Hard News: The Debate and Onwards
242 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 10 Newer→ Last
-
The correlation between congressmen voting against the bill and unsafe seats in the upcoming election may surprise you.
Oh no it wouldn't, Jake. :) But to be fair, there are people on both sides of the aisle who cast good faith votes against the bail out -- and it is one hell of a crap shoot, even with the worse of the corporate welfare stripped out (I think... I hope... well, who fraking knows?) Sure, Ben Bernacke was predicting the end of the universe if the bailout didn't pass as originally submitted, but am I the only who has doubts that that you send him out with a twenty dollar bill to get a pack of butts and a bottle of milk, and he'd give you the correct change.
So that suggests to me that most people in the US are looking at the candidates rather than listening to what they are saying. No surprises there I guess.
No, I really think people are listening to McCain, and he's like candy floss. It's sweet and fluffy, but the more you eat the sicker you get.
-
McCain has declared that now is not the time to assign blame for the bailout failure -- 90 minutes after issuing a statement containing these words:
"Barack Obama failed to lead, phoned it in, attacked John McCain, and refused to even say if he supported the final bill ...This bill failed because Barack Obama and the Democrats put politics ahead of country."
Could he get any more weird and erratic?
-
My brain hurts . . . wasn't it the Repubs who sunk it? I'n Roger Kerr fan but it was interesting to read his editorial in NZ Herald yesterday for a view of why too much govt intervention caused the problem in the first place. Always fun to see the world through Kerr-tinted glasses for a moment - scary but fun.
-
Could he get any more weird and erratic?
Yes? I don't want to even imagine how, but as far as weirdness is concerned too much is not enough. :) But I do have a nomination for the McCain-Palin campaign anthem...
http://nz.youtube.com/watch?v=FKeQpeDkoGc
NSFW! But soothing words for difficult times, don't you think?
-
Mind need boggling?
Check out some of the usual suspects on Kiwiblog on the bailout story.
Laugh? Cry? You choose.
-
Just in ...
HUGE swing-state poll results for Obama.
No wonder Redbaiter is even more upset than usual.
-
3410,
Wow. Have you ever seen a more disingenuous bunch than the House Republican leadership today?
-
Best comment on the TPM thread:
McCain's got more positions than the Kama Sutra on Ritalin.
-
I agree with Sage and RB in that I thought McCain had the better of the debate purely in terms of technique.
He did as well as any politician with 26 years experience and one failed presidential bid behind him would do. Nothing special, very professional.
Where McCain clearly tripped up, several times, was in saying "Senator Obama doesn't understand..." when, even if you disagreed with Obama, he quite obviously did understand.
-
Where McCain clearly tripped up, several times, was in saying "Senator Obama doesn't understand..." when, even if you disagreed with Obama, he quite obviously did understand.
He should also resist the urge to call anyone else "naive" - especially today.
Wow. Have you ever seen a more disingenuous bunch than the House Republican leadership today?
Probably have, but suppressed the painful memory of such a pitiful sight. OTOH, I don't think you need to be any kind of strategic genius to pick that it's a matter of when not if, Boehner and the rest of the House Republican leadership start sleeping with the fishes.
-
Always fun to see the world through Kerr-tinted glasses for a moment
He needs to take those off & address himself in the mirror before he goes jogging. OT, but the other evening I would have sworn santa (or a giant red panda) was jogging (in a shuffling kind of way) towards the duckpond, from the main entrance to the Bot Gardens.
When he got nearer, I realise it was Roger Kerr (he's taller than I thought) in the most garish red & white tracksuit I have ever clapped eyes on (and I live near the cable car & I've seen an awful lot of garish track suits on American cruise liner passengers.
-
Paul: Love you, love your work, but that's nonsense -- and being a Labour supporter has nothing to do with it, Much as I'd like it to be otherwise, I'm not see either National or Labour being in a position to govern alone. They're going to need one or more of the "minnows", and while I see the politics of both Key and Clark wanting to avoid any potential embarrassment by being roasted on live TV it's a shame Three and TVNZ caved.
I'll take the affection as a salve to the dismissal ;->
I don't disagree that debates with all leaders are needed; they'll provide insights into the deals that'll inevitably be struck to form government. I think debates with all leaders are important, but not instead of a head to head with Clark and Key. Clark and Key will ultimately play a leading hand in determining the overall direction and focus of government and I'd rather we have some time where their plans can be fully scrutinised without on-the-fly negotiations with the smaller parties.
Also, I'll take the rebuke on "minnows" (or did I say minors); I mean no offence at all and respect their important role.
He did as well as any politician with 26 years experience and one failed presidential bid behind him would do. Nothing special, very professional.
Agreed. I got sick of the endless stories, Presidents needn't be surrogate grandfathers, but McCain was less cluttered and more direct than Obama towards the end of the debate (although I don't see that as necessarily better, just better in this forum). Having read of the post analysis, I tend to agree that any advantage in the debate was undermined by his awkward demeanor.
-
Heh, Democrat congressman, Barney Frank, offers to talk "uncharacteristically nicely" to his Rep colleagues so that they can put country before their hurt feelings.
This would be funny, if not so damned serious. Wouldn't it?
-
This would be funny, if not so damned serious. Wouldn't it?
I'm glad one of them said it.
-
I think debates with all leaders are important, but not instead of a head to head with Clark and Key.
I don't think it's an zero sum proposition either, but the "one of us is going to be Prime Minister so we aren't going to be seen with these minnows" is, to be generous, a wee bit previous. And call me an old crank, but I'd rather not see Three outsourcing editorial decisions to the Ninth Floor or the Opposition Leader's office. They're perfectly entitled to decline to appear, but it's rather spineless and disingenuous of Three to pull the plug on the whole exercise.
-
This would be funny, if not so damned serious. Wouldn't it?
Barney Frank is the chairman of the House Banking Committee, so at the moment he damn well better be the grown-up in whatever room he's in. I'm no fan of Nancy Pelosi, but if she's got duvh powerful hoodoo mind-fuck powers that she can turn two-thirds of House Republicans against a bill with a single speech she's setting her sights far too low.
Why don't Boehner and McCain stop being such a pack of cocks and just admit reality: They couldn't secure the votes of a majority of their own party. Doesn't say much about the leadership skills of either man, but their petulant psychosis is even worse.
-
And call me an old crank, but I'd rather not see Three outsourcing editorial decisions to the Ninth Floor or the Opposition Leader's office. They're perfectly entitled to decline to appear, but it's rather spineless and disingenuous of Three to pull the plug on the whole exercise.
Yeah, that's what disappointed me. Clark and Key's behaviour, not the best, but not totally surprising. TV3's decision to not run a debate with everyone else - some of whom could be very significant post-election, just sad.
I'm not sure why the debate suddenly became non-viable without the top two. Sure, less people might watch it, but you'd still pick up a pretty significant audience for a 'minor parties' debate. More than watch some of the other silly things TV3 runs.
-
I came across this article recently and thought it would be of interest to PA readers (with some time on their hands)
It's an excerpt from the book Reinventing Collapse
Soviet Example and American Prospects
By Dmitry OrlovAnother one to add to the Holiday reading list
-
@Tony,
yes. Orlov is a very smart character with some very interesting insights.
have to read that book. have to. must read. top of the book list.
starting to sound repetative... -
Orlov on the bail out plan
Interesting times
-
shiller slightly more credible and realistic in his assessments. And as the author of Irrational Exuberance he does have some.
If we move smartly, Americans can have a better, more robust financial democracy along the lines of the system envisioned by our first president. The current crisis does not mean the end of American capitalism. But if we are lucky, it will mean an important step in its evolution.
-
an interesting analysis to put the bailout in perspective is an estimate that US housing losses amount to $6 trillion in the last 3 years.here
For additional perspective on the value of $6 trillion, the Chinese economy reached a GDP of $3.4 trillion in 2007, according to the Chinese news agency Xinhua. That means that over the last two years, the US housing market has been losing value at a rate almost equal to the size of the entire Chinese economy, the economic juggernaut that is currently driving much of the growth of the global economy.
-
Clark and Key's behaviour, not the best, but not totally surprising. TV3's decision to not run a debate with everyone else - some of whom could be very significant post-election, just sad.
Sorry, what do people object to exactly? The two leaders agreeing the need a head to head or Three's capitulation? I still see nothing wrong with them wanting more head to heads; in fact I'm a little surprised Key agreed (I suspect he was advised against it) so I'm unclear what's being criticised.
-
Oh and for those of you who think the sub prime crisis was caused by greedy bankers, think again.
In the early 1990s, Congress eased Fannie and Freddie's lending requirements (to 1/4th the capital required by regular commercial banks) so as to increase their ability to lend to poor areas. Congress also created a regulatory agency to oversee them, but this agency also had to reapply to Congress for its budget each year (no other financial regulator must do so), assuring that it would tell Congress exactly what it wanted to hear: "things are fine." In 1995, Fannie and Freddie were given permission to enter the subprime market and regulators began to crack down on banks who were not lending enough to distressed areas.
-
Sorry, what do people object to exactly?
I think both are rude, I think the actions of politicians are 'meh', TV3 is the real disappointment.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.