• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
* * * * - 3 votes

John McCain suspends his campaign


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#31 luv2increase

  • Guest
  • 2,529 posts
  • 37
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 25 September 2008 - 10:31 PM

"McCain's suspension of his campaign apparently doesn't apply to his own advisers."



I don't believe any nominee throughout history has ever suspended their campaign so who is to be the one to define what all it means to do just that? It is silly to think that his advisers wouldn't be doing job as usual; it isn't like they are the ones to be in the White House with the President is it? I should think not. Also, I wouldn't take a Democratic Representative's word on the matter of all went down. Don't you think that is a tad of a conflict of interest? Do you think he was going to say, "everyone listed to McCain intently and McCain saved the day!!! Yippee for John McCain??????". I should also think not once again.

#32 PWAIN

  • Guest
  • 1,288 posts
  • 241
  • Location:Melbourne

Posted 25 September 2008 - 11:51 PM

I really don't feel that McCain or Obama for that matter can do much useful stuff when it comes to the financial crisis - at least not until one of them takes the reins. I think McCain is going for a popularist approach and it might just pay off but it will depend on whether Obama can convince the electorate that it is all just a political ploy and to be honest that comes down to how smart the average voter is.

To claim to be a maverick and say that you are going to shake things up and then go ahead and pretend that you are doing something useful in this financial crisis is just contradictory. McCains weakness is his economic skills ahile Obamas ae his foreign relations. Right now, it seems that the economy is at the fore of most peoples minds. McCain needs to accept that and push his strenghts not fake strength where he is weak - he risks being revealed otherwise.

Ultimately, nothing matters until voting day and then all the other polls become irrelevent.

#33 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 1,999
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 25 September 2008 - 11:55 PM

Buck up, righties. You had eight entire years to drag this country down, and you did a damn good job of it.

The country was doing fantastic until the Democrats took over Congress in 2006.

This is nonsense. The country was doing lousy the whole time. What in the world could the dems in congress have done to wreck things in two years? Look at the data:

Since 2007 was the last year of an economic expansion that began in 2001, that makes it an economic peak: the last year of a cycle. Which means we can now, for the first time, compare the results from this peak to the peak of the prior cycle: 2000.

Economists like such comparisons because they evaluate a given outcome across similar years in the cycle. If you were to compare, say, trough to peak, you'd expect things to improve. But peak-to-peak is considered the legit way to compare like-to-like.

So here are some key peak-to-peak comparisons:

Real (inflation-adjusted) median household income was essentially unchanged between 2000 and 2007 (it was $300 lower last year than in 2000, but the difference is not statistically significant).

This is the first cycle on record where the real median household income failed to surpass its prior peak.

For working-age households, real median income is $2,000 below its 2000 level.

Poverty rates were 1.2% higher in 2007 than in 2000, up from 11.3% to 12.5%, an addition of 5.7 million to the poverty rolls. This is the worst cycle for poverty on record. The second worse was 1979-89, a decade also dominated by trickle-down economics.



sponsored ad

  • Advert

#34 spaceistheplace

  • Guest
  • 397 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Sacramento

Posted 25 September 2008 - 11:55 PM

luv2increase is a perfect example that you can take all the nootropics you want and still be a freakin idiot.

#35 luv2increase

  • Guest
  • 2,529 posts
  • 37
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 26 September 2008 - 12:03 AM

luv2increase is a perfect example that you can take all the nootropics you want and still be a freakin idiot.



Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and interpretations on things. You calling me an idiot is calling all McCain supporters idiots as well. You are the perfect example of culprits of our society which hinder the process to a well operating bipartisan government and country.

You don't see any McCain supporters using such foul statements or words now do you? It seems that this is a perfect example of maturity and personal values.


Since no one wants to face the truth and watch the video I posted up on the other thread, I feel it perfectly necessary to post it hear. If Congress would have listed to McCain in 06, this crisis could have been perfectly avoided, but the Democrats were in the way from that happening. They were too busy taking pay-offs from Freddie and Fannie!



Mr. President, this week Fannie Mae’s regulator reported that the company’s quarterly reports of profit growth over the past few years were “illusions deliberately and systematically created” by the company’s senior management, which resulted in a $10.6 billion accounting scandal.

The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight’s report goes on to say that Fannie Mae employees deliberately and intentionally manipulated financial reports to hit earnings targets in order to trigger bonuses for senior executives. In the case of Franklin Raines, Fannie Mae’s former chief executive officer, OFHEO’s report shows that over half of Mr. Raines’ compensation for the 6 years through 2003 was directly tied to meeting earnings targets. The report of financial misconduct at Fannie Mae echoes the deeply troubling $5 billion profit restatement at Freddie Mac.

The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator’s examination of the company’s accounting problems. This report comes some weeks after Freddie Mac paid a record $3.8 million fine in a settlement with the Federal Election Commission and restated lobbying disclosure reports from 2004 to 2005. These are entities that have demonstrated over and over again that they are deeply in need of reform.

For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs–and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO’s report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO’s report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay.

I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.

I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation




– Sen. John McCain
The Floor of the US Senate, May 25, 2006




And the Dems say McCain doesn't understand the economy, u n b e l i e v a b l e !

Edited by luv2increase, 26 September 2008 - 12:07 AM.


#36 REGIMEN

  • Guest
  • 570 posts
  • -1

Posted 26 September 2008 - 02:18 AM

luv2increase is a perfect example that you can take all the nootropics you want and still be a freakin idiot.



A) You calling me an idiot is calling all McCain supporters idiots as well.

B) You don't see any McCain supporters using such foul statements or words now do you?




A) I should think not, once more!


B) You have a really poor memory if you can't remember even the last 48 hours of your own posting history. You turn on a dime whenever you get a new idea be it "anti CR diet!" to "I deserve my thread be solely and starkly about MY topic like someone mentioned in the thread of an opposing topic!". You're funny like that. Seems you -can- teach an old dog new tricks; kind of like McCain appropriating the same tactics Bush raped him with back in 2000. You know...the old standby of "fog of lies wins the gigantic heehaw moron vote because they hear it once and run with it like scissors after glue-huffing". You and your McCain supporters are the Children Left Behind. That right there....that's what they call an ad hominem attack. You still don't seem to understand that concept. It's an attack no matter how out of your way you state something about the poster; you never stick to the topic and just flare up about whatever hook you think was implied. Another: reading your responses is tiresome because you push into blinkering vacuous hyperbole so often it becomes your own private Shock & Awe campaign. If all you're going to do is state your side without actively participating in the give-and-take nature of this forum you may as well leave to go fill up your own blog; you might get some ad revenue if you're worth anything. Shoving links and cries of disbelief upon anyone with an opposing opinion...it's annoying and furthermore you fail to see your own hypocrisy. And bullshit you make up like "McCain could have saved us in '06 but the Democrats got in the way clambering to take payoffs!"....it's just embarrassing and you should stop.

Mission Accomplished................................... (that has a portentous ring to it...used here that is...)

Actually this whole post is a massive waste of time and resources since it's not another poster I should be worries about but the discrete details of my own life.....Mission Accomplished.

Edited by REGIMEN, 26 September 2008 - 02:23 AM.


#37 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 1,999
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 26 September 2008 - 02:41 AM

Since no one wants to face the truth and watch the video I posted up on the other thread, I feel it perfectly necessary to post it hear. If Congress would have listed to McCain in 06, this crisis could have been perfectly avoided, but the Democrats were in the way from that happening. They were too busy taking pay-offs from Freddie and Fannie!

Do you really think that the GSE reform that McCain talked about, but otherwise did nothing about in 2006 would have in any way altered the Credit Default Swaps that AIG was writing? The CDOs that Morgan and Bear and everyone else were shoveling in money with? The tidal wave of liquidity that Greenspan was unleashing? The real causes of the mortgage crisis had little to do with GSEs. If it were not for republican deregulatory foolishness, the CDSs would not have been so reckless, and the CDOs (MBSs) wouldn't have been turned into garbage. Are you aware that we had a sound MBS market for a good 15 years before Republican Phil Gramm legislatively forbade all regulation of CDSs? Do you even know what all these acronyms mean? If not, you are out of your depth in discussing the causes of the mortgage crisis.

#38 spaceistheplace

  • Guest
  • 397 posts
  • 4
  • Location:Sacramento

Posted 26 September 2008 - 02:51 AM

You calling me an idiot is calling all McCain supporters idiots as well.


No, I just think they're evil.

#39 Iam Empathy

  • Guest
  • 429 posts
  • 1

Posted 26 September 2008 - 03:27 AM

http://www.nytimes.c...ml?ref=politics

Senator John McCain had intended to ride back into Washington on Thursday as a leader who had put aside presidential politics to help broker a solution to the financial crisis. Instead he found himself in the midst of a remarkable partisan showdown, lacking a clear public message for how to bring it to an end.

At the bipartisan White House meeting that Mr. McCain had called for a day earlier, he sat silently for more than 40 minutes, more observer than leader, and then offered only a vague sense of where he stood, according to people in the meeting.



#40 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 1,999
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 26 September 2008 - 03:47 AM

Has this political stunt backfired on McCain? The meeting with Bush, McCain, and Obama was nothing more than a photo-op. By the time the two presidential candidates rolled into Washington, the real work of hammering out an acceptable compromise was just about (if not completely) done. If McCain had really cared about the country more than getting elected, he would have arranged a postponement of the debate in conjunction with the Obama campaign, and held a joint press conference with Obama. Instead, he acted unilaterally, just like Bush... It was a move designed to scam his possibly wavering supporters, to appear as a "Man of Action". Should have worn a flight suit. (Mission Accomplished).

#41 luv2increase

  • Guest
  • 2,529 posts
  • 37
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 26 September 2008 - 03:57 AM

By the time the two presidential candidates rolled into Washington, the real work of hammering out an acceptable compromise was just about (if not completely) done.


Apparently, you haven't been paying close attention to the news. The compromise wasn't almost completely met at all. It probably won't be done until a few days if that...



It was a move designed to scam his possibly wavering supporters, to appear as a "Man of Action". Should have worn a flight suit. (Mission Accomplished).


Who are you to determine the mind-set of another individual that you don't even know and obviously don't want to get to know?

#42 Connor MacLeod

  • Guest
  • 619 posts
  • 46

Posted 26 September 2008 - 04:00 AM

Since no one wants to face the truth and watch the video I posted up on the other thread, I feel it perfectly necessary to post it hear. If Congress would have listed to McCain in 06, this crisis could have been perfectly avoided, but the Democrats were in the way from that happening. They were too busy taking pay-offs from Freddie and Fannie!

Do you really think that the GSE reform that McCain talked about, but otherwise did nothing about in 2006 would have in any way altered the Credit Default Swaps that AIG was writing? The CDOs that Morgan and Bear and everyone else were shoveling in money with? The tidal wave of liquidity that Greenspan was unleashing? The real causes of the mortgage crisis had little to do with GSEs. If it were not for republican deregulatory foolishness, the CDSs would not have been so reckless, and the CDOs (MBSs) wouldn't have been turned into garbage. Are you aware that we had a sound MBS market for a good 15 years before Republican Phil Gramm legislatively forbade all regulation of CDSs? Do you even know what all these acronyms mean? If not, you are out of your depth in discussing the causes of the mortgage crisis.


Memorizing acrnoyms from articles read off of partisan Leftwing moonbat websites does not, at least to my mind, indicate any sort of depth. Nevertheless, for kicks I'll give it a stab:

CDS - credit default swap
CDO - credit default option
MBS - mortgage backed security

In any case, you seem to overlook the fact that it was a Clinton White House initiative that led to the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. The Leftwingers are trying to make CFMA out to be some sort of evil plan on the part of the Republicans whereas in fact it was initiated and supported by the White House and had the backing of the vast majority of Democrats (and Republicans for that matter.) I'm not going to blame Clinton or the Democrats for it; I believe there was no particularly ill intent in the desire to modernize derivatives trading (though evidently some short-sidedness.) It's simply a matter of unintended consequences and now everyone is trying to cover their asses.

#43 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 1,999
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 26 September 2008 - 04:08 AM

By the time the two presidential candidates rolled into Washington, the real work of hammering out an acceptable compromise was just about (if not completely) done.

Apparently, you haven't been paying close attention to the news. The compromise wasn't almost completely met at all. It probably won't be done until a few days if that...

It was announced about 2:00, thursday afternoon. What time did McCain get there?

It was a move designed to scam his possibly wavering supporters, to appear as a "Man of Action". Should have worn a flight suit. (Mission Accomplished).

Who are you to determine the mind-set of another individual that you don't even know and obviously don't want to get to know?

I'm a concerned citizen. I have a good eye for bullshit. Who are you to say I "obviously don't want to get to know"? I have Republican friends. I used to BE a Republican. I just want to put an end to this deregulate, trickle-down, warmongering, anti-science, bailout, neocon freak show that we've been saddled with for 8 years.

#44 Iam Empathy

  • Guest
  • 429 posts
  • 1

Posted 26 September 2008 - 04:09 AM



#45 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 1,999
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 26 September 2008 - 05:00 AM

Since no one wants to face the truth and watch the video I posted up on the other thread, I feel it perfectly necessary to post it hear. If Congress would have listed to McCain in 06, this crisis could have been perfectly avoided, but the Democrats were in the way from that happening. They were too busy taking pay-offs from Freddie and Fannie!

Do you really think that the GSE reform that McCain talked about, but otherwise did nothing about in 2006 would have in any way altered the Credit Default Swaps that AIG was writing? The CDOs that Morgan and Bear and everyone else were shoveling in money with? The tidal wave of liquidity that Greenspan was unleashing? The real causes of the mortgage crisis had little to do with GSEs. If it were not for republican deregulatory foolishness, the CDSs would not have been so reckless, and the CDOs (MBSs) wouldn't have been turned into garbage. Are you aware that we had a sound MBS market for a good 15 years before Republican Phil Gramm legislatively forbade all regulation of CDSs? Do you even know what all these acronyms mean? If not, you are out of your depth in discussing the causes of the mortgage crisis.


Memorizing acrnoyms from articles read off of partisan Leftwing moonbat websites does not, at least to my mind, indicate any sort of depth. Nevertheless, for kicks I'll give it a stab:

CDS - credit default swap
CDO - credit default option
MBS - mortgage backed security

"partisan Leftwing moonbat websites"? Like http://bigpicture.typepad.com/ ? That's Barry Ritholtz' site. He called this thing about two, maybe three years ago. When you use language like that, it appears that you dismiss any reality that doesn't fit your ideology by calling it "moonbat" or somesuch thing.

BTW, a CDO is a Collateralized Debt Obligation. They hold different qualities of debt in different tranches.

In any case, you seem to overlook the fact that it was a Clinton White House initiative that led to the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. The Leftwingers are trying to make CFMA out to be some sort of evil plan on the part of the Republicans whereas in fact it was initiated and supported by the White House and had the backing of the vast majority of Democrats (and Republicans for that matter.) I'm not going to blame Clinton or the Democrats for it; I believe there was no particularly ill intent in the desire to modernize derivatives trading (though evidently some short-sidedness.) It's simply a matter of unintended consequences and now everyone is trying to cover their asses.

Do you have any documentation for this claim? The CFMA was inserted into an omnibus spending bill at the 11th hour, and never debated. It was authored by Republicans in both house and senate versions. Congress had no choice but to vote on it, and Clinton had no choice but to sign it or hold up funding for a significant fraction of the government. Clinton and the Democrats in Congress may well have been unaware that it was even in gigantic spending bill, since there was no debate. This was Dec 15, 2000. Not only should you not blame Clinton or the Democrats for it, you shouldn't even be mentioning them. That's just trying to deflect blame from where it rightly belongs. This is exhibit A for another failed Republican Ideology: All Regulation is Bad. The Unbridled Free Market is the Best Solution. Another trillion dollar error.

#46 Live Forever

  • Guest Recorder
  • 7,475 posts
  • 9
  • Location:Atlanta, GA USA

Posted 26 September 2008 - 05:02 AM

I am going to say once again for both sides; Please do not use ad-hominems and personal attacks. Arguing ideas is fine; but personal attacks can get you banned permanently. (IPs, cookies, and everything else that we don't advertise) Just a warning since it is getting heated in the political forum.

#47 Connor MacLeod

  • Guest
  • 619 posts
  • 46

Posted 26 September 2008 - 05:29 PM

"partisan Leftwing moonbat websites"? Like http://bigpicture.typepad.com/ ? That's Barry Ritholtz' site. He called this thing about two, maybe three years ago.

Did he claim that it was some sort of dark conspiracy on the part of the Republicans? Did he claim that the Republicans slipped the bill surreptitiously with the Democratic lawmakers and the Democratic president unaware? If so, please provide a link to where he made such claims.

When you use language like that, it appears that you dismiss any reality that doesn't fit your ideology by calling it "moonbat" or somesuch thing.

Niner, you of all people are not one to talk on this point. I used the term moonbat to refer to people who dismiss reality because of their extreme political views.

In any case, you seem to overlook the fact that it was a Clinton White House initiative that led to the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. The Leftwingers are trying to make CFMA out to be some sort of evil plan on the part of the Republicans whereas in fact it was initiated and supported by the White House and had the backing of the vast majority of Democrats (and Republicans for that matter.) I'm not going to blame Clinton or the Democrats for it; I believe there was no particularly ill intent in the desire to modernize derivatives trading (though evidently some short-sidedness.) It's simply a matter of unintended consequences and now everyone is trying to cover their asses.


Do you have any documentation for this claim? The CFMA was inserted into an omnibus spending bill at the 11th hour, and never debated. It was authored by Republicans in both house and senate versions. Congress had no choice but to vote on it, and Clinton had no choice but to sign it or hold up funding for a significant fraction of the government. Clinton and the Democrats in Congress may well have been unaware that it was even in gigantic spending bill, since there was no debate. This was Dec 15, 2000. Not only should you not blame Clinton or the Democrats for it, you shouldn't even be mentioning them. That's just trying to deflect blame from where it rightly belongs. This is exhibit A for another failed Republican Ideology: All Regulation is Bad. The Unbridled Free Market is the Best Solution. Another trillion dollar error.


You see, what you wrote there is a good example. It appears you have not really bothered to research this. Instead you likely read some articles on partisan Leftwing websites, found them to be consistent with your political views, and are now going about propogating this as certain truth.

Yes, there is documentation. It's really not that hard to find. You have the text of the bills, you have the votes in the House, you have press releases from the White House and government departments, etc. Orginal source documentation - not partisan propoganada. The fact is that the CFMA (and the resulting deregulation) was a Clinton White House initiative from the very beginning. The idea that the Republicans would have been able to (or would have found it necessary) to secretly slip it into a spending bill without the Democrats being aware is nothing more than conspiracy mongering and defies any commonsense interpretation of the reality surrounding the issue. In any case, you can easily find this information for yourself on the web. If you can't locate it I can post some information in a couple of days; I don't have the time to make a long post right now.

Edited by Connor MacLeod, 26 September 2008 - 05:31 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users