Both presidential candidates have to state clearly and specifically how they’d deal with Wall Street’s troubles if elected. Most analysts think John McCain has the harder job. Above, Sen. Barack Obama greeted a rally in Charlotte, N.C., Sunday. (Chris Carlson/AP)
Obama, McCain, and the financial crisis
John McCain has the harder job of countering his support of Bush and his push for deregulation.
By Linda Feldmann | Staff writer/ September 22, 2008 edition
Pat Murphy talks with Monitor staff writer Linda Feldmann about the lack of a Wall St. financial bailout plan by either presidential candidate.
Gerald Herbert/AP
Senator McCain met supporters as he arrived at Independence Hall in Philadelphia, Sunday.
Washington
A week after the worst crisis since the Great Depression engulfed Wall Street, the presidential race has shifted perceptibly to Barack Obama’s advantage.
A bad economy always benefits the “out” party, no matter who is the nominee. And while both major party candidates initially offered cautious support for the Bush administration’s proposed rescue plan, which could cost taxpayers up to $700 billion, the onus has been on Republican nominee John McCain to show how his presidency would represent real change.
“Now he [McCain] is extraordinarily vulnerable to a 26-year history of being a strong proponent of deregulation, of getting government out of the way and letting markets manage economic growth,” says Cal Jillson, a political scientist at Southern Methodist University in Dallas. “That just won’t fly.”
McCain, as a sitting senator, faces the uncomfortable task of needing to cast votes on the Bush administration plan – where Republican Party unity will be expected – while at the same time distancing himself from an unpopular president of his own party.
Both senators are in a tricky spot, but for McCain it’s worse, because he’s under pressure to distance himself from Bush and support him at the same time. Obama does not face the same pressure.
Last Friday, McCain put out his own plan to reform Wall Street, but has done little to promote or explain it. On Sunday night, a McCain spokeswoman announced that the senator would call for creation of a bipartisan board to oversee the proposed Wall Street bailout.
McCain has also criticized Obama for not putting out a plan of his own, then sought to expand the conversation to foreign policy, an area where McCain enjoys more public confidence. “At a time of crisis, when leadership is needed, Senator Obama has not provided it,” McCain said Sunday in a speech to the National Guard Association in Baltimore. “We saw the same lack of leadership on Iraq.”
In the first presidential debate, which takes place Friday in Oxford, Miss., the focus will be on foreign policy. But Obama is expected to turn the discussion to the global economy, and the international reverberations of Wall Street’s meltdown, as much as possible.
Still, McCain is not without options going forward on the economy. By the end of a rocky week – in which he initially expressed confidence in the soundness of the American economy before changing his tune – he struck a more populist tone. In a New York Times interview, he called for a limit on the compensation of executives at bailed-out firms. Obama has echoed that idea.
McCain can also still benefit from the seniority gap with Obama, who is 25 years his junior and has far less experience in national policy matters. While voters tend to say they prefer Obama when asked who is better equipped to handle the economy, he does not enjoy a commanding lead.
“McCain has to hope – and it’s not entirely out of the question – that he can take his image as a guy who can help you navigate through a crisis and make that apply to economic conditions,” says Norman Ornstein, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. “But when you look objectively at who he has relied on for economic advice – it’s CEOs like Carly Fiorina [former head of Hewlett Packard] and Meg Whitman [formerly of eBay], who are unequipped to deal with a crisis involving financial institutions, along with Phil Gramm, who he has distanced himself from.”
Former Senator Gramm was a key author of a 1999 financial deregulation law that is now being blamed for the excesses that brought Wall Street to the point of collapse. Gramm took grief earlier this year for saying that Americans had “sort of become a nation of whiners” over the economy.
For Obama’s part, the task is to look calm and presidential, and to stand near major economic eminences as often as possible. The recent photo op of Obama standing next to former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, former chairman of the Federal Reserve Paul Volcker, former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, and Laura Tyson, former chair of President Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers, has done as much as anything to project the sense that, if elected, an Obama administration would put the economy in battle-tested hands.
“I would try to superglue Bob Rubin to my side for the next six weeks, if I were him,” says Mr. Ornstein.
Aside from adopting a more populist tone in recent days, McCain has also sought to reassert his image as a maverick. In an interview that aired Sunday on CBS’s “60 Minutes,” McCain said he would appoint Andrew Cuomo, the Democratic attorney general of New York State, to run the Securities and Exchange Commission. McCain also pledged to remove the political affairs office from the White House, a swipe at Bush and his political guru, Karl Rove, who prided themselves on running a permanent campaign from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Overall, the Realclearpolitics.com average of major polls shows Obama up by two percentage points, a gain from the postconvention period when McCain led by about the same amount. But two points is within the margin of error. A look at key swing states, many of which are in a dead heat, confirms that this race could go down to the wire, despite Obama’s advantages as the Democrat.
Comments
3. Chris Grant | 09.22.08
When you look at the two candidates’ plans, much of there plans are different. Mc Cain came out and put one out there but seemed that he did not put much thought into it for he did not discuss what it was. Obama is showing himself with some of the more worn people who have had dealt with the economy before. They both are trying to show how the other is like Bush, which since Mc Cain is in the same political party. Obama is black and some of the votes will not vote for him because of his color of his skin. This should be an interesting election. Obama is in the lead but it is not enough that if the swing states don’t go his way he will still be able to win.
4. Casey G. | 09.22.08
If the current economic swing down lasts, it’s bound to have an interesting impact on the election. Obama’s got the benefit of being a democrat (and McCain the disadvantage of being Republican), but the fact is we have no way of knowing how successful the candidates will be at handling this situation. Neither Obama nor McCain have the kind of solid financial know-how that would convince me he’s the right man for the job. Nor have they gathered the kind of support that would tell me they know who to ask for help in such matters.
It will be interesting to see on Friday if Obama chooses to talk about the international aspect of the financial crisis, and what both of the candidates think of the matter. I’d like to see if either of them have any plans to prevent what we know as the Great Depression from being called “World Depression I” by future generations besides agreeing with Bush. I’m not convinced that Bush’s plan will be the solution at all, and it seems important that both candidates have alternative solutions available.
5. Eric | 09.22.08
The recent outbreaks at Wallstreet over the government’s plan to avoid major companies to go bankrupt has struck America’s economy in a big way. Is the government putting itself in a bigger debt than we currently have? What will happen if and when more companies need to be bailed out for fear of bankruptcy? Will the government bail them out too? If they do, who’s going to pay for it?
Hopefully the upcoming debate on Friday will clear a few things up about the two candidates for presidential office. At the beginning of last week, John McCain explicitly said that the fundamentals of our economy are strong. It did not take long for him to regret that statement when wallstreet crashed nearly the next day.
With wall street in meltdown, the upcoming debate will see a lot of focus on this current situation. Before this crisis, the Obama campaign rallied for more discussion on foreign policy, yet it could turn a real economic turn with the current chaos. If this goes on, I agree that McCain might strive and maintain the idea on foreign policy and his goals, but Obama may follow this current news and talk more on the economy because it is what everybody wants to hear.
Personally, I really don’t want both candidates to talk about completely different subjects regarding domestic and foreign policy. A purely economical approach to this upcoming debate is what the American people needs and strives to know what they are going to get out of their new presidential nominees.
The article also takes into question the experience of both Senators. Of course, with John McCain’s 26 year run in the senate, he has a slight advantage in that area, but he also has to work with George Bush while trying to keep his distance. Obama, however, does not have the problem of a failed president riding his back.
6. Aaron Waller | 09.22.08
I believe that with Barack Obama having the upper hand with the upcoming debate on Friday night, he will win over John McCain. Although McCain has a plan to help solve the situation on Wall Street, this article states he has done little to promote and explain what it is he plans on executing. Also, although Barack Obama does in fact have less experience than John McCain, Obama has a way of addressing the people and their needs better than that of John McCain. Not to mention that McCain has taken advice from those who are not well equipped to advise on the current economic situations. So it will come down to what the candidates propose and act upon that will enable them to win over the people of the United States.
7. Camille | 09.22.08
I believe that this article did a very good job of taking the reacent economics crisis and looking at it from both Obama and McCain’s point of views and actions on the crisis. According to the article Obama has a slightly eaiser job than McCain all he has to do is to “look calm and presidential”. Where as McCain has a it slightly harder. McCain has to find a way to support his president while at the same time distancing himself form him so as no to be classifyed as “the same”. In an effort to acheive this McCain has come up with his own plan to reform the economy, which at the moment does not seem to do any good to reform it.
8. Miriam | 09.22.08
I believe the article explains what both candidates are doing to work with the financial cisis. It shows how McCain “faces the uncomfortable task of needing to cast votes on the Bush administration plan.” His plan to keep supporting Bush while staying away from him as much as possible. In my opinion I do not think this is possible I think you either do one or the other or do neither. You really can say im supporting this person while not being there with the person. Althought both candidates are in a tough position they both have a plan of what to do to get pass it. Even if Obama is in a less pressured position than McCain.
9. Gregory D | 09.22.08
You people really don’t understand what just happened. This crisis occurred expressly because of government intervention. The democrats pressured banks into loaning money to unworthy applicants to appease low income and minority supporters. Ultra regulation is the disease masquerading as the cure. All McCain has to do is get the truth out there.
10. Brad Cochran | 09.22.08
I agree with this article, stating that Obama does have the upper hand now because the bad economy will undoubtedly be blamed on the party in office, which are the republicans. I also think it is a good idea for McCain to be “reasserting his image as a maverick” because he needs to make it look like he has all the views of a Republican so the voters who vote republican will side with him, but he also must appear to have a different strategy that President Bush so that the swing voters will be persuaded to vote for him. I also believe that McCain should advertise his experience as the 25 year old elder, because many older voters will see his age and experience as something more important when compared to Obama then some of the other issues. I would like to know how McCain is going to be able to sway swing voters with his party in control when the economy is at its recent decline, and I would like to know his strategy for cities in general most affected by the poor economy.
11. Jared D. | 09.22.08
McCain has it very hard this week. He has to distance himself from Bush’s economic plans, yet still fully support is ideas. As for the Democrats and Obama, they may have the easy way out for now. It would appear that Republicans can target Obama because of his lack of high expierence in politics and the economy and the fact that Obama has not stated an “exact” economic plan for the country. In a sense, both are in “dead heat” because of the economy, but McCain suffers the most.
What are Obama’s plans to help fix our economy?
Also with the first of the debates approaching this Friday, both senators have to step up their game somewhat.
12. Andy K | 09.22.08
The November vote will be about the bailout. When Congress starts debating the bailout people will realize that it is far more complex and far reaching than anyone believed possible. People will think about this more than they have ever thought about anything before, because they will realize that it will affect their children and their children’s children. This is the October surprise.
13. DoTheMath | 09.22.08
As recently as last March, Obama spoke specifically about the need for better regulation of financial markets, while McCain spoke specifically of the benefits of DE-regulating financial markets. More recently, the September-October, 2008, issue of Contingencies showcases both candidates’ plans for health care reform, including John McCain’s assertion that “Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation.”
http://www.contingencies.org/septoct08/mccain.pdf
http://www.contingencies.org/septoct08/obama.pdf
Americans who trust the foxes to guard the henhouse should vote for John McCain.
14. Democrats 08 | 09.22.08
The Bush-McCain-Republican way of economics DOES NOT WORK. It never did and never will. The markets have crashed and burned, the American people are now footing the bill yet again in the trillions of dollars for the same corporations and Republicans who own them that ruined us economically. When will Americans ever learn. OUR money is now paying THEIR debts, that same money will not go to schools, jobs, environment, Medicare, social security, you wait people, the worst is yet to come unless you elect people who know how to handle this, Obama knows, the Democrats know, just ask Bill Clinton, HE knew. We NEVER had problems like this when Clinton was our President, things were the COMPLETE opposite! Stop listening to idiots like McCain and Bush, they LIE LIE LIE, just look what they have done to our country! What more does anyone need to see? How many times do you need to be dropped on your head before you realize hey that hurts!
15. circle | 09.22.08
Deregulation was Clinton:
THE CLINTON administration’s free-market program culminated in two momentous
deregulatory acts. Near the end of his eight years in office, Clinton signed
into law the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act of
1999, one of the most far-reaching banking reforms since the Great
Depression. It swept aside parts of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 that had
provided significant regulatory firewalls between commercial banks,
insurance companies, securities firms, and investment banks.
16. McCain all the way | 09.22.08
John McCain has a long legacy in bi-partisan economics. he continually went across the isle for his good friend and business partner Charles Keating. What does NObama have?
17. C.T. Cusick | 09.22.08
McCain is effectively complacent and instep with the Bush Administration. Any distancing he displays from Bush or the Republican’s is soley to get himself into power, for 4 more years of the same. His lack of economic understanding will run this country into the ground. The scary thing about McCain is that he will always have an inclination, perhaps even a vendetta, to use the Military, when superior methods of solving the problems we face, are ready to be put in action.
McCain has to lie about providing “socialized” bailouts and make the appearance that he doesn’t support them, if he were confronted with specific questions and if he had simple knowledge of economics, he would certainly be in support of socialized bailouts at taxpayer expense - an unfortuante and harsh reality is that we probably can’t afford to not bail them out given the debt’s we have taken on over the last 8 years, otherwise we could absorb the impact.
18. erik | 09.22.08
Warren Buffet one of the most clear minded thinkers in the world is backing Obama…. I ask why arent you?
19. True Maverick | 09.22.08
Maverick McCain has great experience in getting out of tough financial situations. In 1991, he was able to solve all of his personal corruption problems. Now in 2008, he’s just as connected with the corruption on Wall St., and can do just as fine of a job getting himself off the hook again. McCain 08!
20. erik | 09.22.08
Guess what industries did the best over the last 8 years…
Defense contracting and Oil….
Voting for McCain is to continue this downward spiral… Republicans take your money and it goes to the top .05% of this nation….. We will soon have a third world nation before us with no middle class and just a bunch of poor people and the leaders that took the money and jobs with greed.
21. L. Hawes | 09.22.08
Republicans may hold the White House, but Congress has been controlled by the Democrats for some time now and nothing has improved, in fact it has worsened. I think we need to sweep Washington clean of all professional politicians and do a grass roots startover. They refuse to work together because they don’t want the other party to get any credit for anything, and subsequently, nothing gets accomplished. I’m sick of them all!
22. Don | 09.22.08
I find it astounding that so many citizens of this country lack the intelligence to understand the difference between honoring team loyalty and shooting ones’ self in the foot. If the Republicans are successful at duping enough thoughtless voters into returning them to power, I shudder to think of the creative ways they will come up with to perpetuate the greatest transfer of wealth from the middle class to the super rich this world has ever seen. Anyone who suggests that it was Bill Clinton and the Democrats who initiated the deregulation responsible for the current fiscal crisis is hoping you forgot that it was the REPUBLICAN majority in Congress during his 2nd term in office that presided over that legislation. And guess who elected them?
23. Michael H | 09.22.08
To counter Gregory D’s claims that our current financial crisis is due to Democrats and government intervention:
Democrats have never pressured banks to lend to low income people, just the opposite. H.R. 3915: Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2007 attempted to stop banks from lending to people who can’t afford it. The role call on that vote: 277 dem, 64 republican. It has been a Republican meme for decades to have a deregulation of markets. The specific deregulation of the markets that have crashed the lenders and the housing markets were introduced by Phil Gramm (Republican) in the late 1990s. He was John McCain’s top economic adviser until recently. Republicans have constantly pushed for deregulation of markets, free markets, and a supposed small government hand in business. This was a bedrock of their party.
They made our economic bed and profited greatly from it, now they can sleep in it. Welcome to the Republican Socialist United States of America.
I’m one of the public Gregory, and we understand this subject better than you.
24. Jeff | 09.22.08
This crisis occurred because of deregulation. This is the republican party (not the individual republican) mantra. They want government, they say, out of our way: until it comes to choices about your own body. Now that this crisis came about through de-regulation, they want to fix the problem by taking ownership in private corporations. I agree with the republican congressman from Florida who spoke today on the House floor, who, paraphrasing, said this move by our government to take an ownership interest in private corporations is anti-American at its core. And isn’t that an interesting paradox of republican philosophy: they brought us deregulation; now they bring us public ownership of private corporations. Hmmm. I wish they would just make up their mind whether they are republicans or communists.
25. Bob | 09.22.08
“Ultra regulation is the disease masquerading as the cure.”
Typical Republican thinking. Backwards as usual. You’re just dying for more Enron scandals, eh? It was the LACK OF REGULATION that got us into this mess. I’m guessing you don’t read much.
26. Charlie C | 09.22.08
I don’t subscribe to conspiracy theories, in general, but I do enjoy a good conspiracy fantasy–so, if I may:
Big Oil has bought and paid for certain key economists (that they bought and paid for Bush, ahem, goes without saying) to introduce the concept of the “toxic assets buyout” on this scale to both engineer their own poison asset boom when Paulson begins buying and basically eliminate funding for the Energy bill–thereby creating a zero-option Congress and Presidency in 2009 that should last four years or more and that won’t be able to address either Big Oil profits or de-leverage Big Oil strategic plans.
The only reason I don’t turn this into a novel or screenplay is because I have yet to visualize anything resembling a hero coming out of this mess.
27. Don | 09.22.08
Let’s count who got money from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
Oh yeah, it was Obama and his liberal democratic buddies.
Who are Obama’s financial advisors?
Oh yeah, the former CEO’s from Fannie and Freddie that made 90 million dollars in 6 six years.
Who’s the bigger liar in this election, I think Obama!
28. Johan | 09.22.08
Obama is saying this happened because ‘Bush did regulate enough’. Baloney. This happened because the democrats created Fannie and Freedie so that anybody could get a loan. Money became so easy to come by that it deflated and assets like oil and real estate skyrocketed. Now the government who created the problem steps in and take over the morgages. Now the government owns most the houses in this country. We are becoming communist. The government creates a problem. Then they announce to us they have to do something drastic to ‘fix’ the problem. Their ‘fix’ gives them much more power and control. The American people need to stop falling for this. We need to say STOP! You want how many billions with no oversight? 700? **** no! Lets address the root of the problem not some simple fix. To address the root would be to let fannie, freddie, aig, and the rest go belly up. If real estate went back to affordable levels this would be a good thing. It simply needs to happen. You cannot keep spending billions to keep real estate propped up high when people cannot afford it. The prices have to fall.
29. Citizen Voter | 09.22.08
Bush bragged about increasing the percentage of home ownership. Investment bankers made bundles of money selling sub-prime mortgages to more risky clients. Paying higher interest rates generates MORE INCOME folks.
Shady practices started and we not reigned in because we have had years of republican control and the mantra that deregulation and tax breaks to the rich cures all.
The republicans are all for big government bailout now, no longer extolling the virtures of creative destruction when the target is big business.
30. Katharine | 09.23.08
Gregory D
Try lending some concrete support to your statements. The current crisis happened because of deregulation laws and the creation of ‘default swap’ certificates with no backing traded for literally billions of dollars by the richest corporations. Banks and S&Ls gave loans to unapproved borrowers because they could get away with it and because the regulations had been removed (often as a result of lobbying from people who are now running John McCain’s campaign). These companies made billions in these deals. Now that their house of cards has come crashing down, they want the middle class to bail them out. Not this time.
see
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/howard-schweber/paulsons-plan—annotated_b_128416.html
31. Sheryl | 09.23.08
Looks like there is plenty of blame to go around. So perhaps stopping the blame game and looking toward solutions.
Any sector of our economy that can have such a huge impact that it can bring down the other sectors and/or have an effect on the global economy needs some regulating.
Most importantly, we are simply and truly in this mess because of greed and fraud.
It is time Americans get realistic before it is too late.
32. newsandverse | 09.23.08
HOLDING THE BAG
NEWSWIRE–As Congress considers bailout legislation, there is uncertainty whether it will provide homeowners with mortgage assistance.
Halloween’s still weeks away,
But tricks of finance start today:
Some get gift bags in the billions,
Others, pennies (mere civilians).
Whether treat’s insane or small,
Depends if street is Main- or Wall-.
http://www.newsandverse.com
Light verse, ripped from the headlines
33. Tor | 09.23.08
HR3915 failed because it was bad law. F-Mac/Mae problem occured because they bought key Democrats just look at the funding record. They bought favorable regulation. They should be allowed to sink. Government involvement is the source of the problem.
Top Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008
Christopher J. Dodd (Democrat) $133,900
John Kerry (Democrat) $111,000
Barack Obama (Democrat) $105,849
Hillary Clinton (Democrat) $75,550
Two of Obamas big fundraisers/advisors (Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson) resigned as CEOs of Fannie-Mae based on corruption charges (cooking the books, illegal loans). Republicans have tried to pass legislation to reign in F-Mae/Mac but have been rebuffed by Democrats. F-Mae/Mac bought the Democrats, just look at the political contributions:
34. Andy | 09.23.08
If McCain thinks that calling for the firing of Cox, and him changing his position on regulation a plan…he is sorely mistaken. One has to look at his judgment driving his reactions last week.
The economic meltdown was an excellent opportunity for both candidates to mouth off and score political points…however, with international confidence hanging on a thread, both candidates should have had the restraint to hold back on their objections and allow Bernanke and Paulson to come out with ONE VOICE from America, unity at times like these are critical.
Barack Obama, despite having long proposed a plan to avoid this crisis, and a plan to take us out through commonsense regulation, kept mum and focused only on high level objectives, so that Paulson and Bernanke could do their jobs to assuage frayed nerves internationally.
And then on the side you have McCain mouthing off, creating all sorts of distractions and perception problems for the administration…it’s a good thing he now finally recognizes the wisdom of Obama’s economic philosophy, but his pattern of being Johnny come lately on a range of issues that have been the hallmarks of Obama’s campaign and plans is beginning to show…..
What John McCain did not understand about his actions was that if confidence continued to spiral as a result of his strong words, the 700 billion bailout package would not even be enough to solve the problem.
Such impulsive and unpresidential behavior at a time of national crisis….One questions if McCain is more interested in his political interests or the nation’s economic interest. And to come up this week to say Obama has no plan?
So he put the country at risk to score political points last week with his nonsense, and now is trying to make Obama look bad for doing the right thing? ABSURD. Absolutely absurd.
35. Traderhut | 09.23.08
this is worth a read:
The degregulation may have saved half of the banks… But the democrats don’t want you to know that.. You see, they were able to spread out their assets.. So instead of holding all their assets as industral waste (sub prime loans) they also owned other things, so the company hurt, and hurt bad, but didn’t go under.
Blaming this on deregulation??? LOL!!
Check out the cause below:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_hassett&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0
36. gary from indiana | 09.23.08
The democrats in congress caused this problem. Now they are trying to make it worse so their corrupt leader can get elected and make things even worse. Had they passed McCain’s reform bill back in 2005, instead of blocking it for political gains, we wouldn’t have this trouble today.
Only one president in history has raised taxes during a financial crisis - Herbert Hoover. If Obama is elected, God help us all because the “great” depression will look like a speed-bump compared to what will happen to us.
Reid and Pelosi made this mess. Obama has voted with them 100% of the time. He’s not a solution - he’s the problem.
37. Vicki | 09.23.08
Hopefully voters will care about this country enough to realize that republicans and this Bush administration need to go. McCain will never be a bit different from Bush and Cheney. We really need to change from the stubborn and wrong way republicans have governed. Senator Obama is the smartest candidate and the most able to get us out of these messes that Bush and republican rubber stampers have caused. I have known for a long time that it is so important to rid the country of these corrupt republicans who are in the pocket of big business and don’t care about the country at large.
38. Martin | 09.24.08
Once again, the government has been separated from the People. How is it that a government that is supposed to be by and for the People, is in such stark contrast against the People? My good Father used to say to me,”Son, always follow the money; the Almighty Dollar”. Now, many years later I believe I finally fully know what he meant. These canidates for employment in the Barnahm and Baily Circuis, have finally come to a crossroad with their constituants; the American People. Finally, there is one sacred freedom that is still intact; the right to vote. The literal power to limit the terms of them all, lies squarely in our hands. Do we, the People have the desire and the fortitude to cast them out by casting in our vote?We need real and unadulterated change. No psuedo leaders. No pandering puppets. We need some real and unintimidated Patriots. We need some Patrick Henry and some Paul Revere types; maybe even a Boston Tea Party.There is one who cries in the Town Square on a daily basis, and that is-(yes he really is a Patriot), Rush Limbaugh. When I first tuned in, I too thought he was a kook.But then I began to listen with real and honest intent; without predudice. I began to see the truth. Newt Gingrich is a brilliant mind that the Libs ran out of Washington on a rail in the 90’s. We need thinkers like this who are not afraid to speak against the status quo; no matter what the party or power affiliation. Wake up America, before it’s too late. It isn’t too late, for it may be too early; but better early than not at all. For too late may be never; but today, your tomorrow can be forever. But today, tomorrow, might be your fall.
39. Mike | 09.24.08
Why is John McCain injecting Presidential politics into a delicate legislative matter? Does he think that he is the only one capable of resolving this crisis and without him, it doesn’t happen? Silly. McCain’s first “hail Mary,” Sarah Palin, was a pure political move, which was not in the country’s best interest. His second is exactly the same.
40. s denecker | 09.25.08
Since McCain always wants debates and Obama does not, I don’t think there is a question as to weather or not McCain is backing away from the debate. It is a well known fact that he is a good debator and Obama is not. I do think it is interesting that in a time of crisis, the most important legislature to affect the American people since the depression Obama has done nothing but said “call me if you need me”. That is not a leader. That is a follower and a lazy, self centered one at that. He should perhaps go back and listen to former President Clinton who clearly sees McCain as the stand up guy who IS being a leader. The debates can wait a few days. Lets secure America first before trying to please a want to be Massiah like Obama. I am a democrat who NOW will be voting for McCain. Obamas first test for me has failed.
41. jill matthews | 09.26.08
First off I think it is a grave mistake for the people to expect that the man running for president will pull America out of this long-time- in -the- making- money- problem…the history of our money system is shocking, (see http://www.moviesfoundonline.com/money_masters.php)
I don’t want a “maverick” who takes things into his “own” hands and does things “his way”, who doesn’t show concern for others but has a super star “look at me” demeanor from Hollywood; that’s for the movies! He’s seen too many war movies, get some therapy!
We need someone with the clear ability to surround himself with experts, take in information, make sense of it and go in the obvious direction that will serve the whole…. I think Obama is clearly more capable of this
43. Vic Orli | 09.30.08
Neither McCain, nor Obama are experts in economics. The question remains; what to do about the financial crisis, which will become the worst economic disaster known to mankind. Bankers=the fat rich pigs should be isolated, canned, all their accounts confiscated, and the perpetrators of financial crimes dealt with by using medieval torture methods. All folks using American capital or money made while using American people, and then taking these funds out of the country and investing in other countries, while leaving Americans without jobs, should be put on trial and then also imprisoned if not worse.
Too much power is concetrated in the hands of few, however there is justice, for Death will not forget these rich *******.
Praise the Lord
44. Veryl Relevant | 10.06.08
Robert Rubin is an architect of the current disaster. He pushed hard for overturning the Glass-Steagall Act, a key part of the New Deal which kept banks out of risky investments. Obama should push him overboard fast. Rubin has just resigned from Citi, hoping to avoid blame for its coming collapse.
See: http://www.blackstarnews.com/?c=135&a=4922
45. eveline | 10.22.08
i am definetly voting for obama. he has a stronger plan for the u.s. and is not going to let the u.s. go throught the same 8 years we’ve had. he is straight to the point, and doesn’t ues his adds to critisize McCain, but rather what he’s going to do for us
46. Bob | 03.31.09
If you ask me, the one who is LIE LIE LYING is Obama. He has made many promises and has came through with only a couple of them. So you DEMOCRATS need to understand that this “financial plan” of Obama’s isn’t working. Oh, and for the future….go Sarah Palin!!
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
1. Either Relevant or True » The Bush Administration Can Stay Irrational Longer Than You Can Stay Cellibate | 09.22.08
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. Jeremy L. | 09.22.08
It seems like Obama has it a lot easier than McCain. McCain is under the pressure of making decisions that will separate him from what Bush would choose. It’s like some of the campaign ads I’ve seen on TV where it says McCain agrees with Bush 90% of the time and that America can’t afford four more years of the same. America needs change and voting for Obama will bring it. So now McCain has to try to break free of that statement to capture the hope of Americans again.