McCain suspends candidacy to take the lead in Wash crisis

[symbiosis 0]

historic move? try stunt. mccain can't help with bailout negotiations, he's admitted repeatedly he doesn't know jackshit about the economy.

He was the co-author of a bill that most likely would have averted this mess back in 2005. The bill called for more stringent control of Freddie and Fannie......killed by a partisan democrat vote........

I think he knows enough about the economy and with the right people around him in the WH, such as possibly Mitt, he would still in the aggregate dwarf Obama in experience.....in all areas of concern (except organizing a community, of course )....

Bill name please.

The bill was passed by the senate banking commitee and later killed by the democrats.....

Senator John McCain was one of the three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that would have averted this mess.

Lets look it up.

S.190. Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005. Introduced January 26, 2005.

On June 28, 2005 it was ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably. It died at the end of the session for the 109th Senate Session.

Interestingly...

A similar bill was reintroduced with the amendments in the 110th session of Congress where it remains pending. I unfortunately don't have the Bill #.

Now I wonder... why would the Democrats kill this bill? If Democrats are all for regulation, that is...

Unless, of course, the language of the bill doesn't really properly regulate the 'mess' we were about to get into.

Quite the leap on your part....I defer to the "experts" that describe the bill as one that would've appointed a regulator to oversee Fannie and Freddie and their forays into risky finacial endevours......and those that do know the details of the bill state that the kinds of dealing that finally sunk both of them would be disallowed.......

Well I got my info from thomas.loc.gov as well as govtrack.us

Not exactly people making leaps of logic there. The rest is simple reasoning. Republicans are typically hush-hush when it comes to having 'excess' (*) oversight on Corporate America.

(*) = Usually more than 0.

Actually:

Back in 2005, the Democrats on the Senate's Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs committee certainly agreed on the need for stronger regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The differences they had with the Republicans were in the details. Both parties agreed on the idea that S.190 should create an independent Federal Housing Finance Agency to issue regulations and guideline governing Fannie and Freddie, and that Fannie and Freddie should be forced to reduce the size of their portfolios. The dispute was about how those portfolios should be reduced and what, if anything should be done about maintaining affordable housing.

The Republicans wanted to reduce the Fannie and Freddie portfolios by outlawing their holding of non-mortgage securities. I'm not exactly clear on why the Republicans thought that was necessary, but it might have to do with the fact it would have reduced competition for Wall Street, which otherwise has to compete with these quasi-governmental entities for those assets. Democrats, meanwhile, wanted to reduce the size of Fannie and Freddie's portfolios without making them less diverse.

http://fray.slate.com/discuss/forums/thread/1854773.aspx

[HAL 9000 96]

Gotta love how conservatives are spoon-feeding McCain's asshattery. Can't you guys even once disagree with his stupidity?

How the hell is skipping this debate going to help the subprime crisis? And there has been no real debates yet, and with a little more than a month away from the election, what sort of intelligence is behind having less debates? McCain may as well just say "lets cancel all debates and pray", and I bet his Republican followers would still be parroting the same #######.

Well that would help his campaign right??

[SteveLaura 0]

John McCain's latest crazy, brilliant, desperate campaign tactic.

John McCain has launched his second Hail Mary pass in a month. On Wednesday he called for a suspension of the presidential campaign—no events, no ads, and no debate Friday—so that he and Barack Obama can head to Washington to forge a bipartisan solution. Even more than his selection of Sarah Palin as running mate, this gambit feels like a wild improvisation someone in the McCain team mapped out on his chest: OK, you run to the fire hydrant, cut left, and then when he gets to the Buick, John, you heave it.

It's not clear what, exactly, McCain is going to do in Washington. He doesn't sit on any of the relevant committees, and everyone is already deep in negotiations. Still, he's coming anyway. It doesn't make much logical sense. The only way to understand it is politically: In a presidential campaign, the surest sign that a candidate is playing politics on an issue is when he claims not to be playing politics on an issue. The only way for McCain to convince everyone that his intentions are 100 percent pure is for him to drop out of the race completely. A campaign doesn't end—and its distracting affects don't disappear—just because one candidate says so.

It's hard to believe that McCain's actions would pass his own laugh test. In fact, he's often snickered at his fellow senators who come in at the eleventh hour to lend a hand after McCain has done the hard work. But the McCain campaign is past caring about how journalists (or colleagues) view his moves. He hopes the rest of the country will see this as a leadership moment.

More here

[HAL 9000 96]

historic move? try stunt. mccain can't help with bailout negotiations, he's admitted repeatedly he doesn't know jackshit about the economy.

He was the co-author of a bill that most likely would have averted this mess back in 2005. The bill called for more stringent control of Freddie and Fannie......killed by a partisan democrat vote........

I think he knows enough about the economy and with the right people around him in the WH, such as possibly Mitt, he would still in the aggregate dwarf Obama in experience.....in all areas of concern (except organizing a community, of course )....

Bill name please.

The bill was passed by the senate banking commitee and later killed by the democrats.....

Senator John McCain was one of the three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that would have averted this mess.

Lets look it up.

S.190. Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005. Introduced January 26, 2005.

On June 28, 2005 it was ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably. It died at the end of the session for the 109th Senate Session.

Interestingly...

A similar bill was reintroduced with the amendments in the 110th session of Congress where it remains pending. I unfortunately don't have the Bill #.

Now I wonder... why would the Democrats kill this bill? If Democrats are all for regulation, that is...

Unless, of course, the language of the bill doesn't really properly regulate the 'mess' we were about to get into.

Quite the leap on your part....I defer to the "experts" that describe the bill as one that would've appointed a regulator to oversee Fannie and Freddie and their forays into risky finacial endevours......and those that do know the details of the bill state that the kinds of dealing that finally sunk both of them would be disallowed.......

Well I got my info from thomas.loc.gov as well as govtrack.us

Not exactly people making leaps of logic there. The rest is simple reasoning. Republicans are typically hush-hush when it comes to having 'excess' (*) oversight on Corporate America.

(*) = Usually more than 0.

Actually:

Back in 2005, the Democrats on the Senate's Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs committee certainly agreed on the need for stronger regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The differences they had with the Republicans were in the details. Both parties agreed on the idea that S.190 should create an independent Federal Housing Finance Agency to issue regulations and guideline governing Fannie and Freddie, and that Fannie and Freddie should be forced to reduce the size of their portfolios. The dispute was about how those portfolios should be reduced and what, if anything should be done about maintaining affordable housing.

The Republicans wanted to reduce the Fannie and Freddie portfolios by outlawing their holding of non-mortgage securities. I'm not exactly clear on why the Republicans thought that was necessary, but it might have to do with the fact it would have reduced competition for Wall Street, which otherwise has to compete with these quasi-governmental entities for those assets. Democrats, meanwhile, wanted to reduce the size of Fannie and Freddie's portfolios without making them less diverse.

http://fray.slate.com/discuss/forums/thread/1854773.aspx

Hence the orders to be amended!

Great synopsis.

[SteveLaura 0]

McCain's debate stunt

REPUBLICAN NOMINEE John McCain called yesterday for postponing tomorrow's presidential debate until the resolution of the financial mess on Wall Street, and even vowed to suspend his campaign to concentrate on finding a solution. A delay could change the dynamics of a campaign that has not gone well for him in the last two weeks. And perhaps McCain hopes the gesture would make him look as if he were putting politics aside amid an emergency.

But altering the debate schedule would hardly serve voters. If anything, debates are most valuable at times of national crisis, because voters need to hear candidates highlight their policy differences.

And while the subject of tomorrow's debate is foreign policy, not economics, the Wall Street crisis casts shadows all around the world. A darkening financial picture inhibits the nation's ability to keep troops abroad, for instance, and alters its relationship with China and major oil nations.

McCain's desire to seize the initiative is understandable, for the meltdown on an ill-regulated Wall Street is the harshest indictment possible of Republican stewardship of the economy. And McCain's initial response to the mess - his odd claim that the fundamentals of the economy are strong - made him look out of touch. But if he now thinks the problem can be tidied up during a short break from the campaign trail, he needs some new economic advisers.

McCain has already brought discredit upon his campaign by shielding running mate Sarah Palin from hostile questions. This impulsive new stunt makes him appear unsteady and underprepared, too. America can work through a financial crisis and handle a campaign at the same time.

In politics as on Broadway, the show must go on.

Source

[Sister Fracas 5]

John McCain's latest crazy, brilliant, desperate campaign tactic.

More here

It all makes the prospect of a McCain White House very exciting. So exciting, he might want to schedule periodic suspensions of his presidency to get anything done.

[symbiosis 0]

It's not clear what, exactly, McCain is going to do in Washington. He doesn't sit on any of the relevant committees, and everyone is already deep in negotiations. Still, he's coming anyway. It doesn't make much logical sense. The only way to understand it is politically: In a presidential campaign, the surest sign that a candidate is playing politics on an issue is when he claims not to be playing politics on an issue.

http://www.slate.com/id/2200867/

[HAL 9000 96]

It's not clear what, exactly, McCain is going to do in Washington. He doesn't sit on any of the relevant committees, and everyone is already deep in negotiations. Still, he's coming anyway. It doesn't make much logical sense. The only way to understand it is politically: In a presidential campaign, the surest sign that a candidate is playing politics on an issue is when he claims not to be playing politics on an issue.

http://www.slate.com/id/2200867/

It does sound like a 'battle of wits'

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

There was a bit on the news the other night that the candidates wouldn't really be able to do a great deal on this issue - as they'd essentially be yet another spanner in the works of what are delicate negotiations.

[kaydee457 13]

There was a bit on the news the other night that the candidates wouldn't really be able to do a great deal on this issue - as they'd essentially be yet another spanner in the works of what are delicate negotiations.

How about luring those in their own party to drop their resistance by listening to their concerns?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

There was a bit on the news the other night that the candidates wouldn't really be able to do a great deal on this issue - as they'd essentially be yet another spanner in the works of what are delicate negotiations.

How about luring those in their own party to drop their resistance by listening to their concerns?

Offhand it sounded perfectly plausible.

[luckytxn 2,265]

What would be really funny is if Obama went to the debates anyway and used a tape recorder in place of McCain.

[HAL 9000 96]

What would be really funny is if Obama went to the debates anyway and used a tape recorder in place of McCain.

It would've been hilarious, yes. He may as well play a recording of Bush though.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

After 8 years, Bush is still appalling at delivering a speech. And no magic tricks either - I had to switch to David Blaine for that...

[Marilyn. 340]

After 8 years, Bush is still appalling at delivering a speech. And no magic tricks either - I had to switch to David Blaine for that...

speaking of David Blaine what was so great about his trick at the end??.. I didn't even really know what happened until the announcer kind of explained it...

lol.. I loved when the announcer guy said " you guys in the crowd will be able to see it live and you guys at home will be able to watch it on your TV" well duh