John McCain Saves the Day...OOPS...

@anniepa (27238)
United States
September 29, 2008 4:02pm CST
Not so fast, Johnny Mac; you "suspended your campaign", made noises about postponing the debate and bragged about putting your country first and working on the financial crisis we're in. Reportedly you didn't do much while in D.C. but that didn't stop you from accusing Obama of "phoning it in". http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=AF9F10EC-18FE-70B2-A82949C5A24271A8 Unfortunately, the bail-out failed and the stock market fell over 770 points, the biggest drop in history including immediately after 9/11. So, Johnny Mac, whose to blame for this failure? You and your camp were so ready to take credit for its great success but will you take some of the blame for its failure? Obviously, Johnny Mac isn't going to respond to this so I'm depending on his myLot surrogates to explain it to me. Annie
7 people like this
11 responses
• United States
29 Sep 08
I'm not one of his surrogates but I did have something to add. I just read an article at MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26884523). It seems the republicans are mad at Nanacy Pelosi for bringing up Bush's failed economic policies, etc. Rep. John Boehner said that Pelosi's words "poisoned our conference" causing republicans not to vote for the bail out. lol Now you know who's fault it is. Rep. Franks said, "Because somebody hurt their feelings, they decided to punish the country." See, they are following their Maverick's, their stalwart hero's example...taking their toys and going home. Save us all.
4 people like this
@evanslf (485)
29 Sep 08
Well I think a majority of Republican congressmen voted against the bailout package on fundamental ideological grounds, that people who take risks should carry the can when things go wrong, etc, etc. Though no Repubican myself, I understand that point of view. I understand and feel real anger that we should be bailing out rich bankers who have made an almighty mess. And a lot of people out there feel the same. However, I also understand that in this time of crisis it seems we have little choice but to swallow this bitter pill and accept to go along with this bailout, with as much protection for the taxpayer as possible. The problem is that many Republican congressmen have still not grasped that the world has fundamentally changed in the last 2 weeks: the dominant ideology of the free-market, laissez faire economics with minimal regulation is over. The era of more govt intervention and regulation has now arrived and harsh reality has forced the Republican Bush administration to accept this. It is now going to be very interesting how the remainder of this election plays out: how will the Republicans adjust to this new world where their ideology, so dominant over the last 30 years, is now in shredds and where they have to go on the defensive?
3 people like this
• United States
29 Sep 08
Oh, make no mistake, I understand not wanting to vote for the bailout. I am almost tempted to say that we shouldn't do it at all. Almost. I also realize that it was the republicans who deregulated banking and that McCain is a "champion" of deregulation. Deregulation may not be the only cause of the situation we are in, but it certainly tied the knot in the noose. It does seem we have little choice, but many economists are saying otherwise. Frankly, I don't know who to believe. That alone is enough to make me angry. I don't have a problem with republicans being against the bailout for legitimate reasons, but I do have a problem with the reason they gave. That was ridiculous.
3 people like this
@anniepa (27238)
• United States
30 Sep 08
I just posted below about Laura Tyson, the chief economic adviser for President Clinton, who was on Rachel Maddow's show a few minutes ago and according to her it vital that this is passed. I sure know what you mean about no knowing who to believe but she's one I've really liked and respected for along time and I really think she knows her stuff. Personally, until someone proves her wrong I'm going to take her word for it. I sure agree about their reasons for being against the bill. Talk about a bunch of babies! Annie
1 person likes this
@ZephyrSun (7385)
• United States
29 Sep 08
Oh I know this one. It's Obama's fault and the Liberal media. It's Obama's fault because he didn't suspend his campaign and it's the Liberal media's fault because they are picking on Palin. Does that sum it up? lol
4 people like this
• United States
29 Sep 08
it failed because senators on both sides were upset about the ear marks and pork barrel that got stuck onto it by other senators. It was a couple of billion worth of stuff that had nothing to do with the bail out what so ever. If they would have just voted on the bail out without all the unneeded BS added to it, it would have passed. They said they are going to try and do another vote in a couple of days. Either they are going to take the pork out and make everyone happy.Which is unlikely. Or they are going to give it a couple of days for people to panic and start to put pressure on their senators so that they vote for it, wasteful earmarks and all. I find the fact that earmarks were added to this bail out at all is disgusting. But then the senators who did it were counting on the fact that the bail out was so important that the rest of them would vote for it no matter what trash was attached at the last minuate. It just shows how out of touch our congress is. Instead of seeing it as a chance to help, they look at it as an opportunity to add an earmark to help out the lobbyist and special interest groups. What about us, the average american that is suffering. They could give a rats butt about us. And they just proved it. I say good going to the ones who held out and say NO WAY on the wasteful spending. We are not in a position to waste anymore money. Hopefully they can get it taken off. Unforunately they are going to take a lot of heat from everyone on this one. Why aren't the ones who added all that BS the ones getting the heat?
3 people like this
@anniepa (27238)
• United States
30 Sep 08
First of all, it didn't even go to the Senate yet and I haven't seen any other mention of earmarks or pork barrel spending in regards to this bill anywhere else. Do you have anymore information on this? I know there were provisions added to what Bush had originally submitted such as eliminating the "Golden Parachutes" for CEOs and other things to reportedly make sure it did help out "Main Street as well as Wall Street". Anyway, nobody is happy to have to shell out $700 billion to bail out people who mismanaged their funds and in some cases outright broke the law but it can't be allowed to go unfixed. It will affect all of us in a very short time if something isn't done. Annie
1 person likes this
@ZephyrSun (7385)
• United States
30 Sep 08
I think everyone is confusing the Spending Bill with the financial bail out bill. If you read the Spending Bill posted at FOX that another member linked it's for the Spending Bill even though that member is saying it's the bail out bill.
2 people like this
• United States
30 Sep 08
It made it to the house and they voted it down. Why? All the ear marks. Well that was one of the reasons given. YOu know just because it did not make it to the senate did not mean they did not have their fingers in that pie and were talking to their fellow elected officials. I do not like the bail out, nobody does. Infact it really ticks me off. But at this time I can say we need it. But we should not have a lot of BS attached to it. Nor should we be held hoteage to pay for the earmarks just to get what we need. That is extortion in my opinion. Which is a crime. Give me what I want or I won't give you what you need. Is that really what we elected these people for? It was also on CNN tonight on the news about the junk that was added. Sense my account has had to start over I have lost copy and paste. I did not realize how much I loved that right until I lost it. Go to Cnn.com and then you will a link to the actual bill. There is also a link that tells you who voted which way. It is all on the main page. It is the big story so it is at the top. I do hope they can come to an agreement soon. If not things will get really dirty really fast.
2 people like this
@irisheyes (4373)
• United States
29 Sep 08
Know what, I didn't care who took credit so long as it got done. I just hope to God they can put something else together before all those gloating fools who think they can sit back and smirk while the financial system collapses bring a damn depression down on us all. I just checked the house vote and I'm glad that my congressman voted for the bailout.
3 people like this
• United States
29 Sep 08
I'm from NC and this is how our members voted: Democrats: Yes: Etheridge, Miller, Price, Watt Democrats: No: Butterfield, McIntyre, Shuler Republicans: Yes: 0 Republicans: No: Coble, Foxx, Hayes, Jones, McHenry, Myrick My Rep. is Myrick and she voted no. I hope to vote her out this coming election for oh, so many reasons! As you can see, the Democrats were split; the republicans from my state all voted no. There is a map with information for each state on this page: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26946382/
2 people like this
@anniepa (27238)
• United States
30 Sep 08
I just checked to make sure mine (Kanjorski) did as well although I had seen him on TV yesterday saying he supported it! Laura Tyson, formerly of the Clinton Administration and currently an adviser to Obama, was just on Rachel Maddow's show and she explained it SO well why it's so important for this to get done. I'd heard it and read it before and obviously so have you but apparently according to some of the members on Congress on TV today many of the American people either didn't know the details or didn't quite get it, but Tyson explained it very simply and clearly. It's not about "bailing out" Wall Street, it's about saving the economy. If something isn't done it will effect us all, whether we invest on Wall Street or have stock market investments in our retirement plans or not, whether we have a current mortgage or not, whether we run our own small business or not, and whether we personally rely on credit in our daily lives or not. Nobody will be able to get credit, even overnight, and that will bring business to a grinding halt. The results cold include no jobs, very high inflation, shortages of everything imaginable - to compare it to the Great Depression isn't an exaggeration. Yesterday when it looked like they were really going to get it done I was actually saying to my friends and family how proud I was of everyone involved in coming up with a compromise and working together. I didn't care what party they were from or whether I'd approved of things they'd done in the past, I was very pleased with them for a brief moment when I actually thought our government could work as it was meant to, FOR THE PEOPLE, putting partisan politics aside. OOPS! Annie
1 person likes this
• United States
30 Sep 08
Thank, Annie! I usually watch Rachel, but I missed her earlier tonight. I'll catch her early morning, though (around 3 or 4 a.m.). lol Yes, I need someone trustworthy to explain it. I've gone back and forth with how I feel about it. I figured that when Myrick voted "no" I should be for it...we never agree on anything! Harry Taylor is running against her and I think he has a great chance of winning. If I could just get rid of her and Elizabeth Dole I'd be happy with NC! lol
2 people like this
@Sheepie (3118)
• United States
29 Sep 08
I don't understand anything about the stock market when it comes to the election, so I'll keep quiet and watch, trying to get it. But I would just like to ask you, how do you expect a him to explain that when he doesn't even know how many houses he has? I'm still waiting for an answer to that question. I'm really curious. Okay, I found it. Seven. Now I'm ready to move on to this one.
3 people like this
@anniepa (27238)
• United States
30 Sep 08
I'm not so sure about that - I've heard anywhere from 7 to 11; he DOES have 13 cars, though! Annie
1 person likes this
@worldwise1 (14887)
• United States
29 Sep 08
I saw the whole thing as a ploy to postpone the debate anyway, anniepa! McCain felt that he was not equal to the task and seized upon the situation with the failing economy to buy him some time. Besides, it did not fall to him to come up with a solution to the problem at hand. Anyway he had a poor showing in the first debate and I predict they will be looking to Mrs. Palin to bring them a win.
2 people like this
@anniepa (27238)
• United States
30 Sep 08
I agree, especially with your last sentence, although I'm sure you've read how many posters here think McCain won handily the other night and Obama was the one who was disrespectful. Unbelievable! I'll tell you what, though, if they're depending on Palin to bring them a win they'd better hang it up right now...lol! Annie
1 person likes this
@stephcjh (32327)
• United States
30 Sep 08
I have no idea. I have a hard time understanding things like this anymore. I cannot wait for this to all be overwith LOL. It has my nerves tore up, not knowing what in the world is going to happen to this country.
2 people like this
• United States
30 Sep 08
McCain is full of it. He decides to try and gain points by riding into Washington and instead of actually helping the process he does nothing, although he does promise to get the Republicans to vote for the bill. The morning of the vote he takes all the credit for it working.When the vote happens and those promised Republicans decide to change their minds McCain all of a sudden had nothing to do with it. This is beyond pathetic. How is that there are still people who would willingly vote for this man?
@jerzgirl (8026)
• Gloucester City, New Jersey
30 Sep 08
How can this man sleep at night? Didn't both he AND Obama meet with Bush, Paulson and the other creators of this bailout bill in the White House to discuss this very bill that he says Obama only "called in" about from the "sidelines"? Even Fox news reports that Obama went to DC for this issue. Didn't Obama say on Meet the Press he was calling in to talk to Paulson and others for two weeks that prior to this to keep tabs on the progress and to encourage them to add certain measures to the bill? He obviously couldn't have "suspended" his campaign that long. McCain was actually asked to leave because he was told his presence distracted them, so he was more hindrance than help. Plus, the over 2/3 of the GOP and 40% of the Democrats didn't support it. Doesn't sound to me like it was the Dems who sabotaged it. Plus, the people of this country overwhelmingly DIDN'T want this and made it known to their representatives. Election time is near. If they want their jobs, they'd damned well better listen! McCain tried to swoop in like a super hero to take charge - all he did was attract attention away from the matters at hand.
@kenzie45230 (3560)
• United States
30 Sep 08
I was proud of McCain for his stand. Too bad the other side didn't see how important the economy problem was and insisted on the debate. Obviously, when the folks in Washington thought that things were ironed out, they weren't and they would have been better off trying to help make it so. Of course, Pelosi didn't help anything yesterday with her stupid speech. Then again, I've heard that she made that speech on purpose...so that the Democrats can try to push through more of their plans...complete with bailing out the little guy. One news show said that at one point there was mention of "forgiving" up to 50% of a person's mortgage. Makes you almost wish your own mortgage was in default so you could get 1/2 of your mortgage forgiven too.
• United States
30 Sep 08
i was hoping mccain would win.