Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
McCain v Obama - leadership vs. voting "present?"
Posted by: McQ on Thursday, September 25, 2008

So what does Obama say about the financial crisis?

Why we should have a debate! Of course the fact that the debate is about foreign policy seems to have slipped his mind.
"I think it's very important that the American people see the people who potentially could be in charge of this problem within the next couple of months and so my attitude is that we need to be focused on solving the problems, as I have been," Obama said. "It's also important that we communicate where we need to go in getting us out of the situation."
John Kerry parrots the point:
“The American people need to hear from both candidates,” said Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), the party’s 2004 presidential nominee. “This notion of rushing to Washington and grandstanding, frankly, is I think inserting presidential politics right into it. It’s silly and impulsive and erratic and doesn’t do justice to the process of running for president.”

Kerry noted that McCain doesn’t even sit on the Senate’s Banking or Finance committees.

“To the best of my knowledge, he doesn’t serve on any of those committees,” Kerry said.
But wait a minute, shouldn't the two people who are going to have to execute whatever the Congress is going to cobble together be deeply involved in the shaping of the legislation? I mean where would it be better for the American people to see and hear these two people "who potentially could be in charge of this problem within the next couple of months" than hip-deep in the process of shaping and crafting the solution (assuming there is a solution that can be crafted)?

The more I watch this unfold, the more I'm convinced that, as it pertains to the politics of this, this is a smart move by McCain and Obama is not playing it well.

The facts are clear - the economic crisis that has arisen favors the Democrats. Polls showed a marked move in the favor of Obama. In order to arrest that move and perhaps reverse it, McCain had to make a bold move. Obviously, depending on how such a move ends up being perceived, it could backfire. But as it is lining up now, and depending on how the campaign frames it, McCain's move will be perceived by most of the public as a demonstration of leadership.

Obama, on the other hand, first said "I'm here if you need me" (the equivalent of voting "present" on the plan) and now is trying to claim he can do two things at once.

Of course its not a matter of doing more than one thing at a time, it is a matter of showing up and taking a part in the process that is going to produce something you have to live with if you become president.

And it appears this isn't going to be over by Friday night.
Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said a bill could be produced as early as Thursday, with debate and a vote likely over the weekend. Ideally, Durbin said the Senate would finish the bill before Wall Street opens on Monday.
"Leadership" vs. "present". We'll see how this works out politically. I just heard Howard Wolfson say that in his opinion, the election ended last week with the emergence of this crisis. Given this move, I'm not yet sure that's true.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
The cynical side of me says Johnnie Mack suspended his campaign ultimately as a political ploy. He gets to look presidential and forces Barry-O into sacrificing a rook or bishop. If he suspends his campaign also he looks like a follower and not a leader. If he stays on the trail he looks narcissistic. Practically speaking two senators missing from debating body of 535 members is not a significant deficit so there was no real urgency forcing JSM’s hand.
 
Written By: CR
URL: http://
What nonsense. Here’s the only pertinent question: Do you favor or oppose using 700B+ of taxpayer money to bail out Wall Street financial firms? I oppose it entirely. Do you, as an economic libertarian, oppose the bailout or do you support it?
 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://
Leadership by Invitation
KROFT: Why you? I mean, why do you think you would be a good president?

OBAMA: Well, I was going to get to that.

KROFT: Go ahead.

OBAMA: You know, I’m a, I’m a practical person. One of the things I’m good at is getting people in a room with a bunch of different ideas who sometimes violently disagree with each other and finding common ground and a sense of common direction. And that’s the kind of approach that I think prevents you from making some of the enormous mistakes that we’ve seen over the last eight years.
Isn’t his waht McCain is doing ?

So it now takes an invitation from the President to get Obama to join in the discussions .. LOL

Meanwhile, WSJ conjectures that the US government could possibly make $1 trillion
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
It doesn’t matter what McCain does or says, when the media is against you, it will spin whatever he does or says to make him look like he is partisan and not for the little guy (voters who never fell the pain when government keeps over spending). All you have to do is watch CNBC’s Jim Harwood.
 
Written By: Commander Tom
URL: http://
I’m going to recycle a response I just gave in another blog.

Considering any package would probably executed past November and past January, I’m surprised the candidates weren’t pulled in sooner actually.

Its stupid for them not to be involved. McCain grandstanded a bit. Obama didn’t want to touch it at first. Which is worse?
 
Written By: jpm100
URL: http://
McArdle sums it up best, I think. Basically:

1) It’s superfluous and unnecessary.
B) It’s a masterful political move.
iii) The second point is what’s giving Barry and the Dems serious heartburn.
 
Written By: CR
URL: http://
Given the push to limit CEO compensation, if there is a profit and the banks that lost money on this deal don’t get some of it back. The government won’t ever be able to sell a Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac security product again.
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
It bears repeating:

1. McVain and The Annointed One are senators. They are PAID to go to the Senate, debate and vote. Considerable leeway is granted because they are running for office, but this is one of the most important votes in the past several decades. They should be there for it. The rest of us who work for a living don’t get to stay home or go golfing or otherwise pursue our own interests and claim that, if we’re needed to do our jobs, "They’ll call me."

2. If these two senators are so superfluous (useless?) to the legislative process, doesn’t it rather call into question (A) how good they are at their present jobs, and thus how good they’ll be at the job they are trying to get, and (B) what the hell use Congress is in the first place?

 
Written By: docjim505
URL: http://
"The cynical side of me says Johnnie Mack suspended his campaign ultimately as a political ploy."

With most other politicians I would agree, but I think McCain actually thinks he is The Indispensible Man.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
If mr politician himself thinks its a good move, wow.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/25/awesome-mccains-acting-in-good-faith-in-pulling-out-of-the-debate-says-clinton/

id almost say he was impressed at how McCain has played this election, i bet him and Hillary just go home and have a good laugh at Obama.
 
Written By: josh b
URL: http://
The Senatorial equivalent of that "3AM phone" is ringing and Obama is waiting for an aide to pick it up.
 
Written By: Neo
URL: http://
Wizbang links to a Newsbusters story about why McVain went back to DC (to do his job). No less than Bob Schieffer says that SecTreas Paulson ASKED him to come back:
BOB SCHIEFFER: I am told, Maggie, that the way McCain got involved in this in the first place, the Treasury Secretary was briefing Republicans in the House yesterday, the Republican conference, asked how many were ready to support the bailout plan. Only four of them held up their hands. Paulson then called, according to my sources, Senator Lindsey Graham, who is very close to John McCain, and told him: you’ve got to get the people in the McCain campaign, you’ve got to convince John McCain to give these Republicans some political cover. If you don’t do that, this whole bailout plan is going to fail. So that’s how, McCain, apparently, became involved.
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2008/09/25/paulson-asked-mccain-to-help.php

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-finkelstein/2008/09/25/schieffer-paulson-warned-bailout-would-fail-unless-mccain-got-invo

Guess Sec Paulson didn’t feel the need for The Annointed One’s help. You know: the chap whose strength is his ability to go into a room full of people who are fighting over what to do and get them to reach a consensus?
 
Written By: docjim505
URL: http://
What nonsense. Here’s the only pertinent question: Do you favor or oppose using 700B+ of taxpayer money to bail out Wall Street financial firms? I oppose it entirely. Do you, as an economic libertarian, oppose the bailout or do you support it?
I don’t think it’s that simple.

You leftists tend to argue that, since this isn’t really a free market, free market rules don’t really apply. In this case, the failure wasn’t due to free markets but due to government meddling.

The issue is that banks may lock up and stop issuing credit, and the bail out is intended to prevent this. If the banks lock up, many US companies will be seriously impacted since they run their day to day activities on credit.

 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
Neo quotes The One:
OBAMA: You know, I’m a, I’m a practical person. One of the things I’m good at is getting people in a room with a bunch of different ideas who sometimes violently disagree with each other and finding common ground and a sense of common direction.
I’m certain that what Obama means by "people...who someitmes violently disagree" is a herd of Leftists. He could, and no doubt has, gotten bomber Ayers, God damn America Wright, and "I’m White!" Pfleger all on the same page.

They all appear to support an Obama presidency, so we know that he’s at the very least gotten all of them onto his page.

But these aren’t people who might just "sometime violently disagree," these are people who might also agree violently.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://newpaltzjournal.com
well if McCain wants this to continue in his favor he needs to find some way to get coverage of what he is actually doing during the debate.
 
Written By: josh b
URL: http://
he needs to find some way to get coverage
I think that the McCain campaign long ago stopped depending on coverage.

McCain could cure cancer and the New York Times would run the story deep in the Metro section. On MSNBC it would be declared a serious blow against the viability of Medicare by increasing the number of the elderly.

On the other hand, if Obama came running naked out of a men’s room in Grand Central Terminal bleeding from his ass while being chased by a six foot ten NBA forward it would be declared a "personal matter" and none of our business.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://newpaltzjournal.com
The issue is that banks may lock up and stop issuing credit, and the bail out is intended to prevent this. If the banks lock up, many US companies will be seriously impacted since they run their day to day activities on credit.

That is what it means for the markets to be free. Free to succeed, free to fail, free to evolve.

You leftists tend to argue that, since this isn’t really a free market, free market rules don’t really apply. In this case, the failure wasn’t due to free markets but due to government meddling.

Um, it is YOU making the argument for Government intervention, not me. According to economic libertarians like you: Free markets are essential (Free Markets, Free People and all that), except in America, where the Government can bail out companies with a gargantuan infusion of taxpayer money because we don’t really have free markets anyway. Got it.

 
Written By: David Shaughnessy
URL: http://
That is what it means for the markets to be free. Free to succeed, free to fail, free to evolve.
Thje problem is, due to Clinton et al, the markets were not free and were predisposed to provide bad loans.

The bail out is intended to stop a domino failure in the economy.
Um, it is YOU making the argument for Government intervention, not me. According to economic libertarians like you: Free markets are essential (Free Markets, Free People and all that), except in America, where the Government can bail out companies with a gargantuan infusion of taxpayer money because we don’t really have free markets anyway. Got it.
Actually, I’m not really making the argument that we should do the bail out, I’m just not certain that we shouldn’t.

An argument has been presented for the bail out, and I’m attmpting to determine its merit.

The fundamental problem is that your side set the market up for failure, and the question is: do we have to stop the spread of that failure?

I don’t know the answer.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
Of course its not a matter of doing more than one thing at a time, it is a matter of showing up and taking a part in the process that is going to produce something you have to live with if you become president.
And what of this “leadership”?
What if McCain goes to Washington and aids in this bailout plan you so disagree with?

What of this leadership then?
I’m harked to quote that wise old sage Obi-Wan Kenobi, “Who’s the more foolish: The fool, or the fool who follows him?”
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
And what of this “leadership”?
What if McCain goes to Washington and aids in this bailout plan you so disagree with?
I didn’t say I agreed with his "leadership" or the (his) plan. I made it pretty clear to those who read the whole post before commenting that this was about the "politics" of the situation:
The more I watch this unfold, the more I’m convinced that, as it pertains to the politics of this, this is a smart move by McCain and Obama is not playing it well.

[...]

We’ll see how this works out politically.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
I didn’t say I agreed with his "leadership" or the (his) plan. I made it pretty clear to those who read the whole post before commenting that this was about the "politics" of the situation:
Oh I know what the post was about. I’m just fishing here.
And what I’ve seem to have drudged up is that you find Obama as having no leadership, but you find McCain to have the wrong leadership.
To which you obviously find better than having no leadership.

I once asked my father who he thought was the best and worst president he experienced in his lifetime. He told me that Johnson was the worst because he felt that Johnson implemented the welfare state as we know it. He said that Ford was the best…
And when I asked why, he simply said, “Because he didn’t do anything.”

Cheers.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
And what I’ve seem to have drudged up is that you find Obama as having no leadership, but you find McCain to have the wrong leadership.
Uh no — I made a general political observation about how what McCain was doing might be perceived by voters. You don’t like it so you resort to trying to tie on characterizations that don’t fit.

Big surprise.

And it is "dredged up". Only Drudge can "drudge up" something. Of course I can’t imagine you wanting to associate yourself Drudge so obviously that’s a mistake, no?

Cheers.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
Uh no — I made a general political observation about how what McCain was doing might be perceived by voters. You don’t like it so you resort to trying to tie on characterizations that don’t fit.
They don’t fit, huh?
So is McCain’s leadership the right or the wrong leadership?

You are a bottomless well of opinions. You should have no trouble providing an answer.
My guess is you won’t answer that question. Because it’s not so much that you’re pro-McCain as it is you are anti-Obama. And to suggest that McCain has the wrong leadership would stroke too closely to being pro-Obama. And that is a burden your rhetorically narrow shoulders just cannot bear.

But prove me wrong. Please. Is McCain’s leadership the right or the wrong leadership???
And it is "dredged up". Only Drudge can "drudge up" something. Of course I can’t imagine you wanting to associate yourself Drudge so obviously that’s a mistake, no?
Drudged.
Verb:
To do tedious, unpleasant, or menial work.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
So is McCain’s leadership the right or the wrong leadership?
Who cares - this is about the POLITICS of the situation.
You are a bottomless well of opinions.
You bet your @ss I am - that’s what I provide, opinions. Of course your well of opinions has a bottom, right?

I haven’t formed an opinion about his leadership on this issue since I haven’t seen his proposal - have you?

Most likely, if he’s for the bailout, I’m going to be against it.

But, back to the point of the post, right or wrong, at least he’s demonstrating some leadership unlike Obama.

Obama is again trying to vote "present".
Drudged.
Verb:
To do tedious, unpleasant, or menial work.
Not in the context you used it - but nice try.

What, no "cheers"?

I’m so disappointed.

Cheers.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
And what I’ve seem to have drudged up is that you find Obama as having no leadership, but you find McCain to have the wrong leadership.
To which you obviously find better than having no leadership.
The indications are that Obama isn’t much of a leader. That’s a good thing if he’s elected, because it will limit the damage he will do.

McCain shows signs of being a good leader. He has the ability to accoplish things, good and bad.
My guess is you won’t answer that question. Because it’s not so much that you’re pro-McCain as it is you are anti-Obama. And to suggest that McCain has the wrong leadership would stroke too closely to being pro-Obama. And that is a burden your rhetorically narrow shoulders just cannot bear.
From my perspective, McCain is right on foreign policy, guns, and quite a few other issues. He’s wrong on other issues, campaign finance reform, and his populist Teddy-style approach to buisness and economics.

Obama is flat out wrong on everything.

I’ll take 70% over 0% anyday.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
Doesn’t voting "present" require one to be ... um ... present?
 
Written By: Xrlq
URL: http://xrlq.com/
But, back to the point of the post, right or wrong, at least he’s demonstrating some leadership unlike Obama.
Okay, I get it… Obama sux. But what of this leadership you speak of? If McCain aids the current bailout, will this be good leadership or bad leadership? You say you would be against the plan, well… fine…, but the question remains unanswered. Will this be good leadership from McCain or bad leadership?

I’m “dredging”, if you insist, your bottomless well of opinions. It’s “what you provide”.

If McCain aids this bailout, will it be GOOD OR BAD LEADERSHIP???

C’mon man…

GOOD OR BAD LEADERSHIP???

You got it in you… It’s down there… Let’s see it.

Cheers.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
Okay, I get it…
Er, no, you don’t - you haven’t "gotten it" since your first comment.
If McCain aids this bailout, will it be GOOD OR BAD LEADERSHIP???
Let’s see - I said, "Most likely, if he’s for the bailout, I’m going to be against it."

Did you miss that? Of course you did. Nothing new there either.

What has that to do with whether or not he demonstrated leadership while the other guy sat on his rump in FL and said "call me if you need me"?

I don’t have to agree with his solution to agree that despite it he at least showed some leadership on the issue.

Or is that a bit too nuanced for you?

Cheers.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
Heh…
You still cannot bring yourself to admit it. You still cannot say whether or not it would be “good” or “bad” leadership. It’s a simple question, not hard to answer. Good? Or Bad?

Instead you have to attack my ability to grasp the concept of demonstrable leadership.
No surprise, since you cannot bring yourself to actually have a definitive answer to what your McCain’s “leadership” will be, you attack me for not understanding the “nuance”.

Good or bad?

Your “I would be against it”, that I referenced but you claim I “missed”, does not answer the question. Good or bad leadership?

You’re like a politician on one of the Sunday shows. You cannot give a direct answer.
And like I would treat a politician on a Sunday show whenever they would not give a direct answer, I will just take the preponderance of evidence and just state it directly for you.

McQ thinks that if McCain aids the current bailout plan, McQ thinks that it would be BAD leadership.

Of course McQ, if you reckon I have that wrong, please correct me in stating that it would be good leadership.

Cheers.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
You still cannot bring yourself to admit it. You still cannot say whether or not it would be “good” or “bad” leadership.
No, I can’t and won’t. Because, as I’ve tried to point out, that has nothing to do with the point of the post.

Robert E Lee - a demonstrated leader throughout the Civil War. I disagree with some of his decisions, but that doesn’t mean his leadership was lacking.

Then there was George McClellan ...

Meh ... this is wasted on you.

Your refusal to understand the point isn’t my problem.
You’re like a politician on one of the Sunday shows. You cannot give a direct answer.
What’s bugging you is I won’t let you change the subject and try to force it in a direction you prefer.

I’ve answered your question - you just don’t like the answer.

Not my problem.

Cheers.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
No, I can’t and won’t. Because, as I’ve tried to point out, that has nothing to do with the point of the post.
It’s an expansion of the post.

Just because you won’t, doesn’t mean you can’t.
Meh ... this is wasted on you.
Whatever, McQ. You have not answered the question. Not because you can’t, but because you simply do not wish to.

Let me...

Obama is showing no leadership, which is bad. McCain, if he backs the current plan, is showing bad leadership.

It’s really just that simple. Why you refuse to answer that question... well... I think we both know why.

Cheers.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
Whatever, McQ. You have not answered the question. Not because you can’t, but because you simply do not wish to.
I have answered it but apparently you’re unable to "drudge" it up.

Think "campaigns" or even "wars" instead of "battles".
It’s an expansion of the post.
Really? Seems a rather silly one at this point.

And even more amusing is the fact you can’t seem to understand the use of the word "leadership" in this context.

If he doesn’t decide as I want him to that’s "bad leadership"?

Uh, no, that’s Pogueian nonsense. It has nothing to do with leadership.

Cheers.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
Good leadership can still lead to bad decisions.

Happens all the time.
 
Written By: Keith_Indy
URL: http://asecondhandconjecture.com
Geeze, Pogue - so NO leadership is okay with you.

Good or Bad or even mediocre McCain, the alternative Obama offered, NO leadership, is okay with you.

You realize that NO leadership is, in and of itself..by definition
BAD in a LEADER.

Okay?

Cheers
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
This is a very informative site
[URL=http://benicar.schadez.info]benicar[/URL] benicar [URL=http://bobs-discount-furniture.schadez.info]bobs discount furniture[/URL] bobs discount furniture calico corners calico corners carquest carquest coldwatercreek coldwatercreek http://fruitcake-lady.zeiter.info fruitcake lady http://jcpenneys.zeiter.info jcpenneys http://jordans-furniture.zeiter.info jordans furniture http://kay-jewlers.schadez.info kay jewlers http://mccalls-patterns.zeiter.info mccalls patterns
 
Written By: benicar
URL: http://benicar.schadez.info

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider