Gary Whitta
Member
Congressional meetings to resume tomorrow at 11:30am? Good to know they're getting an early start! Your tax dollars at work!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF Thread of First Debate Election 2008 - GAF doesn't know shit
- Thread starter Amir0x
- Start date
- Status
WickedAngel
Banned
The only way this could end up working out for McCain is if this was his plan all along. Show up, shut down the process for a day, then come back Friday to score a touchdown with no time left on the clock. He rides the wave of success into the debate, taking credit for finishing the process (That he himself was responsible for shutting down).
Otherwise, it's lights out for McCan't.
Otherwise, it's lights out for McCan't.
bafflewaffle
Member
McCain's gonna parachute in from a chopper with an Evil Kneivel style jumpsuit while this plays in the background. Oh man, it'll be so awesome.
Son of Godzilla
Banned
...WickedAngel said:
That would be crucifying every member of the GOP that stood against the bill.
WickedAngel
Banned
Son of Godzilla said:
You think he gives a shit anymore? His entire campaign has been run on spur on illogical, impulsive decisions.
They come out and support the old measures, saying that the old measures are ones that they had just suggested that day. The truth doesn't matter to them anymore.
Xisiqomelir
Member
devilhawk said:
FWIW, I've been a Libertopian till very recently and have very different opinions from my fellow Obama-GAFfers on a lot of stuff, like gun control and the gold standard.
My first instinct to King Hank's demand for a blank cheque was "fuck no, let the bastards burn". Sadly, a lot of innocent people will be completely fucked over if that happens. Yes, we'll liquidate all the misallocated funds and wipe the slate clean, but I think the collateral damage will be unacceptable. So we need to keep banking alive somehow, so things don't completely go to shit.
What I don't want though (as has been said), is for Wall St. to get a good deal. They fucked up royally, and if they want our money, they'll get it, but on the shittiest possible terms. We should get hefty chunks of equity in exchange for what we put up, and we absolutely shouldn't have to overpay for balance sheets full of toxic waste for "assets".
Incognito said:
Macam and I are going to Alamo on South Lamar I think.
I just bought a 5 dollar ticket from www.originalalamo.com, its not even really a ticket its a 5 dollar food voucher.
Agent Icebeezy
Welcome beautful toddler, Madison Elizabeth, to the horde!
WickedAngel said:
less regulation isn't going in. That cuts at Obama's message of regulation.
WickedAngel
Banned
Agent Icebeezy said:
I wasn't saying it would happen. I was saying that was the only scenario that would allow McCain to spin this positively.
CharlieDigital
Banned
If at this point, after 8 years of having a "compassionate conservative" in the White House hasn't taught you anything about what the Republican party is really all about, then you have no hope.
I've been alive for 27 years and "aware" of politics for two presidencies: 8 years of Clinton and 8 years of Bush. All I can go by is what I've observed in my lifetime and what I've seen is that the Republican approach to government -- a supposedly "conservative" approach -- has failed massively.
Fuck the theories and fuck Reagonomics. I've followed politics for two presidencies with my own eyes and I've seen for myself the difference in philosophy and, most importantly, the difference in results. Seriously, fuck the theories. Fuck the philosophy. Look at the goddamn results for crying out loud. Look at the results. The Republicans had control of the Executive branch and the Legislative branch for 6 of the last 8 years. Let's not forget that 7 of the 9 SCOTUS Justices are Republican appointments. Look at the results that has lead us to. Just forget everything else -- forget the theories -- and look at the fucking results.
If by "conservative" you mean Bush, then I just don't know what to say. If, after all of the evidence provided here by GAF and all of the information provided on the Net, you still think that the Republicans represent the "conservative" view, then I don't know what to say since they've been anything but from a financial standpoint. If, even after all of the evidence, Libertarians still want to believe that the unbridled free market works, then I don't know what to say. All I know is that some of you guys really need to reevaluate your positions and stop grasping for some ideology that doesn't exist in the party that you support.
I don't understand how any person can look at the results that they've seen over the last 16 years and say that the Republicans have done a better job of guiding this country. I DON'T SEE HOW IT'S POSSIBLE.
I've been alive for 27 years and "aware" of politics for two presidencies: 8 years of Clinton and 8 years of Bush. All I can go by is what I've observed in my lifetime and what I've seen is that the Republican approach to government -- a supposedly "conservative" approach -- has failed massively.
Fuck the theories and fuck Reagonomics. I've followed politics for two presidencies with my own eyes and I've seen for myself the difference in philosophy and, most importantly, the difference in results. Seriously, fuck the theories. Fuck the philosophy. Look at the goddamn results for crying out loud. Look at the results. The Republicans had control of the Executive branch and the Legislative branch for 6 of the last 8 years. Let's not forget that 7 of the 9 SCOTUS Justices are Republican appointments. Look at the results that has lead us to. Just forget everything else -- forget the theories -- and look at the fucking results.
If by "conservative" you mean Bush, then I just don't know what to say. If, after all of the evidence provided here by GAF and all of the information provided on the Net, you still think that the Republicans represent the "conservative" view, then I don't know what to say since they've been anything but from a financial standpoint. If, even after all of the evidence, Libertarians still want to believe that the unbridled free market works, then I don't know what to say. All I know is that some of you guys really need to reevaluate your positions and stop grasping for some ideology that doesn't exist in the party that you support.
I don't understand how any person can look at the results that they've seen over the last 16 years and say that the Republicans have done a better job of guiding this country. I DON'T SEE HOW IT'S POSSIBLE.
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
My insider information says that the closest we got to complete economic collapse was actually last Friday.
SouthernDragon
Member
devilhawk said:
That's what we were getting.
Look, fella, Dems aren't too happy with any of this, either. It's our god damn money, too. This burdens all of us.
The bill was going to get everything you just mentioned, but McCain swooped in and napalmed it. The Republicans in the Senate did a good job, no doubt. It's the House Republicans.
Again, hardcore socialism like this scares them. It should scare us, too. But there's nothing else for it. None. We can hash out the details later, but this is one gash the free market can't heal on its own.
That's what government is there for; to complement big business. They don't have to be at odds.
Hellsing321
Member
I'm going to need this information in the form of a chart.PantherLotus said:
Gary Whitta
Member
Tell it to me in Star Wars.
TheKingsCrown
Banned
If AIG falls, the world probably does.PantherLotus said:
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
FlightOfHeaven said:
McCain bringing Presidential politics to the meetings certainly didn't help (and probably greatly hindered) however lets get our facts straight, it is the House Republicans that are causing all the trouble. One would have ever thought that one day the Democrats, the Bush administration and the Senate Republicans together would be facing off the House Republicans
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
WickedAngel said:
Wet-start!
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
and there are also reports that Obama brought it up too. Neither man is stupid and both spent the day talking around capital hill. They both at least had an inkling of what the House Republicans were about to do.StoOgE said:
Xisiqomelir
Member
grandjedi6 said:
Avg Senate Republican:
Avg House Republican:
This is actually not so surprising.
speculawyer
Member
It seems he works at WaMu and was fueled with several shots, so ignore the profanity .devilhawk said:
kkaabboomm
Member
6:00pacific...GhaleonEB said:
it's 9pm eastern when it starts... that gives mccain another 3 hours of pure rebuilding!
grandjedi6 said:
but the reports are it may have been the only thing that McCain said, and he refuses to back the Paulson plan.
Obama brought it up after McCain did, and only to ask Paulson if anything about that plan was workable. Paulson said it wasnt.
McCain has at least given the house republicans a good deal of cover to work with.
This is the house republicans fault, but McCain is enabling them.
Gary Whitta
Member
Don't forget to factor in nap time!kkaabboomm said:
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
Xisiqomelir said:
So if the Dems control both houses, and as far as I can tell the Senate Republicans are with them, why don't they just say fuck it to the whole majority of the minority thing, pass their bill, and leave Bush with the choice of screwing over the House Republicans or screwing over the nation with a veto. He may be Bush, but he still knows what's at stake here, and is more concerned with legacy than anything else. He won't take any risk of letting the economy fall to please the House Republicans. He'd sign the Democratic proposal, even without a majority of Republicans behind it.
Yeah, it really looks like the House GOP was operating with McCain's assent.
He certainly didn't go up to bat for the Paulson plan and his "there was no agreement" press release basically echoes the House Republicans. Looks very much like he's letting them do the dirty work, though I'm not sure what his planned endgame is.
He certainly didn't go up to bat for the Paulson plan and his "there was no agreement" press release basically echoes the House Republicans. Looks very much like he's letting them do the dirty work, though I'm not sure what his planned endgame is.
grandjedi6
Master of the Google Search
Oh of course. McCain should have gone in there and twisted/protected the House's arms into supporting the bill. But instead he just stood around and possibly even deluded them into thinking he supported them. Normally its the Minority leader you takes care of the arm twisting but Boehner is the core of the problem. Makes one almost miss DelayStoOgE said:
SouthernDragon
Member
grandjedi6 said:
StoOgE said:
What I was going to say. He's providing cover, purposefully or not, for them to pull this. It's ridiculous.
Incognito said:
C'mon down if you want. I'm just aiming to go to the South Lamar Drafthouse to catch the debates. Just give yourself a bit leeway since Austin City Limits will likely clog things up a bit. Check your PMs shortly.
StoOgE said:
I didn't even know they had that. I'll have to find out if they even require anything to get in given that it's free, but it's good to know.
Republicans in the House can't get the troops in line like they did in Delay's day because their whole strategy was predicated on being the majority.
Without control of Congress they can't force lobbyists to act as an arm of the party, nor can they use committee assignments and pork spending as cudgels against recalcitrant Representatives. 2006 smashed all the levers of power the House GOP leadership had over its members.
Without control of Congress they can't force lobbyists to act as an arm of the party, nor can they use committee assignments and pork spending as cudgels against recalcitrant Representatives. 2006 smashed all the levers of power the House GOP leadership had over its members.
Gary Whitta
Member
So all this talk we've been hearing from McCain during the campaign about how he'll reach across the aisle to bring Dems and Repubs together and get stuff done? How's that working out?
The Chosen One
Member
Cloudy said:
Well I hope they hash it out over the weekend. Some members have already indicated they're willing to do this. Hopefully that will prevent market meltdown on Monday.
Stall tomorrow, cut the deal over the weekend.
MaddenNFL64
Member
Iksenpets said:
The problem isn't votes. The senate is an easy 80+ "for" vote so far, from the information we have.
The House can pass it with a straight party line vote.
BUT the problem is political cover for the House Democrats. This could be deadly for them.
They might have to do that though. Save the country, and lose the House majority.
Way too many assumptions. I understand your view and that you are calling them as you see them. Yet, as you admit, you haven't seen everything. One sentence you argue that republicans are not fiscal conservatives because there plan hasn't been free market. The next sentence is an assumption about how the free market couldn't possibly work. You are too busy taking shots to realize what you are shooting at.CharlieDigital said:
First, the current market is not a free market. The free market has never been tested. We might not have been in this situation if there was a more free market. There wouldn't have even been a freddie and fannie in a totally free market. It could be argued that part of the sub prime crisis would have been avoided with less regulation. I am not against regulation, but we must be careful
The republicans or neocons are not fiscal conservatives. Bush and Clinton were not fiscal conservatives. The only thing you have proof of is that neoconseravtives haven't worked.
I may be confused here, but as far as I know, the majority party has absolute power in the house of representatives, so basically, the democrats should be able to pass this if they want to.
If they really believe it's important for the country and they refuse to bring it to the floor because they're afraid of the political consequences of letting the republicans vote against it, that would be highly immoral. That's politics at it's worst.
And for the record, I'm too much of a libertarian to favor this bill. A recent article by Ron Paul on cnn has turned me against it completley. The consequences for not doing something might be horrible in the short term, but it looks possible to me that the consequences of acting might be worse in the long term. It's time for our country to stop making all decisions based on short term concerns. Maybe we go through a 5 year recession with job losses and all sorts of catastrophe, but maybe 20 years from now, we have a stronger economy as a result and our children can benefit from that.
If they really believe it's important for the country and they refuse to bring it to the floor because they're afraid of the political consequences of letting the republicans vote against it, that would be highly immoral. That's politics at it's worst.
And for the record, I'm too much of a libertarian to favor this bill. A recent article by Ron Paul on cnn has turned me against it completley. The consequences for not doing something might be horrible in the short term, but it looks possible to me that the consequences of acting might be worse in the long term. It's time for our country to stop making all decisions based on short term concerns. Maybe we go through a 5 year recession with job losses and all sorts of catastrophe, but maybe 20 years from now, we have a stronger economy as a result and our children can benefit from that.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked