The ink isn't even dry!
Find a Conversation
The ink isn't even dry!
| Mon, 09-29-2008 - 12:26pm |
Just saw a new McCain ad. It is blaming Obama for this new bill and implying that he and Harry Reid are to blame for the new bill that Bush wanted passed. It's all their fault that taxes will go up. I just wondered how long it would be till McCain pulled this. He is so............blaah!

Pages
>>> LOL! Can I assume you nominated him?
No, the Democrats did by deferring to him in the meeting.
>>> He seemed to believe that it was unnecessary for presidential candidates to impose themselves upon the process and make it all about politics and not about doing what was best for the country.
Then I guess you'd have to wonder why he spend the lion's share of the meeting yammering away til he blew the meeting up? Obama's clearly a fool. The de facto "head of his party," and a sitting Senator with hopes of being President thought that he had nothing to contribute and felt that he was so inconsequential to the process that he said "if they need me they'll call." I tend to agree with him.
McCain, on the other hand, was called and asked to help with the process, and unlike Obama, he put country first and, like a true patriot, dropped everything to help.
Sopal
<?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" />
>>> Obama attended the meeting at the request of the president.
We know. Unlike McCain, Obama typically put his campaign before the country and it took a personal request from the President to embarrass Obama into doing the right thing...until he screwed it up.
>>> The president supposedly called the meeting at the request of McCain (who "suspended" his campaign).
Right...unlike Obama, McCain was doing his duty and fulfilling his obligations to the country as a Senator and Presidential candidate in a time of economic crisis.
>>> If Obama said "no" to the president, he'd be a bad guy.
RIght...he had to be embarrassed into action...such as it was.
>>> If he attended the meeting, he'd be a bad guy. It was a no win.
It was a no-win because Obama was an idiot and said as much..."they'll call me if they need me." Very Presidential.
>>> After the meeting, Obama said that it was not helpful to have had presidential candidates inject themselves into the process.
The Republicans disagreed.
>>> I think that Mr. Maverick was just grandstanding, and it didn't work out the way he planned.
I think McCain was doing his best to serve his country, unlike Obama who was doing his best to serve himself.
((Obama said that it was not helpful to have had presidential candidates inject themselves into the process. ))
McCain parroted this back today. And then walked away from reporters...just like Bush43!!! I couldn't believe that he didn't answer any questions. Not presidential at all.
Sopal
<?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" />
Go ahead and keep trying to blame things on Mccain it's not working. Obama can't even answer the questions as to wether or not he is for this bill. He is trying to stay out of it and play both sides of the fence, at least Mccain can make a damn decision. This is a bipartisan issue. This is a tough decision for both sides, if they do it we foot the bill to fix a big mess that wasn't our fault, if it doesn't go through we may be the ones to pay the consequences anyway. Stop trying to turn this into a presidential campaign issue cause it isn't.
Listened to some C-Span toninght. After the vote Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) spoke and I was very impressed. She said some will try to blame the failure to pass the bill in the House on the Speaker's partisanship in her opening speech, but that is not why it didn't pass. She said many Republicans, and Democrats, found fault with it and that they're committed to work as much as necessary to fix it so that the provisions included take care of the taxpayers.
Some of the things the House Republicans were asking to be included, though, are ridiculous--like getting rid of the mark-to-market rule. Inaccurate ratings of the collaterized debt obligations was a huge contributor to all the problems and now they want more cover-up? I don't get it, how will that help the taxpayers?
My biggest gripe is that only OPTIONS for equity stakes will be made available to the gov't. WTH? We're already buying their lousy assets. For a bailout this size, shares of the participating firms' stock should be GIVEN TO, and not purchased by, us taxpayers. Why should the current shareholders and creditors, who CHOSE to invest in those firms stand to gain while the taxpayer loses? The dilution of their interests would be fair compensation for the govt's bailout. The taxpayers are picking up the risky assets; all the downside risk in share price should be borne by the existing investors.
Anyhow, Michelle Bachmann spoke very well, and she's as attractive, if not more so, than Palin. Why didn't McCain choose her as his running mate? Oh yeah.....he's got a chronic case of poor judgment, and maybe she doesn't hunt moose.
-----------------------------------------------
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/october/meet_the_new_health_.php
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQTBYQlQ7yM
I'm not trying to turn it into that.
Sopal
<?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" />
Pages