[QUOTE=John Drake;1299583]What's important is that we get a President who won't let this happen again, not the very one largely responsible for it happening in the first place. Obama was wrong to go along with this, he should have demanded McCain show up at the debate. The further away McCain is from Congress the better off we're going to be.

McCain's a disingenuous piece of wife-abusing offal and now he's a coward to boot. I have to wonder about anyone who wants this kind of person as their President.[/QUOTE]


I don't really want McCain, but he's preferable to an inexperienced marxist who wants to build the biggest government ever. He also doesn't trust me with guns, which leads to me not trusting him with authority.

Most of all, he talks like a boy with a paper asshole.

__________________
Want government run healthcare? Join the military.

Does McCain part the waters too?

When McCain announced that he was coming back to Washington, all Dodd and Frank thought was that this grandstander McCain had better stay the heck out of the way. They don't have time to deal with someone who admits that he doesn't have a good grasp of the economy. Someone who was saying that the economy was sound when it really wasn’t. Someone who has been opposed to regulation of anything (except stem cell research) when it is lack of oversight that got us into this mess. How the heck would a deregulator help figure out how to regulate this bailout (“Oh, just give them the money. What could go wrong”)?

Now tell the one about the unicorn

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

Unlike the Obaaaamanation who think the Chosen One walks on it....

__________________


Great Quotes from Great Americans:

"With regard to the words 'general welfare', I have always regarded them as qualified by the details of the powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphisis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."James Madison, Father of the Constitution

No, McCain looks like someone who is trying to turn a serious problem into political advantage. In today's highly-connected world, someone can stay involved without being there. You can actually call someone in a different area code and talk to them just like they were in another office/floor/building in the same city. I suppose that this notion of telepresence is beyond a self-proclaimed luddite.

McCain’s going to Washington did nothing to drive the agreement. Pure grandstanding.

That's Obama's thing, not McCains.

I'm seeing pictures from the WH meeting and Obama looks decidedly uncomfortable. "Like, why am I at this meeting. What does this have to do with running for President. I was in the middle of my debate prep. Can't we just jump to the part where I win?"

__________________
Andy
Cynical Optimist

Cool, I've not seen that. You got a link or something?

Oh, you mean Obama went to Washington when the President said that it was important for him to be there rather than pretending that he needed to be there like McCain?


Frankly, I hope like hell that everyone at that meeting looked uncomfortable.

If you're referring to me, I can't help but chuckle at the irony here. The majority of your posts in this thread come across as extremely emotionally charged and irrational. When your discourse degenerates into calling people names when they disagree with your opinions I hardly think you're in a position to call others out for "whining". No doubt it sounds tough and no-nonsense in your head, but to others reading irrational emotive arguments and namecalling generally come across in a plaintive and petulant tone.

If you're not referring to me, then I retract the bit about the irony, but the part about you sounding petulant still stands. To illustrate, consider this as an aside (and neutral take):

Obama and McCain are both playing politics with this crisis, and any thinking person agrees with me on that! If you're a stupid enough idiot not to agree with me, well then you're a stupid idiot.

Everyone who isn't a moron knows that Ron Paul wouldn't play games like that. If you don't know that, you're a stupid idiot. McCain is an old piece of shit and he hates this country. If you don't know that, your head is filled with poop. Obama is an elitist fuck who won't give me the time of day, and if you don't know that it's because you like to get fucked in the ass. Also, because you're a stupid idiot. What kind of dumbass would elect politicians that don't like me enough and don't care about what I believe in?

Why am I surrounded by so many stupid idiots? Why does everyone have doo-doo in their heads?!?


Now, in spite of the gratuitous venom, vulgarity, and scatological references in the above, which reads a lot like one of your posts, but with different names, can you really suggest that it doesn't sound plaintive and whiny and like the sort of thing that might waft in from the playground during recess over a touch-football dispute?

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

Gratuitous pap in the second paragraph notwithstanding, what makes you think that either Obama or McCain would prevent any future speculation bubbles from bursting? I see nothing to suggest that, political posturing aside, this isn't simply a periodic market inevitability.

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson

My question is why does it take a call from the President of the United States for Obama to leave his comfy beach bungalow to deal with a national crisis? Obama said "call me if you need me." Ok, he got the call. Now suck it up.

__________________
Andy
Cynical Optimist

Sadly, I think it's just a rumor that Obama is actually the second coming..... A misconception by those who believe he is the answer to all our prayers. Fools!

__________________


Great Quotes from Great Americans:

"With regard to the words 'general welfare', I have always regarded them as qualified by the details of the powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphisis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."James Madison, Father of the Constitution

Of course, you've failed, miserably, at pointing out what part of my post was irrational. It paints Obama in the correct light.

As for the rest of your little hissy-fit, well, might I suggest an anti-psychotic or a shot of whiskey...

__________________



For those who have fought to defend it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know...



If it wasn't for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all...

Are you suggesting that, in fact, it is Obama, not McCain, who is yet another one of GWB's puppets?

Heh...heh...I loves me sum puppets...heh...heh

Interesting!

Not surprising, though, given that Obama's leadership experience consists solely of deciding to which race to pander on a given day.

WERD! They all should be ashamed that they turned mortgages into yet another failed affirmative action program.

Savings? "Nope"
Assets? "Nope"
Down payment? "Nope"
Job? "Nope"
Non-white? "Yep"
Alrighty then! Let's close this puppy! You are a-movin'-on-up to the East Side!

__________________

"Compassionate Conservatism"?!?! That is a stupid phrase. Conservatism is inherently compassionate. It is liberalism that is cruel for the sake of maintaining a constituency.

lol...

That just sparked this strange image in my head. In the beginning of this campaign season, the Democrat message was "McCain is the same as Bush" (which is absurd, in my opinion), but that seems to have died away. I'm just now imagining some kind of bizarro universe where Bush snaps his fingers, Obama comes running, and the moderate vote swings toward McCain because it doesn't like the perception that Obama is in league with Dubya somehow.

I wonder what would happen if Dubya played up any sorts of policy agreement he and Obama share or might share over the next month or so. He's avoided McCain's campaign studiously, but what if he suddenly started stumping for Obama.

(Not that this would ever happen, but politics sometimes takes bizarre twists, nevertheless - fun to think about, I suppose)

__________________
"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."

-Thomas Jefferson