm owned by Senator John McCain’s campaign manager. Mr. Davis’s firm, Davis & Manafort, had been kept on the payroll because of Mr. Davis’s close ties to Mr. McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, who by 2006 was widely expected to run again for the White House.

Posted by: feastorafamine | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Okay, I changed my name. Note this is *not* the c0cksucker...

Posted by: Mark O++ | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats created this mess.


In 2003, the Bush administration wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused!


See this New York Times article from September 11, 2003...


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.


Proof!


The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.


Note the Barney Frank quote in the last paragraph. It's very revealing!

It was the Democrats who pushed for this deregulation -- because the liberals feared that regulations placed on Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac would deny home loans to poor minorities.

A vote for the Democrats in November is a vote for unprecedented financial DISASTER. You ain't seen nothing yet!


The Democrats caused this financial mess with their complete deregulation of the mortgage industry via liberal policies of forcing lenders to lend to poor people... who can't possibly pay back.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

The Democrats created this mess.


In 2003, the Bush administration wanted to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac... and the Democrats refused!


See this New York Times article from September 11, 2003...


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1


There you have it.


Proof!


The Democrats DID NOT WANT to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac.


Note the Barney Frank quote in the last paragraph. It's very revealing!

It was the Democrats who pushed for this deregulation -- because the liberals feared that regulations placed on Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac would deny home loans to poor minorities.

A vote for the Democrats in November is a vote for unprecedented financial DISASTER. You ain't seen nothing yet!


The Democrats caused this financial mess with their complete deregulation of the mortgage industry via liberal policies of forcing lenders to lend to poor people... who can't possibly pay back.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

The confused demrats are becoming apoplectic and insane as McCain strikes another victory for independent thought and leadership. He will sweep to an easy victory in November as the closet poll liars in the demrat party cannot bring themselves to vote for an inexperienced candidate like Obama. Like the Palin nomination, the call for bipartisan dialogs on Capitol Hill by McCain has caught Obama and his weak sisters without their pants on. Even as we discuss this, some would claim that the demrats are being brought down to their knees again and forced into a position which can best be described as "submissive." Others would claim that it is the demrats willingness to suck and catch that causes them to drop so quickly. Let us not argue: Perhaps it is a combination of the two.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

The confused demrats are becoming apoplectic and insane as McCain strikes another victory for independent thought and leadership. He will sweep to an easy victory in November as the closet poll liars in the demrat party cannot bring themselves to vote for an inexperienced candidate like Obama. Like the Palin nomination, the call for bipartisan dialogs on Capitol Hill by McCain has caught Obama and his weak sisters without their pants on. Even as we discuss this, some would claim that the demrats are being brought down to their knees again and forced into a position which can best be described as "submissive." Others would claim that it is the demrats willingness to suck and catch that causes them to drop so quickly. Let us not argue: Perhaps it is a combination of the two.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

McCain: Desperate, clueless, flip flopping.

America isn't "burning", it is suffering from malign neglect which has accelerated under 8 years of Republican "leadership".

McCain has only stunts in his bag of tricks, while Obama looks more Presidential by the minute.

Posted by: vjf | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

I think we have found the GOPs WMD... McCain!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Today Harry Reid told John McCain to get lost, you don't have to come back - it might be political grandstanding.

Yeah but JUST YESTERDAY...

The Same Democrats Decrying Today's Action
By John McCain Are The Same Democrats Who Were Demanding John McCain's Involvement Yesterday
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV): "We Need The Republican Nominee For President To Let Us Know Where He Stands On What We Should Do." REID: "We need, now, the Republicans to start producing some votes for us. We need the Republican nominee for president to let us know where he stands and what we should do." (Sen. Harry Reid, Media Availability, Washington, D.C., 9/23/08)
Roll Call: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid Told The White House That Senator John McCain Was Crucial To Any Bailout Deal. "Fearing a political backlash against Democrats, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has told the White House that it must serve up support from Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) if it hopes to ensure bipartisan backing for a massive economic bailout package by week’s end." (Erin P. Billings and John Stanton, "Reid Seeks McCain Pledge," Roll Call, 9/24/08)
Roll Call: "McCain Holds The Key To … A Bipartisan Vote, According To Reid …" "McCain holds the key to such a bipartisan vote, according to Reid, because Republicans are likely to defer to his position on a bill that holds political peril. McCain on Tuesday night joined Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) in lending qualified support for the $700 billion package, but it remains unclear whether his backing is strong enough and timely enough to persuade the Congressional rank and file." (Erin P. Billings and John Stanton, "Reid Seeks McCain Pledge," Roll Call, 9/24/08)

Senator Reid Told Secretary Paulson That Senator McCain Was Necessary For Any Agreement. "According to a Democratic aide familiar with the discussions, Reid told Paulson this week that 'if McCain didn’t come out for this thing and come out for it quickly, it was going to begin bleeding Republican votes.' Democrats 'have a very real concern that opposition [from McCain] is going to drive away potential Republican votes,' this aide said." (Erin P. Billings and John Stanton, "Reid Seeks McCain Pledge," Roll Call, 9/24/08)
ABC News' George Stephanopoulos: White House Has Been Told By Democrats "That There Is No Deal If McCain Doesn't Go Along." "A Democratic leadership source says that White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten has been told that Democratic votes will not be there if McCain votes no – that there is no deal if McCain doesn't go along." (George Stephanopoulos, "McCain; Holds Key To Administration's Bailout Passage On Capitol Hill," ABC News, 9/23/08)

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

I think we have found the the Democratic equivalent to a WMD... McCain! Tick Tock...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

I think we have found the the Democratic equivalent to a WMD... McCain! Tick Tock...

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Today Harry Reid told John McCain to get lost, you don't have to come back - it might be political grandstanding.

Yeah but JUST YESTERDAY...

The Same Democrats Decrying Today's Action
By John McCain Are The Same Democrats Who Were Demanding John McCain's Involvement Yesterday
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV): "We Need The Republican Nominee For President To Let Us Know Where He Stands On What We Should Do." REID: "We need, now, the Republicans to start producing some votes for us. We need the Republican nominee for president to let us know where he stands and what we should do." (Sen. Harry Reid, Media Availability, Washington, D.C., 9/23/08)
Roll Call: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid Told The White House That Senator John McCain Was Crucial To Any Bailout Deal. "Fearing a political backlash against Democrats, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has told the White House that it must serve up support from Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) if it hopes to ensure bipartisan backing for a massive economic bailout package by week’s end." (Erin P. Billings and John Stanton, "Reid Seeks McCain Pledge," Roll Call, 9/24/08)
Roll Call: "McCain Holds The Key To … A Bipartisan Vote, According To Reid …" "McCain holds the key to such a bipartisan vote, according to Reid, because Republicans are likely to defer to his position on a bill that holds political peril. McCain on Tuesday night joined Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) in lending qualified support for the $700 billion package, but it remains unclear whether his backing is strong enough and timely enough to persuade the Congressional rank and file." (Erin P. Billings and John Stanton, "Reid Seeks McCain Pledge," Roll Call, 9/24/08)

Senator Reid Told Secretary Paulson That Senator McCain Was Necessary For Any Agreement. "According to a Democratic aide familiar with the discussions, Reid told Paulson this week that 'if McCain didn’t come out for this thing and come out for it quickly, it was going to begin bleeding Republican votes.' Democrats 'have a very real concern that opposition [from McCain] is going to drive away potential Republican votes,' this aide said." (Erin P. Billings and John Stanton, "Reid Seeks McCain Pledge," Roll Call, 9/24/08)
ABC News' George Stephanopoulos: White House Has Been Told By Democrats "That There Is No Deal If McCain Doesn't Go Along." "A Democratic leadership source says that White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten has been told that Democratic votes will not be there if McCain votes no – that there is no deal if McCain doesn't go along." (George Stephanopoulos, "McCain; Holds Key To Administration's Bailout Passage On Capitol Hill," ABC News, 9/23/08)

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: RUSirius? | September 24, 2008 8:00 PM

Seriously? If you care, get off the dang blog and go DO something!

People posting multiple times in here? And in seriousness?

Like these comments mean anything to anybody?

Wow... new levels of idiocy discovered daily...

REPLY: ARE YOU GONNA GET OF THIS "BLOG" AND DO SOMETHING? AFTER ALL ITS "BLOG" YOU SAID IT, AND GUESS WHAT PEOPLE DO ON THE BLOGS??
THEY BLOG!!!

Posted by: BOBSTER | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Obama can multitask:

while a senator in Illinois, he multitasked to buy a mansion from Rezko under the table.

he multitasked on his first Illinois senate run to pick and invalidate the people's votes for his opponent.

he multitasks by not showing to work. He's still a senator, but his presidential ambitions are more important. Ergo, no need to go to work. We pay him for not doing his work.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Obama can multitask:

while a senator in Illinois, he multitasked to buy a mansion from Rezko under the table.

he multitasked on his first Illinois senate run to pick and invalidate the people's votes for his opponent.

he multitasks by not showing to work. He's still a senator, but his presidential ambitions are more important. Ergo, no need to go to work. We pay him for not doing his work.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

TAKE THE 700 BILLION AND USE IT FOR BRIDGES..ROADS..WINDMILL AND SOLAR FARMS..SOCIAL SECURITY..HEALTHCARE.

Posted by: america_first | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Is this the candidate who is running on his record of bravery in war? Why so scared of a little democracy, then? Is he only brave about dropping bombs on people's heads, but not when it comes to presenting his record to the public?

Because this is fundamentally a question of democracy. The bailout in its original form contained language that unambiguously removed all agency and judicial oversight on the spending of $700 billion in taxpayer dollars. Needless to say, that proposal has met with some resistance from the public. And now McCain is trying to duck out of a debate in which this very issue will be presented and discussed before the electorate, from which there could be real consequences in the coming election for those who have supported such an abomination on top of the abominable things that have led up to it.

The debate must go on. This madness must end.

Posted by: LouThomas | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

You have 98 other Senators that can manage the job that needs to get done with or with out McCain. This is a dumb move and he should let Sarah Palin debate for him, especially if he thinks she can step in as President....

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

I am sure McShame is soo shy to debate at this time!

Posted by: John | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

I am sure McShame is soo shy to debate at this time!

Posted by: John | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

I am sure McShame is soo shy to debate at this time!

Posted by: John | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

I am sure McShame is soo shy to debate at this time!

Posted by: John | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

I am sure McShame is soo shy to debate at this time!

Posted by: John | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

I am sure McShame is soo shy to debate at this time!

Posted by: John | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: RUSirius? | September 24, 2008 8:00 PM

Seriously? If you care, get off the dang blog and go DO something!

People posting multiple times in here? And in seriousness?

Like these comments mean anything to anybody?

Wow... new levels of idiocy discovered daily...

REPLY: ARE YOU GONNA GET OF THIS "BLOG" AND DO SOMETHING? AFTER ALL ITS "BLOG" YOU SAID IT, AND GUESS WHAT PEOPLE DO ON THE BLOGS??
THEY BLOG!!!

Posted by: BOBSTER | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

TAKE THE 700 BILLION AND USE IT FOR BRIDGES..ROADS..WINDMILL AND SOLAR FARMS..SOCIAL SECURITY..HEALTHCARE.

Posted by: america_first | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

McCain did the right thing by suspending his campaign......

Like Grandpa has the solution to this whole thing?? Is the Senator who was opposed to all the regulation going to ride in on a white horse and as the crowds part he announces "I have the Master Plan. More regulation!!"

Do you really think McCain is that critical to resolving this crisis????

DO YOU REALLY??????

This is as absurd as ya'll insisting Palin is qualified to be the next President.

You people are starting to scare me!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Personally I'm against the bailout. If the banks fall then eventually so will prices. Their may be a credit squeeze but so far it doesn't look that bad.

Posted by: Alex P | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Personally I'm against the bailout. If the banks fall then eventually so will prices. Their may be a credit squeeze but so far it doesn't look that bad.

Posted by: Alex P | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Okay, I changed my name. Note this is *not* the c0cksucker...

Posted by: Mark O++ | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

Okay, I changed my name. Note this is *not* the c0cksucker...

Posted by: Mark O++ | September 24, 2008 8:08 PM | Report abuse

ALL OF YOU TALKING CRAP ABOUT EITHER CANDIDATE AND YET USING "Anonymous" SIGNATURE, HOW ABOUT YOU JUST SHORTER VERSION; "Anus". IT FITS YOU PROFILE ALSO.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:01 PM | Report abuse

Sen. McCain wants to postpone the debate, and says he should be in Washingtom now. Does he need time to consult with Palin, and pool their vast knowledge of economics to repair the damage his party's "hands-off-business, anti 'big government interference, anti-regulations policies" dumped on the heads of America ? Could it be that he's terrified at the prospect of a head-to-head confrontation with Obama ? Or are we looking at yet another cynical grandstanding photo op ? Twenty six years of lock-step with the Repugnicans at the altar of greed and self-interest entitle him to no more than a bystander's view of the firemen trying to extinguish the conflagration caused by the GOP.

Posted by: thorninurside | September 24, 2008 8:00 PM | Report abuse

Seriously? If you care, get off the dang blog and go DO something!

People posting multiple times in here? And in seriousness?

Like these comments mean anything to anybody?

Wow... new levels of idiocy discovered daily...

Posted by: RUSirius? | September 24, 2008 8:00 PM | Report abuse

The really scary part of this, is the ignorant lot of you each get to vote. Is it any wonder this country is collapsing, when we have people like you deciding who gets to make the important decisions?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 8:00 PM | Report abuse

There is a rat in the kitchen.

1) These candidates are applicants for the jobs of POTUS.
2) Campaigns and debates are part of the interview process.
3) A very basic requirement for any leader and especially POTUS is the ability to multi-task.
4) There are millions of professionals who routinely attend meetings in more than 1 state on the same day. They do this using commercial travel. McCain has a private JET.
5) If McCain can't multitask now, what will he do if elected, suspend being POTUS?
6) It is completely possible to have a hands on command of any bailout negotiations and be in MS by 9 PM EDT Friday evening.

Something else is going on with the McCain campaign and it stinks to high heaven.

If any of you went to a job interview and in the middle of the questioning suddenly called time out, you would be permanently shown the door!!

Posted by: Sylvia | September 24, 2008 8:00 PM | Report abuse

You too, mike from dallas....caps lock, caps lock, caps lock...what is so hard about that? or is it all about the SHOUTING?
b rubin and mike from dallas...two shouters on either side of the issue...sheessh what was the issue again, I forgot what with all this shouting.
Oh yeah, McCain pulled a stunt and Obama is shirking his responsibilities again....carry on both of you.....

Posted by: Asanath | September 24, 2008 8:00 PM | Report abuse

McCain and Coburn played Obama Tuesday night they set him up. So McCain would go the opposite of what Obama would agree to about the debate. The 700B is to keep the rich, rich if the bailout happens and keep the taxpayers struggling, if there is a bailout or not.

Posted by: Dee | September 24, 2008 8:00 PM | Report abuse

MCCAIN IS UNABLE TO MULTI- TASK..2 DAYS BEFORE DEBATES AND THE GUY WHO JUST THE OTHER DAY WAS SAYING OBAMA SHOULD HAVE DONE TOWN HALL DEBATES WITH ME..PULLS OUT OF THE DEBATES..MCCAIN WOULD RATHER RUN ADS THAT DISTRORT AND OUT RIGHT LIE ABOUT OBAMA AND HIS RECORD AND POLICIES..THIS BILL IS STALLED BECAUSE ITS 700 BILLION GOING TO REPUBLICANS WHO IN THE LAST 8 YEARS HAVE BROUGHT THIS ECONOMY TO THIS POINT..NO ONE WANTS TO HAND PROVEN THIEF'S 700 BILLION..WITHOUT OVERSIGHT..CEO PAY AND BONUSES..HOW MUCH WILL WE BE PAYING FOR THESE JUNK MORTAGES..AND THEY CAN NOT EVEN SAY FOR CERTIAN IF THIS WILL WORK.

Posted by: tom | September 24, 2008 7:59 PM | Report abuse

McCain is an idiot to think that people are not gonna see through this gimmick.
He can contribute nothing to the solution and knows less about the economy that GW. He did the same thing during Gustavo, heading down there and playing a leader, acting as if he had a clue about what was going on. He has become a photo op ho.
Thank God Obama didn't fall for this stunt and called his bluff.

Posted by: thor | September 24, 2008 7:59 PM | Report abuse

And to anonymous, the rules are the rules. Posters comment on this site in good faith. We don't expect others to steal our names.
At least nobody can steal your name because you don't have one. So cut the crap.

Posted by: Mark O | September 24, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

You have to face the problems MCSAME, Hiding from them is not gonna make them go away.....

Posted by: Navi | September 24, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, brasilia05, like your identity on here is any less anonymous...

Posted by: lol@brasilia05 | September 24, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

John McCain has been in Washington helping to screw things up for over 20 years. Why do you think we are going to believe for a second that he has to rush back there now and postpone a debate integral to the most important event of all: Choosing our new president! Do you think we will believe that he is going to fix anything? Is he going to rush to help bail-out all his rich friends? He was one of the architects of this mess.

Posted by: Loki | September 24, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

McCain CHICKENS OUT. As his apparachicks deny the polls that show Obama surging on the economy. Maybe he just needs cover to re-invent himself again?
McCain is the ONE qualified to debate himself. He places himself on both sides of the tough issues. Is it schizophrenia, Alzheimer's, or Political Posturing? You decide.

Posted by: Chris Phillips | September 24, 2008 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Maybe McCain has an important meeting with foreign leaders like president of Checoslovakia and president of Yugoslavia!!!

Posted by: BOBSTER | September 24, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

McCain's decision to stop political ads affects only two entities: the MSM and His Highness.

No ads = No millions of dollars in ads for the MSM.

That's why they continue to bash him. Imagine their desperation if His Highness were to assume the same moral decision.

WHAT!!! NO ADS??? NO MONEY???

LETS BASH THEM BOTH!

That would be a beauty.

McCain outfoxed the messiah.

"THE DEVIL IS WISER BECAUSE HE IS OLD, NOT BECAUSE HE IS THE DEVIL." (popular saying)

Obama looks like a centipede who had someone step on one of his toes.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

>There's nothing "partisan" about BOTH SENATORS returning to do work in the U.S. Capitol.

Yes there is, it's will create a political circus that will interfere with progress.

Posted by: jan | September 24, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

It's stupid that people are accusing Obama of being hypocritical for not accepting McCain's invitation to join his McCampaign. WHAT?! When's the last time two opponents campaigned together? Has that ever happened before? And lets not kid ourselves here by trying to say that Obama refused to campaign with McCain because he was afraid to debate him. McCain has an aneurism every single time he's asked a question.

Posted by: Canada | September 24, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

Why do I keep insulting myself?

Posted by: Mark O | September 24, 2008 7:57 PM | Report abuse

annonymous---- hmmm what does that really say about yourself. No identity-& hides from consequences of their words/actions. Grow up and post something worth while. If not then shut up.

Posted by: brasilia05 | September 24, 2008 7:56 PM | Report abuse

It's sad to see the people that you believed in crash and burn, but it's equally bad to see the bodies of 100,000 dead men, women and children in downtown Baghdad, lying in the dust of our American bombs, courtesy the stupidity of the Republican party leadership. If we honestly think that McCain and his ilk are going to step up and "fix" anything, they can start by fixing their priorities. Their war, their money. It's all about them. Country first? I don't think so. John McCain: fire your campaign manager this instant, turn right around and debate Obama. And get rid of that very bad VP choice. You lost when you insulted America by telling us that we are supposed to trust your judgment in the Governor of Alaska. That's when it happened. Start over and you might have a chance. Right now you've got a mooseload of garbage standing in your way.

Posted by: Dan Rains | September 24, 2008 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, way to go 7:48. What a loser. Nothing to say so you stoop to insults.

Posted by: Mark O | September 24, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

McCain can not make it to the debate??
========================================
SIMPLE SOLUTION: SEND SARAH PALIN!
-------------------------------------------
That would show if SHE INDEED IS capable of TAKING OVER on DAY ONE!
.
BUT, guess WHAT?
SHE IS STILL NOT READY. She is busy too on a crash course of "World Politics 1101" for center-fold magazine photos.
-
What a DISGRACE!

Posted by: El Mugroso | September 24, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

To the Mark O's. Take it somewhere else. We have Wall St. in chaos, 2 wars being fougt, health care in crisis and we have to now listen to two Mark-O's debate in here?

This is just so wrong. This isn't about putting America First? It's clearly about putting one of the Mark O's first. And I personally resent that incursion of our valuable time discussing much more important issues.

We maybe on the verge of resolving this $700 billion issue and then have to stop because Mark O.1 doesn't like what Mark O.2 has to say.

Out, out I say. Both of you find another venue. How dare you waste our precious time and limited bandwidth.

Argghhh.......

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

JOHN MCCAIN IS USING CRISIS AS A POLITICAL STUNT. STOP JOHN MCCAIN!!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:54 PM | Report abuse

The Barr campaign sent a letter to Obama and the CPD that said if McCain didn't want to debate Barr would be more than happy to step in so that it could proceed. I know that only about 6% of America cares/knows that he's running, but I would like to see that debate. It'd be a change from the same talk that we hear out of the Rep-Dem plus it would show how well Obama is on his feet; debating with a different candidate.

One thing I grow tired of is the 2 party system that rules our politics. A lot of Americans think that both candidates are horrible, but will undoubtedly vote for one of them. This is Amercia people the land of choices. We have an entire isle in the supermarket dedicated to different kinds of cereal. Maybe we should have more than 2 flavors of political parties. I'm not saying that Barr and the Liberaterian party are the answer, but it would be great to see good candidates rise up from other parties.

Posted by: Kirk | September 24, 2008 7:54 PM | Report abuse

What a friggen wimp! How can a guy think of running the country when he can't multi task? You'd think a guy that got shot down would have learned his lesson on that one.

Posted by: Jeb | September 24, 2008 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Hey "jewels" and "Dave" - your repeated and desperate attempts to try to prop up McBush/Mooselini will fail.

Obama/Biden 08!

Posted by: Anothervoice | September 24, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

"The following 4 people are on the Ballot.

Why aren't they allowed to participate in at least one debate with the 2 chosen ones?"

Do we really need to give you a reason? Here are 4 reasons why those 4 should be excluded:
1. NO CHANCE (seriously this could be all three)
2. TIME. Time is short in these debates, so don't waste it.
3. FOCUS. Each of these cadidates will draw focus away with oddball politics and prevent a real discussion between M & O.
4. A 3, 4, 5 OR MORE PARTY SYSTEM DOESN'T WORK. Major parties will adjust as the public demands it.

Posted by: because... | September 24, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse


All the paid posters or rather pipers of Obama are divulged of any reality.
They just don't get it. We have reputed financial firms going under.
Its RED in the financial world.
I'll give you'll an anology: If a Nuclear Missle is headed our way,would you'll still be so concerned about some debate because some media outlet would like to improve their ratings over the weekend.

McCain/Palin 08

Posted by: vic | September 24, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

yeah, I know what I'm talking about, even though I still type in ALL CAPS?? jeesh...

Posted by: MIKE IN DALLAS | September 24, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

The slow, dimwitted, and inexperienced Obama has been caught flat-footed again. While McCain acted quickly, showing the intregity and honor of his legacy, he also acted with energetic youthful enthusiasm to adapt to the crisis before us. He is a leader! Pathetic, self-involved, and unable to be flexible, Obama and his whining sycophants are shown not only to be incapable of bi-partisan leadership but, worse, unwilling to join with the country to put first things first. Both Senators McCain and Obama are just that--senators. Their first responsibility is to the office for which they were sworn. Senator McCain knows that personal ambitions must be put aside to help heal our nation in its time of concern. The quail Obama lies again to the American People by now claiming he wants to engage in a dialog. But we all know he has rejected 16 (SIXTEEN) calls by Presidential Nominee McCain to do just that in the last two months. Again, the dumb Democrats are seen for what they are--power hungry mongrels, running and yelping in the streets, but offering no solutions, no improvements, and no hope for a better tomorrow.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:53 PM | Report abuse

McCains poll are going to sink like a rock over this.

He could have done both, the debate is 90 minuets. Not only that, but he acting like a panicked deer staring into headlights.

"Say Anything McCain" is at it again. So who and what is he today? A Conservative? A Democrat? A Populist? A Maverick? Or maybe just aptly, Bozo The Clown?

The week of September 15th will be remembered as the week McCain flopped around like a panic-stricken fish and lost credibility by yo-yoing on so many critical position from day to day. What does this guy stand for except appeasing everyone and saying anything to get elected?

John McCain is a sell-out. He too nervous, too jitterly, too panicked to be president. It make me very uneasy.

Posted by: sue | September 24, 2008 7:52 PM | Report abuse

These events clearly show that McCain is twisting a true crisis for his own political gain. He knows he has no chance in the debates, and he took Obama's sincere efforts at solidarity and turned them into a political ploy. Shame on the sham that has become John McCain.

Mr McCain, you were once an honorable man. Why has this presidential campaign caused you to become such a scumbag?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:52 PM | Report abuse

I do not agree with a lot of the comments on this board but whomever is taking other peoples names and posting offensive comments needs to be banned.

Posted by: brasilia05 | September 24, 2008 7:52 PM | Report abuse

b rubin....it's called a caps lock key..that's right,tap it...see, no more SHOUTING...sheesh
as for the ignorance and stupidity of the American voter...speak for yourself....

Posted by: asanath | September 24, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

That was good one "Mike in Dallas" ha ha ha

Posted by: Navi | September 24, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Obama isn't skipping out at the job. He even said that they should both be there, put in their votes, then fly over to the debate. Nothing wrong with that.

Posted by: Erich | September 24, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Yes, Palin's not ready, McCain can't walk and chew gum at the same time, there's a lame duck president, the economy's in the toilet - and they want the American people to give them another four years? Yeah right.

Posted by: Mark O | September 24, 2008 7:51 PM | Report abuse

gee it would be better for you all if the leaders fly off to Washington and talk about this behind closed doors, rather than debate it in public. It is a matter for grown ups. Way to change Washington, you maverick you.

Its our money.

Posted by: robin | September 24, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

Keith: Do you know what the fundamentals of our economy are? They are by the way the working man/woman. Hard work is the fundamental of our economy. Are you saying the American worker is not strong?

Posted by: JLee | September 24, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

Reading thru the comments I felt moved to look up these numbers for the 110th congress. Missed votes by percentage:

1) 64.1% - John McCain
2) 48.4% - Tim Johnson (brain hemorrhage)
3) 45.9% - Barack Obama
4) 32.2% - Hilary Clinton
5) 30.8% - Joe Biden

Obviously campaigning takes its toll, 4 of the top 5 Senators all missed lots of vote due to their Presidential/VP campaigns. But only one of them managed the top the guy whose brain started bleeding.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/senate/vote-missers/

Posted by: rational danny. | September 24, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

"To the people wishing Obama would've done townhalls with McCain--check back after the debate Fri. It's gonna be a battle of wits with an unarmed man.."

You are probably right, now that Obama will be debating himself....He'll probably even lie to himself...LoL


Posted by: Ron E | September 24, 2008 7:50 PM | Report abuse

JakeD, Why don't you answer my question @ 6:44? Feeling the hellfire a bit too much?

Posted by: Carol | September 24, 2008 7:49 PM | Report abuse

TENDING TO BUSINESS DOES NOT FIT OBAMA'S AGENDA AS A PROFESSIONAL CAMPAIGNER..."AS USUAL" HE CAN LET HIS LIBERAL CONSTITUENTS IN CONGRESS HANDLE HIS BUSINESS FOR HIM WHILE HE POLITICS...AND THE LIBERAL PRESS LAUDS HIS ACTIONS......WHERE ARE ALL THE "REAL" DEMOCRATS...SURELY THEY ARE NOT DUMB ENOUGH TO BELIEVE THIS NOBAMA RHETORIC.....LOOK AT THE CANDIDATES!!! OBAMA AND BIDEN ARE LAWYERS!!! MCCAIN AND PALIN ARE NOT.....NUFF SAID...MC CAIN HAS EARNED THE WHITE HOUSE....OBAMA HAS EARNED A LOT OF FREQUENT FLYER MILES....MABEY ANOTHER TIME AMERICA!

Posted by: Mike in Dallas | September 24, 2008 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Did I mention I suck dicks?

Posted by: Mark O | September 24, 2008 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Senator Obama would rather avoid responsibility than to take an active role in shaping policy that will dramatically impact the future of our nation


Did Windows crash on you for the last several days? Have you not read all the comments and suggestiosn he has made in resolving this issue?

I knoiw McCain is a world class hero and everday he is alive he reinforces that title with all that he says and does, but......

Let's give Barry a little bit of credit here, okay? C'mon can't you see it in your heart to acknowledge maybe he does want it resolved too? How about just a tiny bit of love for Barry. I know you can do it. You sound like a decent guy. Please? Just this one time?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:48 PM | Report abuse

call everyone ...tell them to say no to bailout...

Posted by: mr.america... | September 24, 2008 7:48 PM | Report abuse

McCain is a moron and he obviously think that Obama is one too. One of the writers got it right - it's about his limited finances and not wanting to answer questions. Go Obama!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Why did he pull his ads? What difference does it make if his ads are running? Why would a serious campaign stop advertising its message (what message?) during a crisis? Why don't they just play up the whole "Country First So I'm Fighting For You In Washington Right Now" message in his ads instead of taking them down? Where is Governor Palin? Why can't she carry on his campaign? Why does McCain have to be there? Who exactly is he making these "deals" with?

Posted by: Dan Rains | September 24, 2008 7:46 PM | Report abuse

This isn't necessarily about McCain postponing his debate. It is a cover for postponing Sarah's debate, which may get cancelled altogether.

If she actually does attend the V.P. debate, be watching closely for the earpiece. It's small, but it will be down deep inside the ear canal.

Posted by: David | September 24, 2008 7:46 PM | Report abuse

This goes to prove boy's and girls, where Obama's real priorities lay. In his lust for the White house, he again will forgo his Constitutional duties to the nation and his constituents for a debate which can be held back in this moment of national crises.

For a supposed man who voted "present" some 130 times in Congress, ignoring this crucial economic situation comes rather easy.

Posted by: JRM | September 24, 2008 7:46 PM | Report abuse

it seems to me the USA bounced back pretty good from the depression. Let the bums fail, we can deal with it.

Posted by: r | September 24, 2008 7:46 PM | Report abuse

To the person who cited McCain not remembering where Spain was, he might remember Obama has us living in 57 states and Biden remembering television carrying President Roosevelt in 1929.

Posted by: Joe | September 24, 2008 7:45 PM | Report abuse

And again at 7:42. Can I ask the other Mark O to please use another name - I was here first!

Posted by: Mark O | September 24, 2008 7:45 PM | Report abuse

Who the hell is directing McCains campaign?
There is a difference between being a maverick and being crazy.

McCain has done enough regarding the economy. Phil Gramm and McCain have sent it into the gutter.

He is not on any financial commitees, he never wanted to be before now. Nobody wants the benefit of his wacky wisdom.

Once he was Mr. Experience. Next he was Mr. Drill,Drill,Drill. Then he was Mr. Change. Now he's Mr. Fixit.

If he shows for the debate, who will he be?
Keep this wacko away from the Nukes.

Posted by: seems to me | September 24, 2008 7:45 PM | Report abuse

adrian:

LOL! Related query -- can The One create a rock so heavy that He cannot lift it?

Everyone else:

Sorry, but I was busy single-handedly defending BOTH First Lady Laura Bush and Gov. Sarah Palin over on another thread http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/09/24/first_lady_palin_lacks_foreign.html

If anyone else is still here who thinks a debate on FOREIGN POLICY is more important than actually passing the $700 billion bailout bill, please let me know if you also wanted Obama to accept McCain's offer months ago to WEEKLY townhall meetings where all these topics could have already been covered in detail? I will try to catch up asap.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 7:45 PM | Report abuse

Of all Senators, John McCain has been the most absent. There have been 643 votes taken in the current Senate session: McCain has missed 412 of them.

McCain has not voted in the Senate since April 8th. Since March, he has missed 109 of the last 110 votes.

So yeah, looks like McCain has always been there when it counts...

Posted by: WasteOfTime | September 24, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

CORRECTION: I SAID MCCAIN HAS NOT BEEN TO WASHINGTON IN 2-3 MONTHS..I HAVE JUST SEEN THE NUMBER MCCAIN HAS NOT BEEN TO WASHINGTON SINCE APRIL..5 MONTHS.

Posted by: america_first | September 24, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

Oh, yes, I do wish McCain would troop back to Congress and give them the benefit of his profound economic expertise in this time of crisis. Maybe he could reeducate the Senators on what the "fundamentals" of an economy are, or urge congress to pass a law allowing the President to fire the SEC chairman so that Bush could then follow McCain's brilliant advice of earlier this week...If indeed any of those Senators still remember him, it's been quite awhile since he's done any work there. He hasn't voted in the Senate since April 8th, and has missed 412 of 643 votes in the current session. Oh, but he's been busy putting his country before politics....

Posted by: Donna H. | September 24, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

WTF. They are Senators. This is what they are paid to do by the voters who elected them. Get their butts back to Washington. As "leaders" they should have great influence on this process, which has not gone very far in the last 2 days. Screw the debates for Friday, and/or postpone them until this crisis gets worked out. Presidential politics should be their last thoughts. Obama, all you have done and like to do, is campaign. Why don't you get your butt back and do the job you are supossed to do!

Posted by: Dr. Steve | September 24, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

The fact is that McCain hasn't been in Washington this week and now he's calling it a crisis. Yes, I am a tax payer and demand that our congress do their jobs, but I also think it's just as important to have Americans hear what these candidates have to say about these issues. I think they can do their jobs and participate in the debate. It really is that simple.

Posted by: PleaseChange | September 24, 2008 7:44 PM | Report abuse

"America needs answers and solutions NOW and not in January.."
LOL! America needed answers two Januarys ago.
Apparently like McCain, you did not notice that... (psssst...don't look now but the cow is already out of the barn.)

Posted by: plaza04433 | September 24, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

What a joke. McCain is a coward. He can't defend his nearly three decades of deregulation so he doesn't wnat to answer any questions. Palin is doing the same thing. And to think these fools think we're stopid enough to believe them. We need the depate to see what poilcies are going to be implimented once they are elected. No bo hiding, we want the answers out in the open!

Posted by: enaz | September 24, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

It seems to me that Congress needs to spend more time developing a sensible plan for any "bail-out" measure, rather than just rushing into another quick fix. Nothing this important should be so hurriedly thrown together and voted into legislation; too many things in Washington are given too little thought before the voting process occurs.
The safest way to not appear moronic during a debate is to NOT SHOW UP.
If it were absolutely necessary to make alterations to the debate, move the location - to D.C.

Posted by: cabbottpatch | September 24, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Oh by the way, Mr. Bi-partisan still hasent issued that joint statement with Obama.

McCain didn't do it because he has to run to capital hill to find out where he party stands before he makes a decision.

What an appeaser. What a sell out.

Posted by: laura | September 24, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Wow...the media is winning this campaign....if they don't want McCain in office that is what will happen!
++++++++++++

AMEN.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

....Why are we made to feel like we OWE him something because of his misfortune?

Posted by: Justin | September 24, 2008 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone realize how important it is to get this economic situation resolved.

Yes I do for one. I think this issue is so critical we all need to go back to Washington to help McCain fix this problem.

More is better. We can camp out on the White House lawn. The Secret Service can drive us over to Congress in the morning and we'll have breakfast in their dining room. Then we pack the galleries and rant and rave over what should be done.

This is that important an issue and much more critical than our presidential elections.

Support John McCain. Let's all car pool and follow the Straight Talk Express Train back to Washington.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

Wow, a stupid debate about another stupid debate...

Debate monkeys, debate!!!

Posted by: bhall | September 24, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

There are people in the Capitol to take care of business, it does not make a whole lot of difference if these two candidates are present or not, they should continue with the debate....the old man is not the right person to be a president but the other is...

Posted by: Navi | September 24, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

The multitasking argument is as weak as the character of leftist elite. It makes no difference how many things you're able to do at the same time - it's whether you are doing the right thing at the right time. At least Senator McCain has the guts to be part of that process. Senator Obama would rather avoid responsibility than to take an active role in shaping policy that will dramatically impact the future of our nation - long after either of the candidates are no longer in the office of the presidency. Character matters. If you don't believe it, vote Obama and let history be the judge.

Posted by: Mark O | September 24, 2008 7:42 PM | Report abuse

You guys have some good comments. I like the "McSame" name. That says it all!
$700,000,000,000,00 bailout? ASre you crazy.
Remember the previous presidential election when the Republicans made the word liberal the worst kind of politician? Well, George and his buddies have been the most liberal politicians this country has ever had.

Posted by: mee | September 24, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

if you lose all your money and still have your democracy and constitution, you will be back. If you start slipping on those other things, you are toast.

NO illegal bailout, and NO postponing anything to do with the election, transparency and accountability.

keep your eye on the ball.

Posted by: rd | September 24, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

One more reason to switch attention away from his failing campaign. Another piece of evidence as to why McCain is not fit to be president. Uh ... why people would want to vote for this guy is beyond me. He is obviously incompetent to be president.

Posted by: NoMcCain | September 24, 2008 7:41 PM | Report abuse

I hear McCain want to delay the debate until Novemeber 5th.

Posted by: laura | September 24, 2008 7:40 PM | Report abuse

My money says that McCain cried like a little biot** when the VC interrogated him and all this hype about him not giving his name rank and serial number is all just revisionist history. I'd LOVE to hear from someone that really was there. Why is it heroic to be captured and tortured for 5-6 years? What did he do that was heroic that any of us wouldn't have done?

Posted by: Justin McCarthy | September 24, 2008 7:40 PM | Report abuse

I love Obama. He is not only smart by smart and reliable as president. I can't believe that people have time to think about Palin/McCain ticket (as Palin is presenting it on the campaign trail).
McCain you're just pathetic. Go take care of your houses and cars if you can't multitask. This will help you to focus on what you have and prevent your from forgetting even the number of houses you have.

Posted by: Good | September 24, 2008 7:40 PM | Report abuse

So, McCain wants to go do his JOB, while Obama ignores his constituents?

Great way to give example to how your Presidency would be.... Ignore the people you represent and do whatever you damn well feel like.

Posted by: KW | September 24, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

Hmmm,
And McCain is needed asap because he is on the committee that it hashing out this issue- oops, nope! Is it because McCain doesn't know how to use that Blackberry he had a hand in inventing? - perhaps:). And why pull his adds hoping that Obama follows suit... could it have anythign to do with McCain facing spending limits while Obama doesn't- come on, you know it.

Posted by: arthurW from VA | September 24, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

At 7:25 PM somebody used my name to post a message which is the opposite of what I believe. Obviously some people here don't want to play by the rules.

Posted by: Mark O | September 24, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

"Obama called Rev Wright for inspiration?"
Posted by: Xuan | September 24, 2008 7:12 PM
.........................
What on God's earth are you talking about? How would you know who Obama called, if anyone, for inspiration? Instead of making this up, perhaps you should call on someone for inspiration on truth.

Posted by: PleaseChange | September 24, 2008 7:39 PM | Report abuse

Why don't we just postpone the election until Sen. McCain thinks it convenient for the country?

Come on, people, neither one of these guys is going to bring anything new to the table on the administration's plan, and both made it plain where they stand. There are 98 other Senators and the entire House working on this.

I like the line "we both have big jets" with their names on them. This is 2008, not 1808. They can participate in working out the plan AND campaign.

This election is important to, in case you forgot, the winner will be President of the United States come January 20, 2009.

Posted by: Ed Stone | September 24, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

Wow...the media is winning this campaign....if they don't want McCain in office that is what will happen!

Posted by: Unreal | September 24, 2008 7:37 PM | Report abuse

Id it me or at every important turn in this campaign McCain throws a grenade to cause confusion from what actually matters. He is just shameless. He should just make his suspended campaign his final word.. Get out of politics and do dont say.. Why make this whoopla about suspending your campaign?.. take care of business and shut up!

Posted by: sick of it | September 24, 2008 7:37 PM | Report abuse

McCain --rather see his COuntry Come out of this mess.


How is it that whenver McCain make a questionable decision you fiolks run abound and collect allthe idiotic reasons to support him and then claim he is a genius??

Here is what needs to be done.

2 Senators run for President. The other 575 some odd Congress people don't have to run. They can surely decide amongst them selves what laws or bills need to pass.

They don't have to worry about what McCain and Obama do. Not their job.

We have had elections every 4 years for a long damn time now. This arrangement works quite well.

McCain isn't Gen. McArthur marching back to Washington to settle this whole thing.

His job requires him to be in Mississippi Friday night. 100,000,000 voters maybe be waiting for him.

I want to know what he wants to do for the next 4 years. I could care less how he wants to resolve the Wall St. issue. He isn't the Senate's repository of economic wisdom. And nor is Obaba that critical to this whole thing either.

Run for office McCAin, it's your new job this summer.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:36 PM | Report abuse

I bet the other 98 Senators won't be in the chamber that night....

Posted by: philb | September 24, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

The presidential debate should go on and be turned into a debate about the bailout. The Wall Street criminals that looted our economy should be punished. The members of Congress that allowed this major embarrassment to happen to our nation should be identified and asked to resign their committee positions. Now we know why seniority in Congress does not work well and there should be term limits.

Posted by: Eddie Zalez | September 24, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

You have to love the big Mac politics. When loosing you can expect him to come out with something off the wall. First it was Palin and now this.

After all if I was McCain and couldn't remember where Spain was and was partly responsible for the financial crash the last thing I'd want to do is debate with someone who is younger, smarter, better educated and can remember where Spain is.

What great way to get out of it, so rush of to DC where I really cant do any good other than vote for the Bush plan and in the meantime everyone thinks I'm a hero and Obama doesn't care.

Sadly there are a lot of people out there who are dumb enough to beleive him.

Posted by: Alex P | September 24, 2008 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone realize how important it is to get this economic situation resolved. There will be more debates. If there had been a debate prior to the upcoming one on Friday this would not be an issue. Anyone think that absorbing the debt that is created by very wealthy people is a bad idea? Change is coming!!! and i think i am afraid of it. Reagan for president!!

Posted by: JLee | September 24, 2008 7:34 PM | Report abuse

Another huge mistake by the McCain campaign. Now McCain can't back down now because it will look like he "lost" the challenge to Obama. So the debate will have to be postponed because the university is not going to have a debate without both candidates. But this is perfect because now the first debate will be between Palin and Biden. By then the Dow will be under 10,000 and all those 401k's will be bleeding cash. The first question of the VP debate will be "Ms. Palin, have you ever heard of the stock market, or would you like to take a minute to check with your teachers before answering the question?"

Posted by: Dan Rains | September 24, 2008 7:34 PM | Report abuse

I believe the debate should be held for sure, and I believe the entire focus should be on the economy and the (potential) bail-out in particular. Foreign policy can wait for another day.

What has become abundantly clear is that none of the 'leaders' who are negotiating this 'rescue' is willing to enunciate or explain why the only option under consideration is to buy up the bad assets of private lenders who obviously failed to qualify their borrowers responsibly. That is the heart of the matter.

Are they saying that without this assistance, so many banks would fail that paying off the insured portion of their deposits would bankrupt the United States? If so, how big would the price-tag for those payoffs be? Is it greater than $700-Billion? If so, how much greater?

As one digs down into the problem, and asks the obvious questions, it raises another more important one: is the $700-Billion going to solve the problem for the this country, or is it merely going to solve the problem for the current equity holders in the banks, and the elected office holders who allowed the situation to reach such an extreme?

If they can't answer these questions, it strongly suggests that the real answer, if it were forthcoming, would be the latter, in which case the proposed legislative authority amounts to Congress giving itself and the perpetrators of these excesses a license to steal, and bus-fare of sorts to escape the consequences of their malfeasance. If they can answer these questions, why haven't they?

The irony in this is that it replays exactly the scenario we are only now recovering from, wherein we were asked to rely upon (trust) a general set of assertions by the Bush administration upon which we were asked to authorize President Bush to take this country to war. Now we are asked to do the very same thing again, only this time the co-conspirators include the entire leadership of the Congress, the President, his Treasury Secretary, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, and now it seems, both Presidential candidates.

As far as I'm concerned, given a choice between paying off the equity holders in the banks and leaving the same tainted managers in charge of those banks going forward, and simply allowing the free-market to work, and paying off depositors as necessary, I would much rather know that whatever ticking time-bombs there are in our financial institutions have been allowed to go off.

Our leaders seem to be telling us: it's so bad, you don't want to know. Let us handle it. And in effect, by refusing to divulge the fundamental dimensions of the problem, that is exactly what they are saying.

My reply is simple: I don't trust any of you, least of all George W. Bush. If you want the money, tell the truth and let us decide how best to use it. That should be the purpose of the debate on Friday night, nothing else, and nothing less.

Posted by: ted in pdx | September 24, 2008 7:33 PM | Report abuse

Lame John McCain,seems we will be OBAMA Republicans LIKE Reagan Democrats, bye bye, bye- Johnny be (no) good,

Posted by: J & A Gross | September 24, 2008 7:33 PM | Report abuse

McCain is a scared, tired, dishonest old man that knows he is going to get his butt kicked. I'd probably wimp out of the debate if I was him also. Why doesn't Palin go instead?

Posted by: Sean | September 24, 2008 7:33 PM | Report abuse

Today, Sen. McCain has announced that due to the economic crisis, he has decided to suspend his campaign and pending debate and has called on bipartisan unity in reaching a solution to this crisis.

There are a few problems with this.

1) How have we gone from his August 24th statement

INGRAHAM: And now look: the dollar’s weak, we have serious competition from abroad, government is running a deficit. … What are the Republicans going to do if China ultimately overtakes us economically and does that matter?

MCCAIN: I still believe the fundamentals of our economy are strong. We’ve got terribly big challenges now, whether it be housing or employment or so many of the other — health care. It’s very, very tough times. It’s very tough. But we’re still the most innovative, the most productive (13 trillion...right), the greatest exporter (wrong...Germany...the US is number 4 behind the EU and China), the greatest importer (that means we can't make what we need...why is that good?).


MCCAIN: I still believe the fundamentals of our economy are strong.

One month and the economic crisis is so bad he want's to suspend campaigining to help solve the crisis.

What's wrong with that?

Everything.

As president, he won't have the luxury of suspending wildfires in CA, flooding in the midwest, hurricane damage in LA and TX and an impending one in SoFl, Russia moving into Georgia, the re-start of the N. Korean reactor, gas prices rising, the mortgage market in a death spiral, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Cuba, Nicaragua, trade..........and work on one problem at a time. He must be able to multitask without complaining he needs to focus on one issue over another. This proves he isn't up to the task of being president...he can't even run a campaign and deal with one economic issue.

Speaking of issue.

The foundation of our economy is the free-market. Wall Street is the free-market center of the universe. Wall Street is broken. How can the "funtamental" of our economy go from strong, to dead, in less than 28 days.

Sen. Obama needs to make this clear. McCain can't deal with more than one thing at a time.

Posted by: Keith | September 24, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Jake...

Wouldn't it be funny if he was really
"The One" ?
That would probably ruin your day wouldn't it?
Or are you thinking that the real "The One" is a white male with grey hair and a lightning rod?
As far as debating himself ..it would probably be more honest and interesting....

Posted by: Micheli | September 24, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Considering McCain's economic advisor was one of the chief architects of this mess, I'm sure good ol Johnny will have some GREAT ideas on how to fix it. How about some more tax cuts for millionaires, that should do the trick....

Posted by: Indy | September 24, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

McCain who admits to being no expert on the economy is all of a sudden urgently needed to craft the bail-out plan ?


HAHAHAHA......Is he really that scared to debate Obama ?

I would be too if I was an intellectual midget with Alzheimers.

Posted by: John | September 24, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Debate!!!

90% of Americans (in a snap poll done by cnn, or similar) want the Debate to go on...

Only rightwingnut fringe elements don't want it now. Too funny.

Barack is doing everything right, as McSame flounders around like the proverbial fish outta water...

That is why I know my fellow Rocky Mountain residents (be they Red/Blue/Independent, whatever) are going to vote for Obama in huge numbers.

I feel very good about Barack being President, and I'm white, middle class, live in the woods, and happen to own over a dozen guns (But, I only shoot at Elephant Shaped Targets these days - hahaha, suckers!).

McBushSameLoserCain is toast, and the corrupt GOP is going down with him. Sweet!

Posted by: Colorado Liberal | September 24, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

As Joe Biden said, "Obama is not ready to be president"

Posted by: ira | September 24, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

I just listened to Pete Domemici Senator from New Mexico, on C-Span, and he is upset. The credit markets are not working, and we need to get back to Americans spending more money, and running up more credit card debt. He is upset with Barack Obama for not doing what JOHN MCCAIN is doing. Don't you think these Senators have done enought to create this whole mess by what they haven't done already? Why do we have to run up more credit card debt? He said our Christmas will be terrible. Wake up Mr Senator, not only our Christmas will be less than usual, but so will YOURS. He said Mr Paulson has done a study on the Great depression, and if says do this, we should. No questions asked. (Well, maybe he is practicing what he reasearch!) Domemici again said, don't go after those who gained from this calamity, just handle it. Don't put the bad guys in jail, just pay more money. Then he says, after not hearing the who speech from Mel Martinez Senator from Florida, "I only heard the tale end but he seconds his opinion." Well, Mr & Mrs America, the tale end of his speach was a request that the government, YOU AND ME give new home buyers a $15,000 down payment to buy one of these homes. That's my $15,000, my house has lost $85,000 in one year, and is now worth less than $99,000. So now, we have to take more borrowed money from the rest of the world, and give it to someone to buy a property, who really can't afford it, and start the whole thing over again. You who live in New Mexico, get on the phone, you who live in Forida, get on the phone. I have written my Senator, John McCain, but he is in my opinion, useless. He cannot do two things at once I guess, and in no mood for a debate. Have you seen the photo ops for the VP? Moved around from place to place to look like she is meeting with officials. Most of which, only want a hug? Do your homework, and don't be forced into a wall of fear tonight, as our fearless leader speaks, with your money. Let your voice be heard, you don't care about their Christmas, you need answers, and need your right protected!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Right. So since McCain is such a world class EXPERT on the economy, the Congress and Pres just can't manage without his brilliance, so he must don his Superman cape and dispatch immediately to Washington to FIX this crisis. Puhleeeez.

If he can't debate on what he feels he IS an expert on AND manage his one measly vote on this bailout plan, how the heck is he gonna manage two wars, the economy, and whatever the next disaster down the road is as our, God forbid, President.

This is the kid (who graduated at the bottom of his class who got in bc of admiral daddy and took some other deserving kid's spot) cheering on the snow hoping not to have to study for his test, while Obama has coolly been doing his homework all along.

The economy IS national security and foreign policy. Show up and face the nation or drop out of the race.

Posted by: irreverently | September 24, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Now the real motivation comes out. The McCain camp wants the first presidential debate to occur when the VP debates where supposed to occur. Apparently Palin hasn't been able to memorize all her lines yet. What a farce the McCain campaign has become.

Posted by: John Wilson | September 24, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

This crisis broke on Thursday of last week.McCain looks at the polls and now he runs to washington where the bill is still in committee.McCain is desperate.

Posted by: joseph marcucilli | September 24, 2008 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Dave, et al. You've got to be kidding me. The house finance committee met today. That's where the work was being done. Neither of these two SENATORS are on the HOUSE committee. Next time you have a job interview, Dave, just call in and tell them Wall Street is burning and you can't make it. BTW, there are 1.4 million houses in forclosure. Paulson wants $700 billion. That's $500,000 per house...

Posted by: richie | September 24, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

MCCAIN IN THE LAST 2-3 MONTHS HAS BEEN TO WASHINGTON 2 TIMES..NOW 2 DAYS BEFORE THE DEBATE MCCAIN SAY'S THEY NEED HIM IN WASHINGTON..CONGRESS AND HE WHITE HOUSE HAS SAID THE DEAL IS BEING HAMMERED OUT..MCCAIN WITH HIS GAS TAX GIMMICK..SARAH PALIN GIMMICK AND NOW THEY NEED MCCAIN TO GO TO WASHINGTON TO HELP WITH THIS..ANOTHER GIMMICK..IT WAS MCCAIN ALONG WITH HIS ADVISOR PHIL GRAMM YEARS AGO THAT DEREGULATED THE BANKING INDUSTRIES..THAT LED TO THIS ALONG ITH BUSHES WAR FOR OIL IN IRAQ..LED TO WEAKER DOLLAR HIGHER FUEL PRICES..MCCAIN'S TRUE COLORS ARE COMING OUT..YELLOW

Posted by: america_first | September 24, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

The debate is the perfect opportunity to hear the two candidates tell us what they would do to deal with this crisis. This "hurry before we crash" pressure, from the guy most responsible for the crisis should be looked at very closely. What's in it for us the taxpayer> do we get any return on our enormous (and admittedly "ballpark" figure of 700 bill?) I've heard financial commentators say "this is where the action is--how much will they sell off the bad mortgages for?" they're still talking about "action?" this is irresponsible and they haven;t leanred a thing. I think it's the last gasp chance for the Bushies to boondoggle the last shekels out of the till before they're kicked out of the White House, and they should be watched closely. their stated purpose is to bring down the govenment. this is a good way to do it, Nero style. Bush is making no sense when he speaks to the country--he's got the MBA and he can't even come up with a business plan here? He has said nothing of substance this whole week. he is still the president, where's the leadership? he doesn't have a clue.

Why is socialized finance Ok for rich stockbrokers but socialized medicine is the devil for poor workers?

Posted by: mary r | September 24, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

Obviously McCain is right and Obama is Wright. The question is will the press continue to hump Obama's leg or get real....
http://www.examiner.com/x-852-Atlanta-Civics-Examiner

Posted by: Larry Clifton | September 24, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

We all know that the only way obama votes is present, he doesn't have to be there for that.
As for doing his job, he has yet to do it. What has he written in the three years he's been a junior senator, half his time has been out campaigning for another job. Give him time as a senator to show the citizens of this country what IL already knows, that he didn't accomplish anything voting present.

Posted by: ira | September 24, 2008 7:30 PM | Report abuse

You can't postpone democracy.

Posted by: Doug | September 24, 2008 7:29 PM | Report abuse

What is wrong with coming up with another suggestion instead of striking a deal over something that is Constitutionally illegal.

With our futures and the futures of our offspring for the next 200 years at stake, how about a little bit of pro-activity from the Supreme Court?

Why are these people, who would be President, not stepping up to the plate?

http://ewebsmith.com/bus/taxpayers.html

Posted by: Web Smith | September 24, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

As George Will said, McCain is not fit to be president.

Republicans need to remember this statement, as George is much more intelligent than you are.

Posted by: Rafterman | September 24, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

Listen to all the chicken littles here. I guess when wall street barons stand to lose big and NOT when everyday citizens lose big it becomes a crisis!

Hey McObama, in case you haven't noticed this economy has been in crisis for MUCH longer than your pals in wall street have.

But then again, we haven't donated the really big bucks to your campaigns, huh? I guess the PAYING CUSTOMERS go to the front of the line when trouble strikes them, huh?

Posted by: mateocafe | September 24, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

Of course someone who is not very good at Economics should be there helping and not debating.

www.fightmccain.com

Amazing how people like Dave want Obama and McCain to fix the problem. Let's see a lawyer and a mediocre Navy grad should be in there slugging it out with the bankers and economists. Make the problem as political as possible so there is no solution, right?

Forget trying to determine who should shepard this "solution" the next few years, We need EVERY Senator there right now, huh Dave?

My god you Fanboys are so transparent.

Posted by: the Rhino | September 24, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

So many people here who put McCain before country. So many people here who jump to support this obvious delay tactic of McCain's by trying to say he's doing it for the country. So many smart people who will say anything to support the republicans before they support their country. So many people who should be ashamed of themselves.

This southern born, republican and Christian, will truly be putting country first, and will be voting for Obama.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

OK. There's a war on (for the last five years as if I have to remind anyone). The economy has lost 600,000 jobs for 8 straight months. Millions have been booted out of there homes for more than a year now. And now that a few millionaire CEOs can't meet their obligations McCain calls it an emergency, raises the issue of patriotism, and quits. Shows you his priorities, first of all, and second, it shows you that he isn't ready to be anybody's president.

Posted by: joel | September 24, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

McPain is afraid because he knows he will lose big-time in the debate. He's wussing out.

Posted by: meeeee | September 24, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

yeah, why should Obama start doing his Senatorial job now? He hasn't been doing it up to this point.

McCain is not the one who needed to go to debate school this week, he's been debating in the senate for what 28 years? Anyone who thinks he's afraid to debate Barry has a screw loose.

Posted by: Brian | September 24, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

Yeah lets all multitask while the economy continues to slip.... I can look into the camera and spew my version of the truth while the elected officials of our Country do their Job. BTW I am sure Obama would just say that the answer to this crisis is above his pay grade. That is why he wants to be infront of the cameras having a debate with an empty chair. A debate that cannot be won. Go on and keep giving Americans reasons why not to vote for you Sen. Obama.

Frankly I could careless what Obama's next scripted press conference states. Facts are Facts: America needs answers and solutions NOW and not in January. Just wait untill Obama gets his wake up call next week when McCain and the rest of Congress come up with the solution to this crisis while Obama is in makeup and gettin his gray hairs touched up for a debate that won't happen.

McCain/Palin 2008

Posted by: brasilia05 | September 24, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

After 8 years of George Bush, voting for John McCain is like changing seats on the Titanic..

To the people wishing Obama would've done townhalls with McCain--check back after the debate Fri. It's gonna be a battle of wits with an unarmed man..

Posted by: RtheK | September 24, 2008 7:28 PM | Report abuse

My rich friends need a trillion dollars from you, how is that not more important than democracy?

Posted by: robin | September 24, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

McCain should send Palin to debate Obama while he stays in DC to help out his old pal Bush get that bailout scheme approved by Congress. Doesn't the bailout scheme run counter to a plank in the Republican platform? And wasn't Hitler into bailouts, too, in the last days of Nazi Germany? Hitler printed so many marks that the value of the things went through the floor and it took a wheelbarrow full to buy a loaf of bread. Sterling Greenwood, Aspen Free Press

Posted by: AspenFreePress | September 24, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

i have no more tricks up my sleeve folks,god bless america by john mccain.i think cindy should step in and pull the plug.

Posted by: frank | September 24, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Maybe McSame's wife, the aged Barbie, can bail out Wall Street and the rest of us common folk can listen to the debate and see if Grandpa John has anything else but empty patriotism and flag waving and "Rah, rah, rah!"

Posted by: asmostafanejad | September 24, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

10 town hall debates=ohh,ohhh,ohhh,ohhh
Joint appearance in DC to tackle the financial crisis,ohh,ohhh,ohhh

Live appearance on stage with Jeremiah Wright. OK

Posted by: Tracy | September 24, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

I am 48 years old and have voted Republican and Democrat as I see fit for the candidate running. However, I have never seen anything like this before. McCain looks like he has gone postal. I was on the fence, but now I am voting for the intelligent guy with the Harvard Law degree; not the class clown. As a nation we can not endure this foolishness anymore.

Posted by: Joe | September 24, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Obama isn't a coward because he didn't agree to town hall debates. It was to his tactical advantage not to debate McCain in those venue's.

Learn the game my friend. McCain has trouble with a teleprompter and warming up to TV audiences.

Is McCain stupid for not wanting the debates? No.

It's a poker game. Is this your first election?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse


Is McCain for real?!!
He wants to stop EVERYTHING to help cram another 700 Billion dollars of debt down our throats without properly checking it out first. "Hurry, Hurry, Stop Thinking, Just do what I say Now!" has always been the Bush administration's way of doing things,......Why is it so imperative to act immediately? This screw up has taken time to develop, so think about what it is and the long term effects of ALL of the solutions before jumping blindly into it like Bush and friends would have us do. His guidance hasn't been exactly stellar so far has it? But McCain's already on the bus and honking the horn.

Remember,...If it smells like Bovine Feces,...........

SLOW DOWN AMERICA!

Posted by: olddog | September 24, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

B Hussien Obama:-- Salivating to be President so could make Some petty selfiah History of his Own.
McCain --rather see his COuntry Come out of this mess. Well its just like McCain.

McCain/Palin 08

Posted by: vic | September 24, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Is Obama clueless to the severity of what is going on? maybe he is hoping for a catastrofie to happen? At least McCain did the moral thing and return to important responsibilities in Washington.

Posted by: jim | September 24, 2008 7:26 PM | Report abuse

"Obama isn't sure whether he would be helpful as a Senator... why do we want to elect him as president?"

Its amazing to me how some people just WILL NOT SEE reason and will read into something and come up with some BS like that quoted above to convince themselves that they opinion they already hold is the correct one. It has been plainly stated that the presence of McCain and Obama would not be helpful and the infusion of presidential politics into the process will upset already delicate negotiations.

This is so incredibly transparent. That some of you continue stick up for people when they pull these sorts of stunts just baffles me. Open your eyes.

Posted by: Fed up | September 24, 2008 7:25 PM | Report abuse

Only a man whose love of his country has been put to the ultimate test would be able to muster the courage to take action like Senator McCain. No debate necessary. Give me a man who has the courage and conviction act for his country rather than acting for himself any day.

Posted by: Mark O | September 24, 2008 7:25 PM | Report abuse

McCann needs to get to Washington, D.C. to help Congress come up with a bill to aid our great country with its financial crisis.

Obama can debate himself. It would not do the American people any good for Obama to return to Congress as all he would do is vote "PRESENT"

Posted by: Intelligent Lady | September 24, 2008 7:25 PM | Report abuse

Of course someone who is not very good at Economics should be there helping and not debating.

www.fightmccain.com

Posted by: the Rhino | September 24, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

Maybe Sarah can remove her top Friday, behind Obama, as Howard Stern would suggest, and I can avoid a situation that I cannot win.

Posted by: McCain, John | September 24, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

The last time I checked both McCain and Obama are still Senators elected by the people of their states to represent them in the Senate. Everything else is secondary to include the Presidential Election. So, we are now criticizing McCain for doing the job that he was elected to do and praising Obama for not representing the people who elected him. Maybe I have forgotten what the Presidency is about. In addition, the President needs his Senators to do their job right now and not showboat across the country. McCain and Obama are two of those Senators who speak of bringing change to Washington, so let them start now by influencing the Senate on how to fix the economy. We cannot wait until January of 2009 for one of them to take office with promises that, as history has shown, will never work out. Besides, the economy will already be destroyed by then. The debate is in Washington right now…not the campaign trail!

Posted by: Dave | September 24, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

the bailout is not a debate.

The DEMS control the House. In the Senate they need to speak with one person, LIEBERMAN. Lieberman will make this deal.

OBAMA and MCCain can have their debate.
McCain has created another fake issue akin to lipstick.
I AM SO IMPORTANT BUT I CANNOT CHEW GUM AND RUB MY STOMACH AT THE SAME TIME.

The frenzy on this site demonstrates you have no idea what is being considered. The DEMS are not going along with the BUSH plan to pump YOUR money into banks and insurance companies.
Obama already spoke his piece today.
There is nothing further to add.
Nothing McCain says is going to be implemented.
He is a non-entity. Lieberman will tell him how to vote.

McCain's point of view on this matter is famously, DEREGULATE.
That is not the answer. He has nothing to add at all.

Posted by: Bruce | September 24, 2008 7:24 PM | Report abuse

The debate can't wait, The People deserve to see the candidates and what they have to say.

Posted by: Mike | September 24, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

JakeD has nothing else to do with his time except post inane and nincompoop-ish comments on this site. He's a regular here along with "Tom" in case no one has noticed.

Posted by: TheCentrist | September 24, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

The last time I checked both McCain and Obama are still Senators elected by the people of their states to represent them in the Senate. Everything else is secondary to include the Presidential Election. So, we are now criticizing McCain for doing the job that he was elected to do and praising Obama for not representing the people who elected him. Maybe I have forgotten what the Presidency is about. In addition, the President needs his Senators to do their job right now and not showboat across the country. McCain and Obama are two of those Senators who speak of bringing change to Washington, so let them start now by influencing the Senate on how to fix the economy. We cannot wait until January of 2009 for one of them to take office with promises that, as history has shown, will never work out. Besides, the economy will already be destroyed by then. The debate is in Washington right now…not the campaign trail!

Posted by: Dave | September 24, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

Maybe they could use a cardboard cutout of McCain if he doesn't want to show up in person. Nobody would ever know.

Posted by: Mark O | September 24, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

I'm sure Obama has better things to do right now than the job taxpayers are paying him to do.

Posted by: Larry | September 24, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

- ohhhh Puhllllleeeeeze -
Mccain is out of money and ideas
and he will grasp onto anything blowing in the wind to try to keep his "Act" on the
Road. But's it's all an Act...!!!
by a Particularly Bad Actor - mccain.
Yeah we got a big problem on our hands
with the financial crisis -
but just like obama says -
a president should be able to handle two things at once -
don't you think...?
neither one of them is on a relevent committee, and they (should!!) have
aides who are On Top of all this stuff to
keep them competently informed as to what is going on...
they both got fast planes - takes an hour to get there -
C'mon john -
ya Old Maverick
just answer some questions !!

Posted by: lalo cameron | September 24, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

I just went to the Official Website of Barack Obama 2008 Presidential Campaign and it seems you can't read his positions unless you give them your email address. Oh well, I'll wing it. I believe that Senator Obama is still a Senator and also that he is on the record as a strong proponent of personal responsibility. Furthermore, I believe he wants to lead all Americans and has stated he is well qualified to do this. He also claims that he is pretty good at resolving problems in a bipartisan fashion and has all kinds of answers for the many things that ail the economy. Wouldn't it be responsible to put a little time into his current day job? Perhaps he might help to solve one or two things now instead of making us wait until January. Ask yourself, "What would be the result if I decided to skip my job while looking for another (particularly if some critical work was not being done)?" Now I know that politics are different (strange). That's a major part of the problem... they shouldn't be. BTW, imho, score one for Team McCain for doing the political thing (because it happens to be the right thing). Our two candidates have more political juice right now than any other two pols in the country. Why aren't they both using it?

Posted by: Thinking | September 24, 2008 7:23 PM | Report abuse

As entertaining as the latest real would debunking of the notion that there is any magic wisdom in markets has been, and as fun watching the two clowns that dare to be our future leaders 'one-up' each other has been - the press has missed an AMAZING SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY!!!!!

It cannot be confirmed yet that there is no intelligent life in the Universe---

BUT it has now been confirmed beyond a doubt that there is no intelligent life on planet Earth.

Posted by: plaza04433 | September 24, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

There is no way to understand the american public.

McCain decided to STOP advertisements, to stop the political non sense in order to pay attention to what most American have being demanding from their "representatives": to work together and find a solution. But when he does exactly that, the democrats want to fry him up.

His Highness can't raise to McCain's level. He is too afraid of the consequences to his ambitions if he were to stop the political noise and accusations for a moment to take care of the people.

It takes galls to do what McCain is doing. Not advertising could hurt him, but he cares more about this crisis. Whether i will agree with his solutions or not is to be seen. But one thing is for sure: I do appreciate his courage and boldness in stopping the political ads. His Highness can't afford to do that.

The reason the MSM is attacking him is simple: no advertisement, no millions of dollars in ads for them.

Obama is a wuss. PERIOD.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

Of course someone who is not very good at Economics should be there helping and not debating.

www,fightmccain.com

Posted by: the Rhino | September 24, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

I guess someone will be "present" at the debate-it will be nice "town hall meeting" in front of 100 million people.....

Posted by: ucan'thandlethetruth | September 24, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

Debates can go on in the forthcoming weeks.

Obama needs to get his ass to Washington, D.C. NOW as do all senators and representatives and come up with a plan and vote on it to ease this financial crisis. This is a very, very serious problem for all of us. They do not need to be making speeches, campaigning, debating, etc. They need to be in the Senate doing what they were elected to do.

Reid criticized McCann for missing a vote in the Senate for a vote which does not compare to what the Senate needs to do now. The liberal news media is wrong, wrong, wrong...........they only want to stir up problems for McCann. Well, liberal news media, this is a very serious U.S. problem and our country needs action from the United States Congress NOW, NOW, NOW.

The media needs to shut up.

Posted by: Inlovewithtruth | September 24, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

mccain can fly south for the debates. He can be a member of the discussion by day, and debate at night. The presidency is not a 9 - 5 job. He is incapable of debating ol' bama me thinks.

Posted by: monkey boy | September 24, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

JakeD:

He could not debate himself. The greatness would confuse the media into thinking he beat himself and they wouldn't know how to report a loss for obama.

Posted by: adrian | September 24, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

Obama needs to follow is own advise "There are times for politics, and then there are times to rise above politics and do what's right for the country. And this is one of those times," Obama explained. Well, do the right thing. DO YOUR JOB!!

Posted by: lat | September 24, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

If McCain can't even face Obama how will he handle Putin?


Simple. He sends Caribou Barbie. She has seen Russia. When she sees Vlad the destroyer she will stare him down as if he were a Grizzly Bear.

I don't think McCain can see Russia from any of his umpteen houses. She complements him well and dovetails in with his kills.

A perfect match if you will.

Posted by: Snowmobilling Todd, her "First Dude" | September 24, 2008 7:22 PM | Report abuse

For EIGHT YEARS the crooks have been in power making the cake hollow, and now there's a 'perl harbor' urgency, and even suspend the debate?
Heaven forbid, the crooks next will want to postpone the ELECTIONS and give Bush an "emergency extension" with "unlimitted powers".
Haven't we learned yet?
By the way, the crook who wrote on the 4 page "rescue plan' calling for UNCONSTITUTIONAL powers MUST BE put in prison IMMEDIATELY. NOW THAT's really URGENT. Why hasn't the press found out who put THOSE totalitarian words in that 'plan'??

Posted by: El Mugroso | September 24, 2008 7:21 PM | Report abuse

Herewegoagain:

Are you willing to wait and "gamble" that the stock market does not lose 50% of it's value on Monday. What's the problem working on legislation through the weekend, if needed?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 7:21 PM | Report abuse

Dear Cap, you need to get your facts straight. Obama the coward has refused to debate Mccain all summer long in any town hall meetings. He surely isn't going to let any of America question him. He's got way to much to hide and be ashamed of.

Posted by: jewels | September 24, 2008 7:21 PM | Report abuse

McCain is demonstrating true leadership. He is becoming part of the solution, working with colleagues from both sides of the aisle.

Any strategist knows that during times of crisis you must prioritize your resources and direct those resources to where they will be most effective. It's not a matter of being able to handle more than one thing at a time, it's a matter of prioritizing and focusing on solving the economic crisis -- that needs resolution in the next several days.

The debate can wait until next week or the week after.

Posted by: mcbrill | September 24, 2008 7:21 PM | Report abuse

Ohhh, I'v been studying all week and eating finger sandwiches in my Florida hotel suite, we gotta do this now, before I forget everything..

Posted by: KL | September 24, 2008 7:21 PM | Report abuse

MikeVa -- How's that KOOL-AID tastin'? Seriously, let McLame go back and fix the economy for the rest of the week. He'll take the weekend off, he always does. We're just asking him to quit a tad early Friday night to grace us with his presence at his JOB INTERVIEW.

Posted by: richie | September 24, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Debate!
Debate!
Debate!
Debate!
Debate!Debate!Debate!

No running, no hiding.

Put your faces on television and tell the people what you think.

Posted by: time to hear what the candidates have to say | September 24, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Dear Cap, you need to get your facts straight. Obama the coward has refused to debate Mccain all summer long in any town hall meetings. He surely isn't going to let any of America question him. He's got way to much to hide and be ashamed of.

Posted by: jewels | September 24, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

McCain is and always has been a clueless.

Todays move just crystallized it for many who were undecided.

As George Will said, McCain is not fit to be president.

Posted by: Rafterman | September 24, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

McCain won't debate because the debate commission turned down his request to debate from a cage hung from the ceiling with a Vietnamese guard patroling the stage.

Posted by: Kim | September 24, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

HELLO HELLO HELLO!! THEY ARE NOT ON THE BANKING COMMITTEE,IT MAKES NO DIFFERANCE
They can both be their for a vote and then leave

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

If you can't walk and chew gum at the same time how do you expect to be president and deal with two things at once?

Posted by: the truth hurts | September 24, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

McCain has broken fewer of the Ten Commandments than president Bush. In fact, the only Commandment Mr. Bush has not violated is "Thou shall not covet thy neighbor's wife." I certain that every other of the nine Bush has not obeyed. I'm pretty certain McCain has violated far fewer than other Republicans. For that we can all be thankful.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 7:19 PM | Report abuse

McCain wouldn't dodge this debate. For crying out loud it is his forte, foreign policy. There were going to be no questions on the economy, so why dodge it. While he's running for president, he is still being paid to be a senator. He understands his job. Huge difference in these two. I admire McCain!

Posted by: charlieb | September 24, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

What a sad little man McShame has turned out to be.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

"Present"

This ad was paid for and approved by Barack Obama

Posted by: Bill | September 24, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

JakeD

Instead of issuing a joint statement McCain chose to come out and 'suggest' a suspension of campaigns. This after having discussion with his opponent THAT DAY. That is partisan whether you wish to accept it or pretend to be in awe of McCains's bipartisan posturing. How many weeks have we been in this financial crisis? Does anybody really believe all this hype about 'we must get this done now or the markets will collapse Monday?' crap. If you think markets are jittery now do you think presidential candidates throwing their hands up in the air screaming "crisis now, crisis now, we must cancel everything and run to Washington!" will put them at ease. How much do you think congressional rep's really care what McCain thinks or says on the issue anyway? And do you really think that he can sway dem's with this stunt? No, it will just turn an already politicized situation into political gridlock. What is it exactly that you think they can offer to alter opinions that friday morning that could not be done over the phone? If anything they should both stay far away from DC and let the people who actually know the situation best handle it, without the glaring lights from the presidential race to put additional pressure on the situation.

There are several ways he could have handled this in a bipartisan way. He could have come out and said he was returning to DC and if time did not permit, he would not attend the debate. But he did not do that. He tried to turn it into a loose-loose situation for his opponent and you don't have to be cynical to figure that one out.

Posted by: Herewegoagain | September 24, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

Is Mr. McCain trying to ram through the so-called "bail-out" by this "man the barricades--march ensemble!" etc. retreat from debate and public input? Or does he see a threat to his own obscenely bloated assets as a true National Emergency? Come on, man, show you are one and stand up to a debate. Sad sad--and much sadder for most of us should these ploys again succeed; we lost lives in the fake-emergencied war, we get to lose our infrastructure in this fake-"crisis" the financiers are using to position themselves to Take Take Take. Disgusting. One more vote for Obama. (Or are we going to push Israel to bomb Iran--or say it's they who did it--and then when it escalates to nukes call a National Emergency and skip the election? Or is that for next time?) Sick-O, indeed.

Posted by: Paula Friedman | September 24, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

This is a pathetic ploy by McCain to act like he is now a "leader" after being in Congress for 26 years as part of the problem. He would like us to believe that he can solve this crisis when he has done nothing but support big business, tax breaks for the richest1% and deregulation in all it's ugly forms..he cares nothing for the average person. After all, the rich make more than 4 Million dollars a year; then, everyone below that, should get an even bigger break. This BS of suddenly caring for the "fairness" of the bailout is rhetoric when all his actions show he has nothing but disrespect for the middle class. He is only interested in preserving his political "skin" now that Obama has the confidence of the American people on this issue. Would I turn my bank account over to some one who has already shafted me because they say they have changed?

Posted by: Linda L. | September 24, 2008 7:18 PM | Report abuse

What a Shame is that Mccain!!! The American people are not stupid and McCain will pay for tha durty maneuver!!Wacth the polls next week.

Posted by: Joana | September 24, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

At the beginning of this month, Obama asked McCain and Mike Bloomberg to meet with him at Ground Zero to commemorate the 9/11 attacks. McCain agreed, and went with him, wife in tow. Nothing was really accomplished on this day, other than giving comfort and solace to NYers who lost so much in a matter of minutes. Now, we're in a different sort of crisis. One of these guys will be elected POTUS in less than six weeks. OF COURSE they should both participate in the negotiations that will save our economy from ruin -- not just because they're running for POTUS, but because they're both the titular heads of their parties. I'm sorry Obama didn't see it this way.

Posted by: Tim | September 24, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Dear Sen. McCain,

Time to buck up cowboy, you need to make your case to the American People. You can't run and hide because you're having a bad week.

THE PEOPLE WANT TO SEE THE DEBATE!

Posted by: john in Montana | September 24, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

Obama is in a hurry to to be president.He would rather see our credit situation worsen over the weekend to take advantage of it.Goes well with his suggestion to Iraqi leaders to postpone troop withdrawals till elections.What an opportunist.Does this man even care about our country?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

McCain does not want to debate right now because he is vulnerable if pressed on the economy. He was one of the key people involved in the savings and loan scandal back in the 80s. That controversial bailout was funded by shifting a huge amount of money from Social Security to the general fund. It was never repaid and directly caused projected funding shortfalls in Social Security. He also has been one of the leading proponents of banking deregulation. This deregulation directly led to our current economic crisis. He doesn't want to debate the issue because he helped cause the problem.

Posted by: Peter | September 24, 2008 7:17 PM | Report abuse

IDENTIFY THEFT. One of the neocon thugs posted the following:

"Ignore my last post ---- it's that time of the month and I'm frustrated. Plus, I only have a fourth grade education and my personal hygiene is a little lacking. Sorry!

Posted by: Sandra S | September 24, 2008 7:03 PM "

My original post still stands. ANd get your a-- of of this board if you continue to play games and do another identity theft, I will report you to the secret police who will come and take your kool aid away.

Posted by: Sandra S | September 24, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Ummm...Mike in MD's post should make it evident why folks like McCain (who, by the way, has emotional stability issues after his stint in the 'Nam) are even a factor in this race. I lived 6 years in AZ and I 1) watched local news when McCain was chastised periodically for snapping on "the little people" and 2) got screwed by electric deregulation that McCain was championing. If he Grandpa McLame doesn't get his nap, the Angry Troll WILL come out. Thanks.

Posted by: Justin | September 24, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

In real life, he provided propaganda for the enemy, which is actually treason. The only reason he was not shot for treason is that his father was a four star admiral.
If any other war-criminal had helped the enemy like that they would have spent the first couple of years after Vietnam under guard by Marines.

It was technically treason. But in fairness to McCain he signed a letter of confession as a phsically, emotionally and mentally wounded POW. So did others. It was found that the torture used by the N. Vietnamese was brutal and their violations were dismissed. Although thy were violations of their military code, due to the circumstances, the code was modified after the war to allow for fake confessions to be made if it will preclude severe torture and thus help the POW's survive their capture.

If you want to get technical, McCain maybe be prohibited for running for office under the 14th ammenedment ot the constitution for signing the letter. Look it up.

But to be fair, he was forgiven for signing a confession while being tortured.

Posted by: Old white guy for Obama | September 24, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

bgjd1979:

Yes, that must be it, because FOREIGN POLICY (you know, the topic of this first debate) is Obama's strong suit not McCain's. You have so simply cut through all the fog, oh wise one.

(Sarcasm off)

emmie, Sally, Losercuda, sbhoward, Metame:

If a couple nukes had been detonated over American cities by terrorists this morning, would you still want the FOREIGN POLICY debate to go forward? That's kinda McCain's strong suit, so I don't buy that he was "scared".

You do realize it's just a debate, and we have a $14 trillion economy at stake, right?

Sara:

As I said, before, if the legislation is signed by Friday at 9:00 PM, fine by me. Have the debate via teleconference if necessary.

Soldier in Iraq:

Thank you for your service, but I can't agree with you that this is a stunt. Was Army Pfc. Ross McGinnis of Knox, Pa., jumping on top of a grenade in Iraq, and saving the lives of his comrades, just a "stunt"?

erik:

I'm retired, with more than enough time to waste here.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

The American public continues to be lied to for the fear that simply whispering the truth will collapse the US financial markets. This current $700 Billion has little to do with mortgage backed securities against physical asset value deteriorations, this is all about the credit default swaps totaling upwards of $45 trillion dollars. That is twice the total value of the US stock market valued at $22 trillion. Do the math!

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1723152,00.html

Posted by: the truth hurts | September 24, 2008 7:16 PM | Report abuse

Someone please tell me why I keep reading that the current financial crisis is all the more reason to have a debate on Foreign Policy and National Security? Oh right, logically it makes very little sense, but it justifies your candidate's position.

Yes, Obama has done the only thing he could do. He was backed into a corner by a political move, and there is very little doubt in my mind that he'll come out on top of it. But the multi-tasking argument and the need to have an unrelated debate being more important than what is going on, seriously? I can multi task with the best of them, but I think I'd give this one my fullest attention.

Posted by: MikeVa | September 24, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

john is finally doing what is right for his country, now can he say no mas he and on the job training sarah.what a gifted mom she is.

Posted by: frank | September 24, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

If McCain can't even face Obama how will he handle Putin? McCain is nothing but a confused, frightened old man who should just stay in one of his 7 or 10 homes and live out the rest of his numbered days.

Posted by: Bill | September 24, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

Barack shold stay in floryda and practise and dhen fly to missippii and beat dhat old dude honkey, mckain

Posted by: Tyron | September 24, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

The stakes could not be more clear! Every politician and economist says so. Where is Obama? The most important economic issue ever and where's Obama? He's worse than Waldo!!

Posted by: jj | September 24, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, it's not fair to delay the debate. Obama has been studying all week and hearing him speak is a lot more important than the little economy

Posted by: adrian | September 24, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

I can't believe what I'm reading here. Do you think it's too much to ask for Senators to report to Washington to serve their electorate and earn their wages? Would your boss think it was OK for you to skip day after day of work so that you could look for a better job? I doubt it.

Maybe the Obama fans are right here about McCain having no plan, we will see. We will see how things go when Obama has no teleprompter and no one telling him what to say and when they both have to answer the SAME questions.

If you don't think this issue is important enough for participation from all on The Hill, then maybe you will be OK with paying my share of this $700 billion bail out.

Obama isn't sure whether he would be helpful as a Senator... why do we want to elect him as president?

I too will be disappointed if there is no debate, but I'm willing to recognize that there are more important issues out there, and the day the debate takes place is highly irrelevant.

Posted by: Will the Spin Ever Stop? | September 24, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

MikeVa

They are not digging a ditch. They are agreeing upon a compromise. Obama stated his minimum requirements TODAY.
The Bush version is NOT going to happen.
It wont cost $700 billion. The $300 billion that Bush said we didnt have, (a month ago) for homeowners,
WILL be part of the deal.

THE DEAL IS MADE. OBAMA has spoken. 30-40 Republicans are on board.

Relax, the hysteria is fake. Palin can stand in for him since she is just a governor and he is preoccupied with trying to make people forget he and his ideas are precisely how this masterpiece of failure was engineered. ITS HIS FAULT.
Palin can stand in for him, since she has been talking to world leaders and she is ready and is just a heart beat away.


Posted by: Bruce | September 24, 2008 7:15 PM | Report abuse

Both of these presidential candidates currently hold congressional jobs. How many of you can take time off of your current job to campaign for another job? They should get back to work, we are in trouble and they need to step up to the plate and show us, not tell us, what they plan to do if they were to become president. Anyone can talk

Posted by: MAG | September 24, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Mccain is living his life long words, "Country First". His actions match his words,unlike Obama who is just inflated empty words. Mccain is doing his part to bring together both parties on this bailout before our country completly fails. Once again not putting himself first, but our country. What does Obama do? Well what a suprise he thinks only of himself, as he has done his whole political career, and puts himself first. He couldn't care enough to even take two days off to be apart of this massive bailout. That really shouldn't suprise anybody though, since all he has done up till now is vote PRESENT on everything that has come before him. Classic Obama. If is wasn't for the Democratic Controlled Congress blocking every vote to seriously investigate Fannie and Freddie this wouldn't of happened in the first place. From 2001 Republicans have tried to get stronger regulations on F & F but always voted down by the DEMS. Mccain warned this was coming in 2005 with F & F.But then why would the Dems want no one looking into Fannie & Freddie? Simple, They are steep into F & F and knew all along what was going on and just looked the other way because they were lining their pockets. Once again Nancy Pelosi and her hand puppet, Obama, think the American people are stupid as they point their fingers at everybody else.

Posted by: jewels | September 24, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

I am a moderate independent and would like to hear the debates between McCain qnd Obama. But first and foremost, as a taxpayer I am paying them to do their job and that is to take care of business in DC first. They can debate and campaign on their own time and money. TAKE CARE OF AMERICA'S NEEDS FIRST.

Posted by: Rich | September 24, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

There is the difference between youth and wisdom.

Young boys want to be on TV for 15 mins of Fame.

Older and wiser men believe that its more important to actually do the work then play on TV and say nothing.

Obama, earn your pay and get to work back in Washington and stop playing on TV.

Posted by: Yoko | September 24, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Ralph -- America is burning? Excuse me? Can you see Alaska from your house? Wall Street is not "burning".

Posted by: richie | September 24, 2008 7:14 PM | Report abuse

When a crisis arrives, Obama wants to stage an unrelated debate (or vote "present").

McCain wants to act!

McCain is a leader.

McCain has America's priorities in order.

Obama does not.

Obama said, "Call me if you need me."

Obama is a follower, not a leader.

Posted by: Mark | September 24, 2008 7:13 PM | Report abuse

When did it become ok to Lie

Posted by: CBB | September 24, 2008 7:13 PM | Report abuse

No I do not want a president giving all of his attention to one issue because that is how we ended up in this financial crisis in the first place. Bush focuses solely on Iraq and completely neglected domestic issues. McCain does poorly in debates and never wanted to do them that is why he suggested town hall meetings. If it were a hurricane this week he would have used that as an excuse because he is simply scared witless that Obama will eat him alive in a National Debate. Rightfully so. And don't worry about Palin, Biden is going to mow her over too.

Posted by: Cap | September 24, 2008 7:13 PM | Report abuse

No one can blame McCain for being as scared of Obama as the rest of us are, even if he is a war hero. Obama is smart, popular and cool under fire. But the most terrifying thing to all of us courage-impared conservatives is that he's not a good ol' boy. We're desperately hoping this strategy of shielding the entire Palin/McCain ticket from the media will conceal their obvious weaknesses long enough so that the fear of Obama will carry them to victory. We're all really scared that it's their only hope now...

Posted by: McChickens | September 24, 2008 7:13 PM | Report abuse

McCain is a chicken *hit.

Posted by: james | September 24, 2008 7:13 PM | Report abuse

the republicans are playing the victim baby game. Wah...Wah...

Posted by: Dave | September 24, 2008 7:13 PM | Report abuse

The only people that care if the debate is rescheduled are radical left wingers that wouldn't vote for a republican even if they were the only one running. There is over six weeks left to do the debate. Taxpayers with brains and common sense want our elected officials to be in Washington working on this bill to get it right.

Posted by: Tom | September 24, 2008 7:12 PM | Report abuse

As for the scared of the debate bit; this is the one debate McCain was supposed to be good in and was expected to clearly win, what does he have to gain from not being there? Even though Obama says the debate is on; it won’t be a debate with 1 person, that’s an interview.

----------

Considering the way debates work, it is much better to miss the one you're expected to win than the one you're expected to lose. If McCain is expected to trounce Obama and fails to do so, he 'loses', even if he 'wins'. If you were McCain and you wanted to miss a debate, this would be the one. It robs Obama of any chance to turn the tables on the foreign policy attitudes of voters while making McCain seem more focused on the economy, where he polls much less favorably.

Posted by: Joe | September 24, 2008 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Hmm. Perhaps gun-toting computer engineer Mike from MD can answer the question.

________

Q: Which of these scenarios represents altruistic bipartisanship, and which represents political opportunism?

(A) Crisis arises. Rivals discuss matter privately, agree to cooperate. Rivals then hold joint press conference to present their plan. Nation sees united front.

(B) Crisis arises while Rival "M" spends years pushing deregulation, then months telling us the bad economy is all in our heads, then a week claiming the "fundamentals" are strong, then most of yesterday deciding it's the worst crisis since 9/11 and pondering how to play it to his advantage in the press.

Resolved on such a plan, Rival "M" ignores highly unusual direct call from Rival "O", strings him along for 6 hours while coordinating with White House allies, then sand-bags everyone with a unilateral announcement reneging on a prior agreement, and publicly dares Rival "O" to follow suit or look bad. Bush White House piles on as arranged.

Tell us, please: which one is selfless and "bipartisan" again? Use your 'vision' and explain it to us.

Posted by: youarestillidiots | September 24, 2008 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Obama called Rev Wright for insiration, and he decided that the no good whitey cracker is right and they should return to DC and get the country's work done. But then again Barack could just vote present from his Florida suite "Present". And still campaign.
"BRILLANT"

Posted by: Xuan | September 24, 2008 7:12 PM | Report abuse

sorry --- it's that time of the month and I have clamydia.

Posted by: rhda | September 24, 2008 7:11 PM | Report abuse

Neither McCain or Obama are on the Senate Banking Committee. As such, there really isn't much they can do either alone or together that isn't already being considered.

What's really important, more than ever, is they debate because one of them is going to be elected our next President. McCain stating the debate should be delayed is an indication to me he doesn't understand it's even more important now that they hold the debate.

Posted by: AllenW | September 24, 2008 7:11 PM | Report abuse

screw McSame and his shifty games. The people want to see Obama rip McSame apart!

Posted by: Scott | September 24, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

HEY MCCAIN--HAVE THE DEBATE IN WASHINGTON. COME ON, YOU KNOW HOW TO MULTI-TASK . . . YEAH RIGHT!

Posted by: HEY MCCAIN HAVE DEBATE IN WASHINGTON | September 24, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

I am a republican and will be voting for McCain this election. However, I cannot understand McCain's logic behind delaying the debates so they can somehow fix the economic problem. With all due respect to both senators, congress will still be able to move forward on this issue in their absence. I equate McCain wanting to cancel friday's debate to his unpreparedness for such an event. Perhaps his handlers have recognized he still needs work before arguing with Obama. I was really looking forwarded to finally having a spirited debate on the issues. For McCain to try and use the economic crisis as a way out does not sit well with me. If anything, the current crisis is all the more reason for them to have the debate.

-an uninspired republican

Posted by: Brandon | September 24, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Obama is refusing to delay the debate to discuss "foreign affairs" no less. McCain challenged Obama to ten debates and he refused them all. Now he's ready. Its seems that for Obama a debate is more important than country. Maybe Obama should debate himself in a Senate stall. People want action out of Washington not more talk. Leave the ego at home and get the job done.

Posted by: Campbell | September 24, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

and not give a damn about the nation after taking so much money from the instituions that are failing.

Posted by: This really shows Obamas desire to be president | September 24, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

jake d and anonomouse must be Brother and Sister.it doesn't matter which one is her.They are both pathetic

Posted by: frank | September 24, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

It's clear to me if McCain is elected, then the terrorists have won.

Posted by: Bill | September 24, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

We can't really tell if he's running scared or truly concerned, but it definitely comes off as a "stunt" under the circumstances.

Posted by: Abarafi | September 24, 2008 7:05 PM

----------

The way it was announced, it is obviously a stunt. I will be surprised if anybody outside of the 32% hard core right-wing-or-bust voters see it as anything else.

Truly, what does McCain have to offer to the process? What does Obama have to offer? If either one of them were the president, they could bring the backing of the White House. As it stands now, they're just two senators who have one vote each and no particularly strong ties to any economic committees.

Posted by: Joe | September 24, 2008 7:09 PM | Report abuse

What's new Pussy Cat ???

The first Real Debate and the silly old fart
ducks it.

Posted by: rhda | September 24, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

McCain is a coward in so many ways. I can't believe this guy was acutally called a "Hero" at some point!

Posted by: Sally | September 24, 2008 6:51 PM

Sally, it was a work of advertising genius.

In real life, he provided propaganda for the enemy, which is actually treason. The only reason he was not shot for treason is that his father was a four star admiral.
If any other war-criminal had helped the enemy like that they would have spent the first couple of years after Vietnam under guard by Marines.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

They are both presidential candidates weeks away from an election. Everyone in Washington understands that. It's kind of important we ick the best candidate since Bush is heading for Texas soon.

You people who ague its the wisest thing to do under the circumstances are once again trying to change the rules to fit was is best for McCain.

Whats best is they BOTH debate, they BOTH campaign for the next 6 weeks.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

Whichever one wins the presidency will have to deal with the decision being made. I would think they’d both want to be there to participate in that decision rather than just vote on a proposal created and being negotiated by the person's administration that you blame for the problem in the first place.

You people are really starting to crack me up.. Let me attempt to wrap my brain around your logic. Bush is to blame for the mess, because he sat back and did nothing while the people working on the problem today created this mess. Now you suggest that the candidates for the next presidency are supposed to sit back and not participate in the discussions towards a resolution, because the experts who created today's problems are working already working on it? Did I get that about right? I love it when people think before they speak / type.

To those chiming in about mulit-tasking; there is a VERY big difference between being able to answer emails and install Oracle on a server at the same time and dealing with the biggest financial problem we are likely to see in our lifetime. Your argument is weak, and if Obama suggests that he would not give his full attention to such an important issue if he were president, I’m extremely scared of him.

I think McCain is doing the right thing, but I think politically it will bite him in the butt. Obama is clearly better at the politics game (funny for a guy who's supposed to be about change and keeping it real). Having said that, Obama did the only thing he could do politically as well; if he follows suit he looks weak. This also may not play well.

As for the scared of the debate bit; this is the one debate McCain was supposed to be good in and was expected to clearly win, what does he have to gain from not being there? Even though Obama says the debate is on; it won’t be a debate with 1 person, that’s an interview.

Posted by: MikeVa | September 24, 2008 7:08 PM | Report abuse

So get some work done in Washington and then do a couple hours of debate on Friday. Surely anyone running for President can debate just like they do on the Senate floor all the time. Seriously, the debate shouldn't require a whole lot of preparation, its issues they should be talking about ALL THE TIME. This is such ridiculous garbage.

Posted by: Strange Days | September 24, 2008 7:07 PM | Report abuse

What's new Pussy Cat ???

The first Real Debate and the silly old fart
ducks it.

Posted by: Richard Donaldson-Alves | September 24, 2008 7:07 PM | Report abuse

UPDATE: McCain senior adviser Mark Salter emails: "Yesterday, Harry Reid said that consensus couldn't be achieved without John McCain's leadership. John stepped up and is providing that leadership. Now Senator Reid seems to have changed his mind for reasons we'll let him explain. But what he should understand is that this isn't about Harry Reid or John McCain or Barack Obama. It's about the American people and, in the words of Warren Buffet, the financial Pearl Harbor they're facing. John's committed to doing his part to help avert that calamity. We hope Senator Reid is too."

OK, lets suspend the campaign, ahh ahhh ahhh ahhh my bad, John don't bother returning. "Harry Reid 24 Sept 2008 4:23pm"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Just when you would think that McCain couldt go any lower he try’s to pull this stunt trying to politicize this crisis turning himself into the grate savoir that is going to sacrifice his campaign and save the world. Well were have you been buddy for the past 25 years? How dumb do you think people are? And to top it off Zippy the Pinhead is going to address the nation at 9:00(for god knows what?) and screw with the season opener of C.S.I. New York

Posted by: s=dav | September 24, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

The McCain Campaign would like to first set up a "Blue Ribbon" committee to see if Friday is good or if next Tuesday will work out better. Findings of this committee could be announced as early as next Thursday, although these findings will be non-binding.

Posted by: Kevin | September 24, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

McCain's ploy is the opposite of leadership. It's a political stunt. It doesn't matter if either McCain or Obama is in Washington -- they aren't on the relevant committees. The financial system isn't going to be "fixed" on Friday at 9 p.m., and the voters need to know what approach the candidates would take in the long run. If McCain cared about the country and not about the polls, he would debate.

Sad. Shallow. Pathetic.

Posted by: Jean | September 24, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

FIRST PALIN. A SCAM ON THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. NOW I CAN'T DEBATE BECAUSE I NEED TO SAVE THE COUNTRY!WHAT A SCAM! WHERE WAS MCSHAME WHEN GRAM WAS DELIVERING THE NO REGULATIONS BILL? I CAN'T BELEIVE THIS FOOL(GRAM) WAS HIS ECONOMIC ADVISOR UNTIL HE CALLED THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WINERS.(JUDGEMENT ANYONE?)HOWEVER,NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE IGNORANCE AND STUPIDITY OF THE AVERAGE AMERICAN VOTER.THE ROVE BOYS HAVE NOT.

Posted by: B RUBIN | September 24, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

This is just another example of rash decisions by McCain. Watching similar actions of Bush over the years, we cannot afford another President who does this.

Posted by: wolf | September 24, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Senator McCain is becoming erratic in his decision-making. Last week he was screaming for the head of the SEC, and earlier this week said he believed his vote should have no effect on the bill's passage. Political stunts like this and the Palin pick are becoming transparent even to committed conservatives. George Will wonders about McCain's temperament, and now so do I.

As far as "solving this crisis" goes, McCain doesn't serve on the committees that are hashing out the details of this bill, and has absolutely no role in the crafting of this bill. Having McCain in the room would delay getting this done, and would inject politics where little existed before. McCain will do more harm than good.

Obama is right. In 40 days we will be picking the guy who will inherit this mess. We need to see them together to help us make our decision. So far, Obama has been far more deliberate, calm, decisive and Presidential. I admire Obama's demeanor today, as he chose not to call McCain's stunt a cheap political trick. However, I am convinced that McCain would have acted very differently if the polls had him up by 10 points. Panic does not bode well for Presidential temperament.

Way to put country first, McCain.

Posted by: Okiemom | September 24, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Let's call this what it is. A smart, yet shrewd move, but also with the nagging suspicion of this being another cynical P.R. “photo-op” that has characterized the McCain campaign ever since McCain’s long time staffers were usurped by the Bush and Rove operatives now running the high levels of the McCain campaign.

McCain’s poll numbers have been plummeting in lockstep to the economy, so to many in a worried nation, McCain’s action seems suspiciously a “hail Mary” move to attempt to shore up his popularity with a gesture of “care and compassion” toward working Americans, curiously after years of preaching the opposite with regard to regulation and federal oversight.

McCain may be better advised that, if he wants to show what a true leader does, he could be capable of multitasking between a two hour debate and still deal with the debacle and difficulties in Washington.

But off he rides to DC on a freshly painted white horse. Given the gaffes of late, hopefully none of the 100-strong pack of financial lobbyists on the McCain campaign staff will be within 100 miles of McCain during his visit, unless they care to explain and account for the $2500 every man, woman and child in this country potentially owes to those responsible for looting the American financial system.

Posted by: tdub | September 24, 2008 7:06 PM | Report abuse

This story is reporting is slighted. McCain opted to do the right thing Country First!

too bad your guy doesn't think that way!

GOD! Bless America...and yes I am a gun toting computer engineer with enough vision to see through your guys fodder!

Posted by: Mike in MD | September 24, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Hope and can have powerful results. One candidate brings us hope and the other does not. I would assert if Obama won the presidency the mood of the country would turn around and we'd start seeing a economic recovery almost immediately.

Think about it...

Posted by: Jason | September 24, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

There are more dems in favor of a bailout bill than republicans.

Posted by: Tom | September 24, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

McCain needs his nap after a strenuous day in the Senate.

Posted by: drewnet | September 24, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

If McCain really felt it was necessary to suspend the campaign so he and Obama could go to Washington D.C. and be part of the solution, then it should have been floated QUIETLY to Obama, and if there was no consensus, it should have been dropped rather than publicized. But, that's not what he did, is it? He tells Obama "let's do this," and Obama says let's think about it some more and get back in touch, and McCain goes out and makes a unilateral announcement. We can't really tell if he's running scared or truly concerned, but it definitely comes off as a "stunt" under the circumstances.

Posted by: Abarafi | September 24, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

anonymous said:Dude, did it ever occur to you how long the preperations have been going on to televise a national broadcast from non-standard location?

Dude,

Don't you know that DC is a major city with several locations to have a debate? This year alone, George Washington Univ. has been the site of many panel discussions similar in style to debates broadcast by the major networks. My point is that there is no reason not to debate.

Posted by: sbhoward | September 24, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

McCain's action is pretty ridiculous. There is nothing he can do in DC that is going to change the situation for the better. He can't get Repubs in Congress who oppose the bailout to change their minds, since they are certainly not counting on his coattails to get reelected to their seats. No doubt he would like to get Obama to stop talking about the economy for a few days so that Obama will stop rising in the polls. I'm not sure Obama is the genius many people believe he is, but he is certainly smart enough not to abandon a campaign strategy that is working for him.

Posted by: continental46 | September 24, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

McCain is covering up for the recent fact that his son who was on the board of Nevada's Silver State Bank which was the 11th bank to fail and required the FDIC to save it. He left 60 days before the event sighting personal reasons.LOL

John McCain's son, Andrew, who is also CFO of his mom's beer distributorship, "sat on the boards of Silver State Bank and of its parent, Silver State Bancorp, starting in February but resigned in July citing 'personal reasons.' Andrew McCain also was a member of the bank's audit committee, responsible for oversight of the company's accounting," according to AP.
http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/06/bank-failure-count-2008s-11th-bank-fails-mccains-son-was-dir/

Posted by: the truth hurts | September 24, 2008 7:05 PM | Report abuse

What are big tough McBama and Ocain afraid of?

To be honest they aren't afraid of anything. Why you people insist on being treated equally is astonishing. All the people you mentioned will get less than 5% of the vote. In other words the only ffect their votes would have if the count was extremely close.

What good did Ralphn Nader do for anyone voting against Bush? He should have resigned from the election the day before it was held and asked all his voters to support Al Gore. No sense allowing a Republican to win.

It is their job to raise there base and if they do they will be considered. But if they only represent 1% of voters then its meaningless.

No one said you are guranteed anything in life.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

It does appear pretty bad for McCain to be shirking this debate, IMHO. Voters like me (who are still undecided, believe it or not) are really looking forward to the debates to decide which guy is going to do the best job as President. So far, I'm not too pleased with either candidate but McCain is looking worse and worse with moves like this.

Posted by: Dom in OR | September 24, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Obama the empty shirt clammoring for a debate while America burns is exactly what I would expect. There goes the 57 states!

Posted by: Ralph Crandon | September 24, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

There's nothing "partisan" about BOTH SENATORS returning to do work in the U.S. Capitol.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 6:20 PM
______________________________________

Great. Now please explain what *isn't* partisan about first stringing along and then sandbagging, via national press conference, the person you propose to 'cooperate' with.

If partisan politics are to be set aside, and Obama and McCain were already talking privately, why the surprise unilateral announcement from McCain?

Posted by: youarestillidiots | September 24, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

"Present"

Live from Mississippi

I'm Barack Obama & I approve this message!

Posted by: Dave | September 24, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

I forgot one McCain talking point for his foreign policy non-debate.

McCain "We should prepare for WAR against Russia over Georgia, because"
AND I QUOTE

"We are all Georgians"

McCain and his traveling companion Palin are both so out of touch they BOTH actually want to put our troops in the way of nuclear weapons in a remote location that is impossible to supply conventionally.

Posted by: Bruce | September 24, 2008 7:04 PM | Report abuse

No one is voting on this bill until it makes sense. Right now it's a fascist manifesto. Everyone give you money to the corporations. What happened to the few values the republicans had left?

Posted by: Bill | September 24, 2008 7:03 PM | Report abuse

At least Obama can keep his cool during a crisis. But then again McCain is trying to deal with two crisis' at once. The financial crisis caused by the ideological hatred of government oversight of the private sector and the collapse of his campaign.

Fox and WaPo polls showing Obama pulling ahead. The un-vetted Palin turning out to be just what critics claimed, not ready for prime time. His new Rove wanna-be campaign staff screwing up. He's caught in one lie and distortion after another.

How many times has McCain suspended his campaign because of one crisis or another. This isn't the first. Is that what he does in a crisis, call a time out?

As for his sleazy end-run around Obama. Oh yeah, this is a guy to trust to be bipartisan??

Bush/McCain. No More Years!!

Posted by: thebob.bob | September 24, 2008 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Ignore my last post ---- it's that time of the month and I'm frustrated. Plus, I only have a fourth grade education and my personal hygiene is a little lacking. Sorry!

Posted by: Sandra S | September 24, 2008 7:03 PM | Report abuse

If "The One" were to debate himself, at least it would be an intelligent one, opposed to debating a fear monger talking point.

Posted by: Jeffrey | September 24, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Come on JakeD! It doesn't matter what side you are on. This is a blatant political stunt. Open your eyes brother.

Posted by: Soldier in Iraq | September 24, 2008 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Grandpa McLame needs a nap, eh? He is going to have to learn to multitask BEFORE his nap times...

Posted by: Justin | September 24, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

still dont get it, it's politics as usual BOTH candidates will say or do ANYTHING to get elected then one elected change look at history more times then not that has been the case but still we are sheep believing one or the other is the new messiah. BULL!!!!!

Posted by: rob | September 24, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Come on JakeD! It doesn't matter what side you are on. This is a blatant political stunt. Open your eyes brother.

Posted by: Soldier in Iraq | September 24, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

To JakeD
yep that would solve so much... bringing two campaigns and the media closer into this process and or mess.... JakeD do you have a job?... really what do you do and who tells you to do it? Do you work at kinko's or something? because with your insight I think you just maybe you could be The "in-House" color copy specialist...did someone say promotion?!

Posted by: erik | September 24, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

McCain Blindside the new kid again. I hope McCain's lesson comes through to Obama, it's called LEADERSHIP Barry, learn it...even if you are training on the job.

Posted by: Deborah Harry | September 24, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Everyone knows McCain is the one who challenged Obama to town hall style meetings and Obama backed down, so lets just stop with the McCain is scared of Obama stuff. I agree the debate should go on but let the focus be on just the economy. The truth is Obama is not a good debater and will just ramble on and try to make voters think he is the only one who can fix everything that ails this country. He and his followers will learn soon enough he is not capable of doing this job and willl cave to every one who knocks on his door. Obama has never taken a stand for anything and always chimes in after the fact.

Posted by: matt | September 24, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

I dont know why McCain suspended his campaign.

I mean, as the inventor of the BlackBerry he should have figured out an easy way to communicate to Washington?

Posted by: Georgeer | September 24, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

I cannot believe that anyone is falling for this. McCain is such an ignorant jerk. He admits the economy is not his strong suit but thinks his presence is so important he cannot miss a few hours to debate for the POTUS. You know, he couldn't be bothered to practice for the debate this week, now he's using the "Dog ate my homework" excuse. This is not some party he wants to skip -- its a job interview. And this is not some natural disaster threatening people's lives -- it's rich people getting richer. I'm disgusted.

Posted by: Richie | September 24, 2008 7:01 PM | Report abuse

With Obama's record of voting present more than 130 times in IL, it should be no surprise to anyone that he would prefer not to be in Washington when the senate votes on a 700 billion dollar bailout plan.

If he’s not willing to go on the record with a vote on something this important, he shouldn't be our next president or for that matter my IL senator. Obama is a puppet of the DNC and Chicago political machine. He has no character.

Posted by: Tom | September 24, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

No Debate? Whats next? The Bushies going to try to cancel the election and keep dumb-ya in as dictator. Have the debates -then vote the scoundrals like McBush and his clone John McInsane outa-here!(and take the hocky mom with ya...)

Posted by: GetRdone | September 24, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

There's nothing "partisan" about BOTH SENATORS returning to do work in the U.S. Capitol.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 6:20 PM

___

To do what? What are two senators out of a hundred going to do about the economy that they can't do on the campaign trail or by answering one or two questions during the debate about it?

Given the logic you present, why are these guys even campaigning at all?

The only reason McCain wants to duck out of the debate is because he is not willing to be shown up.

Same reason he protects Palin from the press.

We deserve to hear them debate the issues.

What, can McCain not multitask? I think this is a key aspect of running the entire US.

Posted by: Andrew | September 24, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

What a cheap political stunt.

Posted by: act | September 24, 2008 7:00 PM | Report abuse

So McCain is trying to call the shots, upset the whole debate schedule and show what a total a--hole he really is. The man is sinking so fast, I guess he's grasping for straws. "Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive."

So you Obama haters, perhaps you should vote for Obama to see what leadership is really about - if you don't like it in four years, you can always revert back to McCain if he isn't already put out to pasture.

Do you really see any alternative?

Posted by: Sandra S | September 24, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Obama should debate an empty chair if McCain chickens out.

The empty chair would do as well as McCain.

What's he going to say? (2001) "Iraq has anthrax".

The surge of troops was really good but we cannot leave until the Iraqi's actually make peace with each other.

Every day: "I am a former POW".

Did I miss anything?

The IRAQI's said yesterday they were told to change the end date of our occupation, by adding one year, by the White House, for 'political reasons'.


Posted by: Bruce | September 24, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Gee, like it isn't left leaning around here at allllllll.

Posted by: dumbfounded | September 24, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

If Obama had tried to pull this stunt, the republicans would have been all over him saying he was trying to delay the debate, and they would have been right. Just as the democrats are right to assert all McCain is doing is trying to delay the debate. Let's be honest, people, this is our country we're talking about.

All anyone need do is research on the internet John McCain's involvement in the Keating Five to see why John McCain has no interest in this country's economy or financial meltdowns. As a member of the Keating Five, McCain was more interested in protecting the criminal Keating during the S&L crisis in 1989, the S&L crisis where people lost their life savings to the crook Keating. Do your research, and get to know this John McCain.

As the republican conservative George Will admits, McCain isn't fit to be president, and Obama is.

Read up! Put country first! Vote for Obama!

Posted by: Republican Christians for Obama! | September 24, 2008 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Sounds like what I used to do when I had something uncomfortable to do at school - find something much more "important" to do. Also . . . may be paranoid, but REALLY hope nothing postpones or cancels the election. Canceling this debate would set a bad precedent.

Posted by: Sandy | September 24, 2008 6:58 PM | Report abuse

McCain is just afraid it might be revealed he really doesn't have a plan for the economy. He wants more time to dream something up, while Obama is light years ahead of him in terms of a economic recovery plan.

Posted by: Jason | September 24, 2008 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Grandpa looks like the kid who did not do his homework and now is trying to cancel going to school so he won't be exposed. Sorry Gramps the say nothing approach is not working for piggy palin and it will not work for you. You cannot win this election off lies in ads, and rigged townhall meetings. You actually have to know what you are talking about and actually talk about something other than your opponant and the fact that you were a POW

Posted by: christopher | September 24, 2008 6:58 PM | Report abuse

McCain needs to make sure he gets his share of the $700 bil.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

What's wrong with having the debate Friday night in DC?

We could have it on the White House Lawn. Can you bring some hot dogs? i can bring chips and dip and maybe some soft drinks.

Dude, did it ever occur to you how long the preperations have been going on to televise a national broadcast from non-standard location?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

The following 4 people are on the Ballot.

Why aren't they allowed to participate in at least one debate with the 2 chosen ones?

Chuck Baldwin - Constitution party
Bob Barr - Libertarian party
Ralph Nader - Independent party
Cynthia McKinney - Green party

What are big tough McBama and Ocain afraid of?

Posted by: ozzy | September 24, 2008 6:57 PM | Report abuse

McCain is chickening out; it's obvious. He thinks at last he has the perfect "out" but he doesn't, and he definitely is not integral to the maneuvering going on by Paulson et al.

Posted by: Ellen | September 24, 2008 6:56 PM | Report abuse

Neither McCain nor Obama is on the Senate Banking Committee… I think McCain should leave that in the hands of a REAL Republican woman… Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-NC), who is a member of the committee and has probably forgotten more about finance than he has ever known.

McCain is just plain scared. Or is he sick? Perhaps the stress is too much for him, he is 72.

Posted by: <emmie | September 24, 2008 6:55 PM | Report abuse

Alternately, Jake, McCain can appear via telescreen from Washington. After all, Congress isn't doing anything at 9:00 p.m. on Friday...so he won't miss anything that way.

Posted by: Sara | September 24, 2008 6:53 PM | Report abuse

i have a debt 700 billion dollars spent on what when we could spend it on simpler things to jump start a economy
http://700billionbailoutplan.blogspot.com/

Posted by: mdk | September 24, 2008 6:53 PM | Report abuse

McCain is a coward in so many ways. I can't believe this guy was acutally called a "Hero" at some point!

Posted by: Sally | September 24, 2008 6:51 PM | Report abuse

McCain is threatening not to show up.

So Obama should show up, answer questions, give an incredibly rousing speech afterwards, and just head back out on the trail.

This is insane.

Posted by: Losercuda | September 24, 2008 6:50 PM | Report abuse

What's wrong with having the debate Friday night in DC?

Posted by: sbhoward | September 24, 2008 6:48 PM | Report abuse

DEBATE, BABY, DEBATE!!

Posted by: Metame | September 24, 2008 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Oh JakeD...you are so reliably trollish...at least in this period of turmoil we can rely on you for a constant if skewed message.

Posted by: John L | September 24, 2008 6:45 PM | Report abuse

JakeD--if his opponent forfeits, he can still answer the questions posed to him under the time limits imposed by the debate rules. He'll still be debating McCain in absentia by outlining his position on McCain's policies...the only difference is that McCain won't be there to defend said policies.

Simple enough.

Posted by: Sara | September 24, 2008 6:45 PM | Report abuse

JakeD,

No, God is not in this election.

Now answer my question, why do you keep using the lords name in vain? Don't you have some morals?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 24, 2008 6:44 PM | Report abuse

So Obama talks to GOP's Colburn about a joint statement with McCain to take politics out of the issue. Obama agrees and runs it by McCain. McCain's response: Do an end run and call for suspension of campaign and debates. McCain isn't trying to take politics out of the issue, he is trying to inject it into the process. If McCain and Obama were back in Washington grand-standing on every point, nothing will be accomplished.

If McCain doesn't want to debate, fine, everyone will know why. He is fooling no one.

Posted by: bgjd1979 | September 24, 2008 6:43 PM | Report abuse

McSame would have preferred to postpone the debates until December!

Unfortunately the Debate Commission has said the debate will go on.

McSame will show up since his bluff has been called - all the while whining that he would rather not be here as "they need me in Washington to provide leadership"

What bull........

Posted by: toritto | September 24, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

Carol:

I don't have any "party binders" on, since I am registered Independent. Care to answer my question now:

Is "The One" going to debate himself?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 6:40 PM | Report abuse

To JakeD,

I don't engage in blasphemy like the Republicans.

You should pray some, JakeD, instead of trying to create a false idol based on GOP lies.

Take your party blinders off, as you're not helping anyone by furthering Republican lies.

Posted by: Carol | September 24, 2008 6:39 PM | Report abuse

McCain seems to be afraid to debate Obama on the actual issues!

Maybe McCain needs more time to learn about the basics of the economy, or more time to develop more lies that might stick.

I guess its harder for McCain to lie about Obama while standing next to him on stage.

Posted by: Carol | September 24, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

Rome wasn't built in a day McCain. Say good-bye to my vote McCain, I'm drinking the Obama Kool Aid.

Posted by: Trina | September 24, 2008 6:36 PM | Report abuse

Mr. "I Am Intellect" wants to talk about the financial crisis. He is in self imposed gridlock....no action jackson....lets debate some more. oh yeah Mr. Change must think everything is all action (not)... go to hell obamba... my vote will switch this year.

Posted by: robinhood | September 24, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse

the debate should be held as scheduled

this political grandstanding by McCain is pathetic and blatantly obvious

his pole numbers are down because of his ridiculous choice of a VP and he is using stall tactics

DEBATE, DEBATE, DEBATE

McCain has a terrible attendance record anyway and now he suddenly wants to rush back to Washington?

give me a frigging break

Posted by: lndlouis | September 24, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse

The media is now reporting that John McCain's campaign is seeking to reschedule the first presidential debate for next Thursday (the night that the VP debate is scheduled) and postpone the VP debate until a time "to be determined".

Suddenly, it all makes perfect sense...he's trying to give Palin more cramming time!

Posted by: Sara | September 24, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Carol:

Is "The One" going to debate himself?

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 6:28 PM | Report abuse

I understand the solidarity. But didn't Obama lay out his principles like the day before McCain's request for oversite committee. Who's cheating off the other?
But we have short-time memory. Obama should go to Washington and sit right next to McCain. Resolve the issue Friday morning, and debate that night. Someone please make sure McCain takes his vitamins.

Posted by: Curious | September 24, 2008 6:28 PM | Report abuse

McCain made his statement, spoke for under five minutes, and took no questions.

"You didn't hear a hint of a partisan attack or posturing in that statement," Salter said. "He really wants he and Senator Obama -- leadership, throw in the chairmen, the administration -- lock themselves in a room for the next 100 hours or however long it is between now and Monday morning, and achieve some kind of consensus on something that will have the congress's support."

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Woohoo! I'm glad Obama did not bow down to McCain's political maneuvers!!

Posted by: Carol | September 24, 2008 6:25 PM | Report abuse

There's nothing "partisan" about BOTH SENATORS returning to do work in the U.S. Capitol.

Posted by: JakeD | September 24, 2008 6:20 PM | Report abuse

should be interesting..

Posted by: yona loriner | September 24, 2008 6:19 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company